Kerala HC: Applications under the Muslim Women’s Divorce Act Have a 3-Year Limitation Period  ||  Supreme Court: Property Transferred Before Filing a Suit Cannot be Attached under Order 38 Rule 5  ||  Supreme Court: No Review or Appeal is Maintainable Against an Order Appointing an Arbitrator  ||  SC: Terminated Contract is Not a Corporate Debtor’s Asset and a Moratorium Cannot Revive it  ||  SC: Cheque Dishonour Complaints Must be Filed at the Payee’s Home Branch under S.142(2)(A)  ||  Supreme Court: Bail Cannot be Granted Solely on Parity; Accused’s Specific Role Must be Assessed  ||  Kerala HC Upholds Life Terms For Five, Acquits Two in Renjith Johnson Murder, Says TIP Not Needed  ||  Kerala HC Orders Emergency Electric Fencing at Tribal School to Address Rising Wildlife Conflict  ||  Madras HC: Arbitrator Can’t Pierce Corporate Veil to Bind Non-Signatory and Partly Sets Aside Award  ||  Calcutta HC: Post-Award Claim For Municipal Tax Reimbursement is Not Maintainable under Section 9    

Ayodhya Case:Apex Court Questions Antiquity of Archaeological Proof Submitted by Ram Lalla's Advocate - (19 Aug 2019)

PROPERTY

Apex Court has demanded to know if there was any proof of the antiquity of archaeological evidence submitted by the advocate for Ram Lalla claiming that a temple existed once upon a time at the site and that the mosque was built on its ruins, but was told that there was none.

Tags : APEX COURT   AYODHYA CASE  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved