ive
THE BHARATIYA SAKSHYA ADHINIYAM, 2023
THE BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2023
THE BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(81) REKHA WASUDEV GANJRE AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 03-05-2024
Service Law – Appointment - Legality of multiple applications for the same post in different units by candidates for the post of 'Police Constable Driver' - The main issue is whether a candidate can submit more than one application for the same post in various units, and if such applications are found, whether the appointments based on them should be cancelled - The petitioners argue that the advertisement does not prohibit multiple applications in different units and that the Full Bench decisio
India Law Library Docid # 2414625

(82) THE PRESIDENT/SECRETARY AND OTHER Vs. SHRI. SANGALE RAOSAHEB NARAYAN AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 03-05-2024
Service Law – Termination – Termination of an employee from an Ashram School run by the petitioner - The case revolves around alleged non-compliance with statutory procedures during the termination process and the validity of the School Tribunal's decision to remit the matter for a fresh enquiry instead of reinstatement - The petitioner argues that there was no admission of material facts, proper service of the statement of allegations, and compliance with relevant rules - The respondent claims
India Law Library Docid # 2414627

(83) JASPAL SINGH CHANDHOK Vs. SRI GOBIN CHAND SEAL[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 03-05-2024
Civil Procedure Code, 1928 - Section 47 - West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 – Section 2(g) - Contract Act, 1872 - Section 28 – The execution proceeding is based on a consent decree from a 1986 suit, where the judgment-debtor claims a fresh tenancy was created, making the execution not maintainable - The decree-holder argues that the decree allows for eviction without legal process in case of rent default - The judgment-debtor claims the decree has been satisfied and that subsequent tenancy
India Law Library Docid # 2414628

(84) DINESAN C.V AND OTHERS Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 03-05-2024
Fireworks display - Fireworks display license during temple festivals - The main issue was the rejection of the license applications based on three grounds - Lack of fireworks magazines, absence of PESO-approved risk assessment and onsite emergency plans, and the District Police Chief's safety concerns - They argued that the rejection was illegal and arbitrary, stating they complied with all conditions, including the submission of necessary documents and plans - The court set aside the impugned
India Law Library Docid # 2414630

(85) AMIT SOOD Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 03-05-2024
Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Sections 47 and 57 - Cancellation for the trademark "ROSHAN" - The petitioner is suing the respondent for the cancellation of the "ROSHAN STUDIOS" trademark, arguing that the respondent's use of the "ROSHAN PORTRAITS" mark in Panchkula since 1991 leads to passing off - The court ruled that the petitioner is the prior adopter with extensive goodwill, and that the respondent's adoption was not honest - The court applied principles from precedents that protect prior use and
India Law Library Docid # 2414631

(86) RAJAN VARMANI Vs. KAMAL CHAND JAIN[DELHI HIGH COURT] 03-05-2024
Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 - Section 14(1)(e) – Bona fide requirement - The petitioner challenged the dismissal of his application for leave to contest an eviction proceeding initiated by the respondent - The main issue was whether the petitioner should be granted leave to contest the eviction based on the respondent's claim of bona fide requirement of premises for his wife and daughter's garment business and his alleged neurological illness - The petitioner questioned the respondent's neurolo
India Law Library Docid # 2414632

(87) DHARMENDER SINGH BISHT Vs. BABITA BISHT[DELHI HIGH COURT] 03-05-2024
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - 13(1)(ia) – Divorce – Cruelty - Dismissed by the Family Court - The primary issue was whether the respondent treated the appellant with cruelty after the marriage - The appellant claimed that the respondent was uncooperative, hostile, and filed false complaints against him, causing him and his family members to face criminal proceedings - The respondent alleged dowry demands and cruelty by the appellant's family, and claimed that she was ill-treated and abused - The Hi
India Law Library Docid # 2414633

(88) MANJULATA MUDULI Vs. THE LIC OF INDIA, DIVISION OFFICE, CUTTACK AND OTHERS[ORISSA HIGH COURT] 03-05-2024
The petitioner claims to be the legal heir of a deceased policyholder and seeks the release of death benefits from LIC of India - The main issue is the non-disbursement of the insured amount to the petitioner despite submitting all relevant documents - The petitioner's counsel cites the Supreme Court decision in Vishin N. Khanchandani & Anr. v. Vidya Lachmandas Khanchandani & Anr., emphasizing that a nominee is not equivalent to an heir or legatee - The court directs LIC to release the claim amo
India Law Library Docid # 2414645

(89) ROYAL SUNDARAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. KAMLESH KAUR AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 03-05-2024
Motor Accident Claims – Rash and Negligent Driving - Death and Grievous injuries - The appeal challenges the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal on the grounds that it was a hit and run case and the vehicle number was falsely introduced - The Insurance Company contends that the vehicle number was collusively introduced and the FIR was delayed, suggesting a setup - The respondents argue that ‘K’ witnessed the accident and nothing in her cross-examination indicated a hit an
India Law Library Docid # 2414647

(90) RAJ SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 03-05-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B – The petitioner is facing an FIR for fraud and cheating in a property sale - He claims false implication based on a co-accused's disclosure statement and is ready to cooperate with the investigation - The state and complainant resist bail, citing the need for custodial interrogation to recover the amount and documents - The court dismisses the anticipatory bail petition, emphasizing the gravity of the allegations and the necessity
India Law Library Docid # 2414648

(91) GUDDO Vs. STATE OF HARYANA[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 03-05-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 302 and 34 – Murder - A petitioner was accused of murdering her live-in partner 'R', and confessed to stabbing him - The case revolves around circumstantial evidence, her disclosure statement, and the recovery of the knife - The petitioner's counsel argued that she was falsely implicated and had no involvement in the murder - The State opposed bail, citing the weapon's recovery and 'R's beating of her children as motives - The court granted bail to the petitione
India Law Library Docid # 2414649

(92) LAL CHAND Vs. STATE OF HARYANA[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 03-05-2024
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Sections 7, 7-A, 13(1)(b) and 13(2) – Corruption related to an inter-caste marriage reward scheme - The petitioner sought regular bail under Section 439 CrPC after being granted interim bail on 25.04.2024 - The petitioner complied with the court's conditions, declared assets, and argued that further pre-trial incarceration would cause irreversible injustice - The State opposed bail, citing the petitioner's apprehension with a bribe amount and the co-accused's
India Law Library Docid # 2414650

(93) AJAIB SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) PUNJAB AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 03-05-2024
Mutation - Petitioners and another purchased land and mutation was sanctioned - Later, mutation was set aside, which the petitioners seek to quash - The main issue is the legality of mutation which was entered without the petitioners' signatures, and whether it was fraudulent - The petitioners argue that the mutation was illegal, as it was entered without their consent and signatures, constituting fraud - The respondents contend that the mutation was based on a family partition agreement and tha
India Law Library Docid # 2414651

(94) DHANJEET SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 03-05-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 307, 323, 506, 427, 148, 149 and 120-B - Arms Act, 1959 - Sections 25 and 27 – Quashing of FIR – Compromise - The main issue is whether the FIR and subsequent proceedings can be quashed in light of the compromise between the parties - The petitioner argues that the FIR arose from a minor altercation and has been settled amicably - The State and respondent No.2 have no objection to quashing the FIR based on the compromise - The court allowed the petition, quashin
India Law Library Docid # 2414652

(95) SUVARNA NETAJI PATIL AND ANOTHER Vs. SMITA ASHOK PATIL[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 03-05-2024
Appointment – ‘Anganwadi Sevika’ - The dispute involves competing claims for the post of 'Anganwadi Sevika' - The appellant challenged the appointment of ‘S’ claiming the latter was ineligible due to age - The main issue was the validity of the appellant's birth certificate, which showed a different date of birth than her school records, affecting her eligibility for the post - Appellant argued that her birth certificate should take precedence over the school records for determining her age and
India Law Library Docid # 2414619

(96) MAHIPAL Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND[UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] 03-05-2024
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Sections 7A and Section 8 - Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 409, 420, 466, 467, 468, 471 and 120B – scholarship scam - The applicant is implicated in a scholarship scam - anticipatory bail - The petitioner contends that he has been falsely implicated, did not receive any scholarship funds, and has cooperated with the investigation - The State opposed the bail application but acknowledged that the charge-sheet has been filed, implying no need for custodial i
India Law Library Docid # 2414655

(97) RANGE FOREST OFFICER Vs. BABUBHAI MANGALBHAI THAKOR AND ANOTHER[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 03-05-2024
Service Law – Termination - The case revolves around a worker's termination, leading to an industrial dispute and a reference to the Labour Court - The Labour Court awarded a lump sum compensation of Rs. 30,000, which was challenged in a writ petition - The main issue is whether reinstatement is automatic or if lump sum compensation is sufficient - The State Government argued that the writ petition was delayed and the compensation awarded was just and proper - The High Court confirmed the enhanc
India Law Library Docid # 2414685

(98) JAYESH L PATEL AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT AND OTHERS[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 03-05-2024
Service Law – Pensionery Benefits - The petitioners employees of Mahatma Gandhi Labour Institute, sought pension benefits equivalent to those of Gujarat government employees - Their proposal was rejected by the government in 2003 - The main issue was whether the petitioners should be non-suited due to delay and latches, as they approached the court 15 years after their proposal was rejected - The petitioners argued they were entitled to the same pension scheme as government employees and were un
India Law Library Docid # 2414687

(99) SMT.K.LAKSHMI KANTHA AND OTHERS Vs. SRI S. KARUNA AND OTHERS[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 02-05-2024
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 163-A – Enhancement of Compensation - The appeal challenges an award of Rs. 2,53,400/- for a motor vehicle accident claim involving the death against an original claim of Rs. 5,00,000/-. The main issues were the legal heir status of the petitioners, the cause of the accident, and the entitlement and quantum of compensation - The petitioners claimed compensation under "no fault liability," stating they are the legal heirs and that the deceased earned Rs. 3,500/-
India Law Library Docid # 2414565

(100) SHAIK KHADAR SAHEB (DIED) AND OTHERS Vs. SHAIK RAHAMTHULLA AND OTHERS[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 02-05-2024
Suit for Partition – Property Dispute among the heirs of ‘N’ - The main issue is whether the trial court was justified in decreeing the suit for partition of plaint A schedule property - The appellants contend there was a prior partition, the suit is not maintainable for non-joinder of necessary parties, and the trial court erred in its decision - The respondents argue that the trial court correctly decreed the suit based on the evidence, and there's no need to interfere with the trial court's f
India Law Library Docid # 2414573