Search This Blog

Legal Quiz Olympiad 2.0 competition on IPC & IPR on 11th July 2021, Register by 8th July 2021 organized by Legal Advisory in collaboration with RR Law Firm

Legal Advisory in collaboration with Rana & Rana Law Firm is pleased to announce Legal Quiz Olympiad 2.0 Competition on Indian Penal Code 1860 & Intellectual Property Rights. ABOUT IPC & IPR: The first draft of the Indian Penal Code was prepared by the First Law Commission, chaired by Thomas Babington Macaulay. The code came into force on January 1st, 1860 after undergoing many revisions and amendments by Barnes Peacock who would go on to serve as the first Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court. The Indian Penal Code of 1860, sub-divided into 23 chapters, comprises 511 sections . Intellectual Property Right: Intellectual property is the product of the human intellect including creativity concepts, inventions, industrial models, trademarks, songs, literature, symbols, names, brands etc. Intellectual Property Rights do not differ from other property rights. They allow their owner to completely benefit from his/her product which was initially an idea that deve

List of most important and Landmark judgments in india

Most important judgments however, Every Advocate should know the below mentioned important judgments.

List of most important and Landmark judgments in india


1. NJAC held unconstitutional (Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association vs. Union of India

2. Yakub Memon midnight hearing [Yakub Abdul Razak Memon vs. State of Maharashtra]

3. Section 66A IT Act struck down [Shreya Singhal vs. Union of India]

4. No compromise in Rape cases [State of MP vs. Madanlal]

5. Unwed mother can become sole guardian of a child [ABC vs. State (NCT of Delhi)]

6.Uphaar Verdict [Sushil Ansal vs. State through CBI]

7. Award Compensation to the victim of crime [Manohar Singh vs. State of Rajasthan]

8. Section 364A IPC awarding death penalty not unconstitutional [Vikram Singh vs. Union of India]

9. States cannot unilaterally grant remission [Union of India vs. Sriharan]

10. Minimum Edu Qualification rule for Panchayat elections upheld [Rajbala vs. State of Haryana]

11. Women can be manager of a Joint Family [Shreya Vidyarthi vs. Ashok Vidyarthi]

12. Complete Departmental inquiries within six months [Prem Nath Bali vs. Registrar, High Court of Delhi]

13. RBI also under RTI [Reserve Bank of India vs. Jayantilal Mistry]

14. Acid Attack Victims in disability list [Parivartan Kendra vs. Union of India]

15. Writ petitions maintainable against ‘deemed Universities’. [Dr. Janet Jeyapaul vs. SRM University]

16. No politician photos in Govt Ads [Common cause vs. Union of India]

17. Age determination of rape victim clarified [State of M.P. vs Anoop Singh]

18. Amendment in complaint can be done [S.R.Sukumar vs. S.Sunaad Raghuram]

19. Obscene language cannot be allowed against ‘Historically respected personalities’. [Devidas vs. State of Maharashtra]

20. Appointment of Archakas to be made in accordance with Agamas [Adi Saiva Sivachariyargal Nala Sanga vs. Government of Tamil Nadu]

21. Father of deceased victim has right to appeal [Satya Pal Singh v. State of M.P]

22. Jat reservation unconstitutional [Ram Singh vs. Union of India]

23. Concealing pending criminal cases by elected representative illegal [Krishnamoorthy vs. Sivakumar]

24. Writs against Judicial actions by judiciary not maintainable [Riju Prasad Sarma etc. Vs. State of Assam]

25. Validity of Sec 499 IPC-Subrhamanyam swamy v UOI

26.Haji Ali Dargah; Dr. Noorjehan Safia Niaz Vs. State of Maharashtra [Bombay High Court, 26-08-2016]

27. Plea of Self-defence; Brij Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan

28. Extra-Judicial Confession; Kala @ Chandrakala Vs. State Through Inspector of Police

29.District Judge Selection; Vijay Kumar Mishra Vs. High Court of Judicature At Patna

30. Constitution; Rajender Prashad Vs. Govt. of NCT [Delhi High Court, 04-08-2016]

31. Government Bungalows; Lok Prahari Vs. State of U.P

32. Voice Samples; Sudhir Chaudhary Vs. State

33. Wild Life; State Vs. Salman Khan [Rajasthan High Court, 25-07-2016]

34. Sedition; Hardik Bharatbhai Patel Vs. State of Gujarat

35. Slaughter House; Eagle Continental Foods Vs. Shailesh Singh

36. Victim; Jag Mohan Vs. State of U.P. [Allahabad High Court,

37. Consent; Ayodhya Prasad Vs. State of U.P. [Allahabad High Court,

38. Juvenile Justice; “A” through her Father “F” Vs. State of U.P. [Allahabad High Court]

39.Upload FIRs in Police Websites [Youth Bar Association of India vs.Union of India]

40.Multiple Life Sentences will run concurrently, Remission of one will not affect the other [Muthuramalingam vs. state]

41.DV Act; Relief Possible Against Minors, Women [ Hiral P Harsora and ors Vs. Kusum Narottamdas Harsora]

42.Forcing Husband To Get Separated From His Parents, Amounts To ’Cruelty’ [Narendra vs. K.Meena]

43.Persons in Govt/Judicial service need not resign to participate in District Judge Selection Process [ Vijay Kumar Mishra and Anr Vs High court of Judicature at Patna and Ors]

44.Public Service Commission shall provide Information about answer sheets and Marks under RTI [Kerala Public Service Commission vs State Information Commission].

