Smt. Geeta Devi vs The State Of Rajasthan on 1 November, 2018

On

Supreme Court of India Smt. Geeta Devi vs The State Of Rajasthan on 1 November, 2018Author: …………………………………….J. NON­REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION   SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) No.8271 OF 2018 GEETA DEVI & ANR.        .. Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN        .. Respondent(s) WITH   SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) No.8336 OF 2018 O R D E R 1. It is brought to our notice that an Arbitrator is appointed under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 at the instance of the parties to resolve the disputes arising between the parties, which are also subject matter of these special leave Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by…

Saba Praveen vs . Anurag Yadav & Ors. on 29 October, 2018

On

Delhi District Court Saba Praveen vs . Anurag Yadav & Ors. on 29 October, 2018 Saba Praveen Vs. Anurag Yadav & Ors.       Uzma Vs. Anurag Yadav & Ors.    Gufran Khan vs.  Anurag Yadav & Ors.    Furkan Vs. Anurag Yadav & Ors. Furqan Vs. Anurag Yadav & Ors. Gufran & Ors. Vs. Anurag Yadav & Ors. Areeba Vs. Anurag Yadav & Ors.   IN THE COURT OF SH. PAWAN KUMAR JAIN, JUDGE, MACT-1 (CENTRAL), THC, DELHI. MACT No. 356472/16 Unique Case ID No….

Janhit Manch vs State Of Maharashtra Through … on 2 November, 2018

On

1 One of the issues involved in this group of
Public Interest Litigations is of the validity of
section 52A of the Maharashtra Regional and Town
planning Act, 1966 which provides for en-bloc
regularization of a very large number of illegal

::: Uploaded on – 03/11/2018 ::: Downloaded on – 04/11/2018 01:31:37 :::
4

structures constructed in the State on or before
31st December 2015. The issue is whether the
concept of town planning will be thrown to winds if
the said provision is implemented. The contention is
that the very concept of town planning is sought to
be destroyed and defeated by enacting section 52A.
We are reminded of what Socrates said:

Vivek Velankar vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors on 2 November, 2018

On

1 One of the issues involved in this group of
Public Interest Litigations is of the validity of
section 52A of the Maharashtra Regional and Town
planning Act, 1966 which provides for en-bloc
regularization of a very large number of illegal

::: Uploaded on – 03/11/2018 ::: Downloaded on – 04/11/2018 01:31:19 :::
4

structures constructed in the State on or before
31st December 2015. The issue is whether the
concept of town planning will be thrown to winds if
the said provision is implemented. The contention is
that the very concept of town planning is sought to
be destroyed and defeated by enacting section 52A.
We are reminded of what Socrates said:

Ravindra Sukhdev Ghadge vs Swati Ravindra Ghadge Swati … on 2 November, 2018

On

::: Uploaded on – 03/11/2018 ::: Downloaded on – 04/11/2018 01:31:50 :::

2 SA237.2016

2. The appellant Ravindra is husband of respondent No. 1 –

Swati and father of respondents No. 2 – Tanmay and respondent No.

3 – Arav. The respondents filed Hindu Marriage Petition No. 100 of

2012 in the court of Civil Judge Senior Division, Aurangabad. The

appellant is resident of Buldhana and the respondents who are

original petitioners, were shown to be residing in N-12, CIDCO,

Aurangabad. The marriage was solemnized in Aurangabad. The

petition was filed for maintenance under the Hindu Adoption and

Maintenance Act, 1956. The learned trial Judge awarded

maintenance of Rs.18,750/- per month to all the respondent-original

petitioners together, from the date of the petition. In the trial Court,

Ravindra – the appellant herein, had not raised any defence of

jurisdiction. He filed Reg. Civil Appeal No. 155 of 2014 challenging

the order of trial Court. The first Appellate Court modified the order

and granted maintenance at the rate of Rs. 5,000/- for each of the

petitioners.

Mayura Maru vs State Of Maharashtra, Through … on 2 November, 2018

On

1 One of the issues involved in this group of
Public Interest Litigations is of the validity of
section 52A of the Maharashtra Regional and Town
planning Act, 1966 which provides for en-bloc
regularization of a very large number of illegal

::: Uploaded on – 03/11/2018 ::: Downloaded on – 04/11/2018 01:30:55 :::
4

structures constructed in the State on or before
31st December 2015. The issue is whether the
concept of town planning will be thrown to winds if
the said provision is implemented. The contention is
that the very concept of town planning is sought to
be destroyed and defeated by enacting section 52A.
We are reminded of what Socrates said:

Shri. Bhausaheb Baban Khedkar vs Maharashtra Industrial … on 2 November, 2018

On

1 One of the issues involved in this group of
Public Interest Litigations is of the validity of
section 52A of the Maharashtra Regional and Town
planning Act, 1966 which provides for en-bloc
regularization of a very large number of illegal

::: Uploaded on – 03/11/2018 ::: Downloaded on – 04/11/2018 01:30:43 :::
4

structures constructed in the State on or before
31st December 2015. The issue is whether the
concept of town planning will be thrown to winds if
the said provision is implemented. The contention is
that the very concept of town planning is sought to
be destroyed and defeated by enacting section 52A.
We are reminded of what Socrates said:

Rajiv Mohan Mishra vs City And Industrial Development … on 2 November, 2018

On

1 One of the issues involved in this group of
Public Interest Litigations is of the validity of
section 52A of the Maharashtra Regional and Town
planning Act, 1966 which provides for en-bloc
regularization of a very large number of illegal

::: Uploaded on – 03/11/2018 ::: Downloaded on – 04/11/2018 01:30:31 :::
4

structures constructed in the State on or before
31st December 2015. The issue is whether the
concept of town planning will be thrown to winds if
the said provision is implemented. The contention is
that the very concept of town planning is sought to
be destroyed and defeated by enacting section 52A.
We are reminded of what Socrates said: