Follow Us:
Wednesday, January 29, 2020

Justice Arun Mishra

JUSTICE ARUN MISHRA NEWS

For contempt threat to senior lawyer, Justice Mishra sorry

December 06, 2019 4:25 am

Justice Mishra’s apology came when a battery of senior advocates sat in his court before the judges assembled and sought to intervene in connection with the heated exchange between Justice Mishra and senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan during a hearing on interpretation of provisions of the 2013 Land Acquisition Act.

Willing to apologise, but arrogance destroying SC: Justice Mishra after argument with advocate

December 05, 2019 12:22 pm

"I have always been criticised in my career, but can tell you I respect the Bar more than any other judge. Lawyers should not show arrogance if queries are put forth to them by Bench," Justice Arun Mishra told the lawyers.

SC association urges Justice Mishra to be more patient with lawyers

December 05, 2019 7:29 am

The association requested justice Mishra to be a “little more patient in dealing with lawyers”.

In refusing Justice Mishra’s recusal, SC relied on two verdicts by CJI-led benches

October 25, 2019 7:24 am

The verdicts, delivered in 2018, had held that the CJI has the last word in assigning cases to other benches.

Justice Mishra not to recuse from hearing land acquisition case

October 24, 2019 2:50 am

On Wednesday, bench ruled that Justice Mishra will not recuse from the hearing as demanded by some farmers’ associations.

Justice Arun Mishra refuses to recuse from hearing land acquisition cases

October 23, 2019 11:52 am

Justice Arun Mishra recusal was sought by some land associations on the grounds that he heads a Bench meant to re-examine a judgment that he had himself given in 2018.

Bid to malign... my integrity clear before God: Justice Arun Mishra refuses to recuse from land acquisition case

October 16, 2019 10:15 am

Justice Mishra heads the five-judge Constitution Bench, also comprising Justices Indira Banerjee, Vineet Saran, M R Shah and S Ravindra Bhat, which has been set up to examine the correctness of two conflicting decisions of the Supreme Court regarding interpretation of Section 24 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.