•  •  Dark Mode

Your Interests & Preferences

I am a...

law firm lawyer
in-house company lawyer
litigation lawyer
law student
aspiring student
other

Website Look & Feel

 •  •  Dark Mode
Blog Layout

Save preferences

Need to know: BCI cozies up to NaMo | SC settles TDSAT-TRAI turf war | Crowds admire Kerala HC astro garden| Munsiff court PIL | Madras HC anti-sex harass cell & judicial app’t controversy | …

BCI cozies up to NaMo
A delegation led by Bar Council of India (BCI) chief Manan Kumar Mishra met Narendra Modi on Saturday, inviting him to address the valedictory function of the Gujarat bar Council. According to a Gujarat state press release, the BCI respected Modi’s nationalism, while Modi called for better application of technology and faster disposal of criminal cases by improving forensic science education [TOI]

SC settles TDSAT-TRAI turf war: TRAI wins
Telecom tribunals’ TDSAT and TRAI’s three-and-a-half-year-long turf war has been finally put to rest by the Supreme Court which has held that the TDSAT has no business interfering in TRAI-made regulations. TDSAT can only hear and dispose of appeals against TRAI orders [Business Standard / SC judgment]

Crowds admire Kerala HC astrological garden
Kerala high court now has its very own astrological plant garden with 27 varieties of medicinal saplings that relate to the 27 constellations. Crowds thronged the HC complex on Friday in search of their medicinal star-sign flower pot [IANS]

AP HC allows lower courts to accept PILs
We haven’t succeeded in putting our finger on the legal provision Andhra HC chief justice KJ Sengupta has employed in reaching this conclusion: “The common man need not approach the high court for filing of PILs as it involves a cost factor. The filing of PILs can be done at munsiff magisterial courts also.” Can you? [PTI]

Madras HC asked for anti-sex harass cell: After the Allahabad HC is done constituting its anti-sexual harassment cell, the Madras HC is now also under the wave of demand for the cell after a PIL was filed in the HC asking for a mechanism to deal with the problem in all Tamil Nadu courts [TOI]

Bombay HC prioritises ‘younger’ senior citizens’ cases, lowers age limit 
The “precedence age” – the age at which a litigant can get his case listed on priority in the Bombay HC – has reduced from 65 to 60. On 3 December the HC has issued a circular that if even one of the litigants party to a case have attained the age of 60, their case will be listed for final hearing and disposal on priority basis, on their request. In 1999, this age was fixed at 65 [PTI]

Madras HC lawyers against SC lawyers as their judges: Madras HC lawyers will have a 25 per cent empty roster rather than “importing a stranger” to fill judge seats in the HC, if their opposition to the appointment of three SC lawyers to the HC’s judgeship is anything to go by. The Advocates Association of the HC swears that the move will ‘'completely distort the present selection process”, because the appointment will not be made by the collegium’s recommendation but on the request of the SC’s Advocates-on-Record association [The Hindu]

Lawyer punches pesky customs officer for clients: A Madras HC lawyer has managed to make headlines for taking his solemn duty for his client a tad too seriously by roughing up the customs officer who held up his clients after their questioning at the unit was over [TOI]

Click to show 1 comment
at your own risk
(alt+c)
By reading the comments you agree that they are the (often anonymous) personal views and opinions of readers, which may be biased and unreliable, and for which Legally India therefore has no liability. If you believe a comment is inappropriate, please click 'Report to LI' below the comment and we will review it as soon as practicable.