The Supreme Court said the pharma marketing code must be strong enough to let cheated consumers file easy complaints and get proper remedies. The Bench questioned why the government’s UCPMP 2024 still lacks a solid, enforceable complaint mechanism.
The Supreme Court has expressed its unwillingness to intervene in sports matters, citing cricket and other games are now all about business. The bench allowed a petition related to Jabalpur Cricket Association to be withdrawn, stressing courts should stay away from commercialised sports.
The Supreme Court observed that it is increasingly burdened with matrimonial and bail cases, cautioning that handling such matters could flood the apex court with divorce petitions from across India. The remark came while hearing an Army officer’s plea seeking intervention in a delayed matrimonial case.
The Supreme Court ruled that a proprietorship is only a trade name and not a juristic person with separate legal status, holding that while such a concern can be sued, it cannot itself initiate legal proceedings.
The Supreme Court set aside a man’s death sentence in a minor’s rape-murder case, ruling that Article 32 empowers reopening of sentencing if Manoj guidelines were ignored. The Court stressed that the death penalty process must be “open, thorough and fair.”
The Supreme Court has directed Thuraiyur Municipality to remove the seal from an IDBI Bank branch in Trichy and let it function until December 31, 2024. The branch, serving 20,000 customers, was earlier sealed over alleged unauthorised construction.
The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a petition seeking protection of lawyers’ privileges. Advocate Aaditya Gore has been pursuing the Advocates (Protection) Bill since 2014.
The Supreme Court questioned a plea on feeding stray dogs, asking, “Why don’t you feed them in your house?” The court stressed public safety while tagging the matter with a similar pending plea. New Delhi: Today, on July 15, the Supreme Court of India, during a hearing on a plea related to the feeding of […]
Today, On 14th July, The Supreme Court has dismissed a plea challenging the tribunal’s decision to extend the ban on SIMI, upholding the 5-year prohibition imposed by the Centre under UAPA based on continued threats to national security and public order.
The Supreme Court is set to review whether alimony can be awarded when a marriage is declared void under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Conflicting judgments have led to this matter being referred to a larger bench by a Division Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and PB Varale. The issue will be resolved by a three-judge Bench of the Supreme Court.
