Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla was a landmark judgement of the Supreme Court of India pertaining to the suspension of Articles 21 and 226 of the Indian Constitution in the event of a National Emergency. This controversial judgment of P.N. Bhagwati, decreed during the emergency from 25 June 1975 to 21 March 1977, held that a person's right to ...
URL. indiankanoon .org. Launched. 2008; 16 years ago. ( 2008) Current status. Online. Indian Kanoon is an Indian law search engine. [ 1][ 2] It was launched on 4 January 2008. The search engine has been meshed with the highest courts and tribunals of India to provide up-to-date judgements. [ 3][ 4]
Atypical families are deserving of equal protection under law and benefits available under social welfare legislation. Decision by. D. Y. Chandrachud and A. S. Bopanna. Deepika Singh versus Central Administrative Tribunal & Ors. (2022) is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of India that widens the definition of 'family' under Indian law.
Justices K.N. Wanchoo, Vishistha Bhargava and G.K Mitter (writing together); R.S. Bachawat; V. Ramaswami. Golaknath v. State Of Punjab (1967 AIR 1643, 1967 SCR (2) 762), or simply the Golaknath case, was a 1967 Indian Supreme Court case, in which the Court ruled that Parliament could not curtail any of the Fundamental Rights in the Constitution.
The Attorney General of India K K Venugopal had opposed the elevation of privacy as a fundamental right, representing the stance of the Union government of India in the Supreme Court. The previous Attorney General, Mukul Rohatgi , had opposed the right to privacy entirely, but Venugopal, while opposing the right, conceded that privacy could be ...
R.F. Nariman. Shreya Singhal v. Union of India [1] is a judgement by a two-judge bench of the Supreme Court of India in 2015, on the issue of online speech and intermediary liability in India. The Supreme Court struck down Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, relating to restrictions on online speech, as unconstitutional on ...
Case opinions. The public trust doctrine, as discussed by the Court in this judgment was a part of the law of the land. Decision by. Kuldip Singh. M. C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath was a landmark case in Indian environmental law. In the case, the Supreme Court of India held that the public trust doctrine applied in India. [ 1]
State of Mysore. M/S R.M.D.C (Mysore) v. State of Mysore, (AIR 1962 SC 594) was a judgment of the Supreme Court of India, dealing with constitutional law, where the Court utilized the doctrine of colourable legislation. This is a landmark case on Centre-States relations in India, and was decided in favor of the erstwhile State of Mysore.