- ticket title
- DME Law College in association with Eastern Book Company, Lucknow will publish a bi-annual, peer reviewed and a refereed Journal to be called as, “DME Journal of Legal Studies” (DMEJLS)
- HC Issues Notice To Centre On Plea For Gender-Neutral Rape Law.
- FIR Of Indecency Against The Show Bigg Boss Is Quashed After 9 Years.
- Bombay High Court : Even If A Girl Had Two Boyfriends, The Same Does Not Empower Or Authorise the Applicant to Commit Penetrative Sexual Assault On Her .
- Delhi HC rejected the transit anticipatory bail to Honeypreet.
FACTS: The Petitioner learnt from the information provided by various sources that the Government of India and the Government of National Capital Region of Delhi, being pressurized by the Respondent No. 7, Indian National Congress, had been intercepting the Petitioner’s conversation on phone, monitoring them and recording them. And hence this writ petition has beenRead more
Deciding Authority: Supreme Court of India Name of the Judges: Justice V.S. Sirpurkar, Justice Surinder Singh Nijjar Date of Judgement: February 10, 2010 Facts of the Case: The marriage between the parties took place as per Hindu rites at New Delhi on 17.11.1991. For a short period after the marriage, the couple stayed at MeerutRead more
Deciding Authority: Supreme Court of India Name of the Judges: Justice Aftab Alam, Justice B.S. Chauhan Date of Judgement: February 5, 2010 Facts of the Case: The husband, the petitioner, possessed the qualifications of CA, CS and ICWA, while the respondent-wife was a Doctor by profession. The parties got married on 23rd July, 2008 inRead more
FACTS This case involved the dispute of a 40 year old disputed property, wherein the Appellants had continuously filed frivolous appeals before the courts even after the matter had been decided. The original owner filed a suit in 1992 against Appellants, his younger brothers, for mandatory injunction to remove them from suit property and forRead more
FACTS The plaintiff, Radico Khaitan Ltd., had argued for a proprietary interest in the mark ‘8 PM’. It claimed that the numeral ‘8’ is an essential, distinguishing and identifying feature of its mark in relation to the font size and the colour with which the numeral ‘8’ is printed. The defendant, Carlsberg India Pvt. Ltd.,Read more