45.No liquor shops near National Highways [State of Tamil Nadu vs. K. Balu]

46.National anthem must in Theatres [Shyam Narayan Chouski vs. Union of India]

47.SC can transfer cases from Jammu & Kashmir Courts to courts outside it and vice versa [Anita Kushwaha vs. Pushpa Sudan]

48. Upload FIRs in Police Websites

Case: [Youth Bar Association of India vs.Union of India]

*Criminal Defamation law not unconstitutional

Case: [Subramanian Swamy vs. Union of India]

49- Multiple Life Sentences will run concurrently, Remission of one will not affect the other.

case: [Muthuramalingam vs. state]

50- SC can transfer cases from Jammu & Kashmir Courts to courts outside it and vice versa

Case- [Anita Kushwaha vs. Pushpa Sudan]

51- DV Act; Relief Possible Against Minors, Women.

Case: [ Hiral P Harsora and ors Vs. Kusum Narottamdas Harsora]

Supreme Court struck down the words “adult male” before the word “person” in Section 2(q) of Domestic Violence Act.

52- Forcing Husband To Get Separated From His Parents, Amounts To ’Cruelty’

Case- [Narendra vs. K.Meena]

53- Directions to Curb Female Foeticide

Case-[Voluntary Health Association Vs State of Punjab]

54- Persons in Govt/Judicial service need not resign to participate in District Judge Selection Process

Case-[ Vijay Kumar Mishra and Anr Vs High court of Judicature at Patna To and Ors]

55- All Tribunals are not necessary parties to the proceedings where legality of its orders challenged

Case-[ S. Kazi vs. Muslim education society]

56- Public Service Commission shall provide Information about answer sheets and Marks under RTI

Case:[Kerala Public Service Commission vs State Information Commission]

57- Social Security to the Legal Profession Becomes an Essential Part of Legal System

Case: [Cardamom Marketing Corporation & Anr. Vs. State Of Kerala & Ors]

58- Landmark guidelines for disaster /drought management.

Case-[Swaraj Abhiyan vs. UoI]

59- People with disabilities also have the Right to Live with Dignity

Case-[Jeeja Ghosh vs. UoI]

60- No liquor shops near National Highways

Case-[State of Tamil Nadu vs. K. Balu]

61- High Court Judges Not Exempt From Airport Frisking

Case-[Union of India Vs. Rajasthan High Court and Ors]

62- Soumya Case: Govindachami Acquitted Of Murder Charges; LIFE TERM Awarded For Rape

Case-[Govindaswamy Vs. State of Kerala]

63- SC issues Guidelines on ‘Appointment of Govt. Lawyers

Case: [State of Punjab vs. Brijeshwar Singh Chahal]

64- Resolution against Justice Katju can’t be quashed.

Case-[Justice Markandey Katju vs. The Lok Sabha]

SC refused to quash the March 2015 resolution by both houses of parliament against him for describing Gandhi as a British agent and Netaji as a Japanese agent .

65- Cauvery Dispute and SC:
Case-[State of Karnataka vs. State of Tamil Nadu:]

SC ordered Karnataka to release 15000 cusecs of water to Tamil Nadu, Later on a plea by state of Karnataka, it was modified to 12000 cusecs.

66- SC orders NEET.

Case-[Sankalp Charitable Trust vs. UoI]

Supreme Court ordered to conduct the National Eligibility Cum Entrance Test (NEET) 2016 in Two Phases.

67- Sedition: Direction to authorities

Case-[Common Cause vs Union of India]

Supreme Court of India issued a direction to all the concerned authorities to follow the Constitutional bench judgment in Kedar Nath v State of Bihar (1962) which limited the scope of sedition.

68- National anthem must in Theatres

Case-[Shyam Narayan Chouski vs. Union of India]

69- Abhiram Singh V. C.D. Commachen (DEAD) BY LRS. & ORS , New Delhi, January 02, 2017

These Judgments are helpful to the lawyers in India.


Thank You


Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner



0 Comments

Testimonial


Mr. Rakesh Sawhney

Proprietor of Riddhi Siddhi Enterprises

Great experience overall having Mr. Lokendr Rana Founder and managing Advocate at RR Law Firm as my attorney. Mr. Lokendra understands his client, very insightful and is an expert in his field. Truly a professional and marvelous individual.

Place Noida/Ghaziabad

Mrs. Bharti Thukral

NGO

I would recommend RRLF because of the way he resolves difficult situations. My legal agreements/situations have a different lens with RRLF in place. I thank you from my depth of heart to all Team for all the great professional experiences. This is only my trusted Legal Firm.

Place New Delhi

Mr. Ajeet Kumar Gupta

Founder of Samveda Marketing Private Limited

I am very thankfull of all RRLF team for finished my all litigation. As a highly experienced attorney, at RR Law Firm, is a true specialist in Corporate Law. This area is critical to the success of my company so we greatly appreciate their expertise in this area.

Place Noida/Greater Noida

Mr. Kuldeep Nagar

Founder and Owner of M/s Bright Teletech Solution

I am the corporate businessman and I would like to recommended of RR Law Firm as it has helped us very well and now we are free from all court litigations, which I was faced. Everything got resolved instantly. Thank you very much to all team of RRLF for helping me.

Place Noida/Greater Noida

Contact Us


Get Direction for RR Law Firm office
A-297 New Ashok Nagar New Delhi 110096
Open: Monday to Saturday from 10AM to 7PM