Supreme Court stays contempt proceedings against ADJ Kamini Lau

Judiciary Jan 16, 2018 Editor : Shreya Bansal 0 Shares

The Supreme Court today granting relief to the Additional District Judge (ADJ) Kamini Lau has stayed the Delhi High Court order initiating criminal contempt and departmental inquiry against her.

Also Read - SC Gives Judgement in Suo Moto Case for Expeditious Trial of Cases Under Section 138 OF N.I. Act 1881 [READ ORDER]

The matter came up for hearing before a Bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud, when Justice Khanwilkar chose to recuse from the case.

The Bench asking her to tender an unconditional apology in the Delhi High Court said that it wanted to protect her for future as well.

Also Read - Fictional Convenience of One Party Cannot be a Ground to Transfer Cases U/S 25 Of CPC: SC [READ ORDER]

A division bench of the Delhi High Court, on December 22 last year, had ordered for the initiation of contempt proceedings against her after taking note of her alleged objectionable words in four applications seeking removal of adverse remarks passed by a high court judge in as many civil appeals.

SC Gives Judgement in Suo Moto Case for Expeditious Trial of Cases Under Section 138 OF N.I. Act 1881 [READ ORDER]

Judiciary Apr 19, 2021 Mathews Savio ( Editor: Ekta Joshi ) 9 Shares

A five-member bench of the Supreme Court gave its judgement in a Suo Moto case relating to the expeditious trial of cases relating to dishonoured cheques under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The bench which heard the matter included Chief Justice S. A. Bobde along with Justices L. Nageswara Rao, B. R. Gavai, A. S. Bopanna and S. Ravindra Bhat.In 2016 while considering a matter related to the dishonour of two cheques which were pending before the courts for 16...

Read full post

Fictional Convenience of One Party Cannot be a Ground to Transfer Cases U/S 25 Of CPC: SC [READ ORDER]

Judiciary Apr 19, 2021 Mathews Savio ( Editor: Ekta Joshi ) 7 Shares

While deciding a transfer petition concerning a commercial dispute (M/S Fumo Chem Pvt. Ltd. V. M/S Raj Process Equipments And Systems Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.) the Supreme Court observed that mere convenience of one of the parties is not a ground to transfer cases under Section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.The matter was decided by a Single-Judge Bench comprising of Justice Aniruddha Bose through Video Conferencing.The commercial dispute was about the supply of certain items. The...

Read full post