J&K&L HC: Matrimonial Remedies May Overlap, But Cruelty Claims Cannot be Selectively Invoked  ||  Delhi High Court: Customs Officials Acting Officially Cannot be Cross-Examined as of Right  ||  J&K&L HC: Second Arbitral Reference is Maintainable if Award is Set Aside Without Deciding Merits  ||  J&K&L HC: Gold Voluntarily Given to Customer is 'Entrustment'; Theft Excluded from Insurance Cover  ||  Delhi HC: Working Mothers Cannot be Forced to Bear Full Childcare Burden While Fathers Evade Duty  ||  J&K&L HC: Arbitral Tribunal Not a “Court”; Giving False Evidence Before it Doesn’t Attract S.195 CrPC  ||  Calcutta HC: Award May Be Set Aside if Tribunal Rewrites Contract or Ignores Key Clauses  ||  Delhi HC Suspends Kuldeep Singh Sengar’s Life Term, Holding Section 5(C) of POCSO Not Made Out  ||  Calcutta High Court: Arbitration Clause in an Expired Lease Cannot be Invoked For a Fresh Lease  ||  Delhi High Court: 120-Day Timeline under Section 132B Of Income Tax Act is Not Mandatory    

HP HC: No Requirement of Practicing for 7 Years for Appointment as District Judge - (15 Jul 2024)

SERVICE

Himachal Pradesh High Court has held that Article 233(2) of the Constitution of India does not require continuous practice for seven years as an advocate and it merely stipulates that the candidate must have seven years of practice and be an advocate on the date of the application and appointment.

Tags : HIMACHAL PRADESH HC   A. 233(2) OF COI   DISTRICT JUDGE   7 YEARS  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved