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

(941) GURMEET SINGH Vs. SMT. NARENDRA KAUR AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 01-04-2024
Will – Mutation - The petition challenges orders regarding the mutation of property based on a will, which was set aside by revenue authorities - The main issue is whether the delay in challenging the mutation should have been condoned and if the revenue authorities have the jurisdiction to mutate based on a Will - The petitioner argues that the mutation order was challenged after 15 years, and the delay should not have been condoned - The court refers to various Supreme Court decisions stating
India Law Library Docid # 2403722

(942) S.N. BAKSHI Vs. MAJIDUDDIN AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 01-04-2024
Property Dispute - The dispute involves a piece of land measuring 32 decimals, part of an 8.32-acre property in Bhopal, originally owned by ‘A’ - The plaintiffs claim the land was reserved for public use and not available for sale - The primary legal issue is whether the sale deed executed by Defendants No.1 to 5 in favor of Defendant No.8 is null and void - The appellant (Defendant No.8) argues that the sale deed dated 11.10.2000
India Law Library Docid # 2403723

(943) AJAY JHAM Vs. SMT. JASHODA RAJPUT AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 01-04-2024
Motor Accident Claims – Compensation - The main issue is the ownership and possession of the offending tractor at the time of the accident, which led to the injuries of the claimants - The appellant contends that he was not the owner of the tractor at the time of the accident, as it was sold to ‘B’ years prior, and thus he should not be liable for compensation - The respondents did not appear, hence their arguments are not recorded in the document
India Law Library Docid # 2403724

(944) JAQUAR AND COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. ASHIRVAD PIPES PRIVATE LIMITED[DELHI HIGH COURT] 01-04-2024
Trademarks Act, 1999 - 23(1) - Infringement of Trademark - The plaintiff, Jaquar & Company Private Limited, alleges infringement of their registered trademarks by the defendant, Ashirvad Pipes Private Limited, through the use of the marks ARTISTRY and TIARA - The main issue is whether the defendant’s use of the marks constitutes infringement and passing off, leading to confusion among consumers - The plaintiff argues prior use and reputation of their ARTIZE and TIAARA marks, claiming that the d
India Law Library Docid # 2403727

(945) DR. MAHESH PRAKASH SHINDE AND OTHERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 01-04-2024
National Medical Commission Act, 2019 - Section 37(2) - Recognition of medical qualifications granted by statutory or other body in India – Medical Council Act, 1956 - 11(2) - Recognition and equivalence of FCPS qualifications awarded by the College of Physicians and Surgeons (CPS), Mumbai, for medical practice and teaching purposes - The main issue is whether FCPS qualifications are equivalent to MD/MS degrees and whether holders of FCPS qualifications are eligible to appear for DNB final exam
India Law Library Docid # 2403728

(946) ABNASH CHANDER CHADHA Vs. BALBIR KUMAR CHADHA AND ANOTHER[DELHI HIGH COURT] 01-04-2024
Property Dispute - The petitioner contributed to the acquisition and construction of these properties and sought partition after the parents’ demise - The main issue was whether the petitioner should be allowed to lead evidence in rebuttal concerning the properties, as the trial court dismissed his application for the same - The petitioner argued that he reserved the right to lead evidence in rebuttal and that the trial court erred in dismissing his application, which was contrary to the princip
India Law Library Docid # 2403729

(947) TARUN KUMAR Vs. AJAY KUMAR[DELHI HIGH COURT] 01-04-2024
Mitakshara Hindu Law - Partition Suit - The plaintiffs and defendants were part of a Joint Hindu Family (HUF) owning various properties and businesses - After the death of ‘L’ in 1943, disputes arose regarding the management and partition of the HUF assets - The core issue is whether the alleged partitions and sales of HUF properties by defendants were fair and legally binding on the plaintiffs, who were minors at the time of these transactions
India Law Library Docid # 2403730

(948) RAJEEV JHAWAR Vs. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT[DELHI HIGH COURT] 01-04-2024
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Sections 7A, 8, 9, 10 and 12 - Taking undue advantage to influence public servant by corrupt or illegal means or by exercise of personal influence - The case involves allegations of corruption and money laundering against Petitioner and others, related to influencing a CBI investigation. - The primary issue is the quashing of Non-Bailable Warrants (NBW) issued against Petitioner by the trial court
India Law Library Docid # 2403731

(949) M/S PCC INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD. Vs. AIRPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA[DELHI HIGH COURT] 01-04-2024
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Section 34 - Application for setting aside arbitral award - PCC Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (PCC) appealed against a judgment that dismissed their petition challenging an arbitral award - The dispute was over the price variation in a contract with the Airports Authority of India (AAI) for construction work at Mangalore International Airport - The main issue was the application of the formula for computing price variation for cement, as per Clause 10CA of the
India Law Library Docid # 2403732

(950) HIMANSHU DAWER Vs. HEMCHAND AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 01-04-2024
Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 - Section 14(1)(e) - The eviction petition was filed by the respondents claiming ownership of a property and seeking eviction of the petitioner under Section 14(1)(e) of the Act - The main issue is the alleged improper service of summons to the petitioner/tenant, as they were not sent simultaneously through ordinary process and registered post - The petitioner contends that the summons were not duly served as required by law, which mandates simultaneous service throu
India Law Library Docid # 2403733

(951) PAWAN SHARMA AND OTHERS Vs. STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI[DELHI HIGH COURT] 01-04-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 328, 366, 342, 34 and 376D IPC - Abduction and Gang Rape - The appellants were convicted for offences including abduction and gang rape - The victim, ‘G’, initially reported the crime but later retracted her statement during the trial, claiming she had left home voluntarily due to tension - The main issue was the credibility of 'G’s testimony and the investigation’s quality, including the lack of evidence like call details and the prosecutrix’s mobile CDR
India Law Library Docid # 2403734

(952) M/S SANA FOOD PRODUCTS AND OTHERS Vs. M/S ASHWMEGH SPICES PVT. LTD[DELHI HIGH COURT] 01-04-2024
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) - Order 8 Rule 1 read with Section 151 – Written Statement - The petitioners are challenging an order that dismissed their application for condonation of delay in filing a written statement in a commercial suit filed by the respondent - The main issue is whether the delay in filing the written statement by the petitioners was justified due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the subsequent lockdown, which affected the functioning of courts
India Law Library Docid # 2403735

(953) VALLEY IRON AND STEEL CO. LTD AND OTHERS Vs. PRINICIPAL COMMISSIONER FOR INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-1 AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 01-04-2024
Income Tax Act, 1961 - Section 80IC – Deductions - The case involves the petitioner challenging an order related to share capital infusion and deductions under Section 80IC of the Income Tax Act - The main issues are the genuineness of the share capital amounting to INR 34,66,56,950 and the claim for deductions under Section 80IC - The petitioner asserts that the share capital infusion is verifiable and that the denial of deductions under Section 80IC is unjustified
India Law Library Docid # 2403736

(954) ASSAM CARBON WORKERS and EMPLOYEES UNION Vs. THE MANAGEMENT OF ASSAM CARBON PRODUCTS LTD[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 01-04-2024
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Sections 10 and 23 – The case involves a dispute over wages for a period of strike and lockout at Assam Carbon Products Ltd - The Labour Court ruled against the workmen, denying wages for the strike from 27.11.2007 to 29.11.2007 and the lockout from 29.11.2007 to 24.07.2008 - The primary issue is whether the workmen are entitled to wages during the strike and subsequent lockout period - The Union argued that the strike was not illegal, the lockout was declared wit
India Law Library Docid # 2413925

(955) M/S ATANU GANGULY AND ANOTHER Vs. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND OTHERS[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 01-04-2024
Assam Value Added Tax Act, 2003 - Section 2(43) - Finance Act 1994 - Section 65(105)(zzzzj) - The case involves a dispute over whether transactions related to hiring launch vehicles for the Bogibeel Bridge Project fall under 'sale' as per the Assam Value Added Tax Act, 2003 or 'service' under the Finance Act, 1994 - The primary issue is the classification of the transactions-whether they constitute a 'sale' or a 'service', which affects the applicability of VAT or service tax - The petitioner co
India Law Library Docid # 2413936

(956) NAGENDRA REDDY, SON OF NANJUNDA REDDY Vs. M.G. SHANTHKUMAR SINCE DECEASED BY LRS AND OTHERS[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 01-04-2024
Property Dispute - The appeal challenges the trial court's decision on grounds of alleged non-opportunity for cross-examination and evidence presentation, and questions the amendment of the plaint being barred by the law of limitation - The appellant argues that the trial court did not provide sufficient opportunity to cross-examine witnesses or present evidence, and contends that the amendment to the plaint is barred by limitation - The respondents maintain that the sale deed is null and void d
India Law Library Docid # 2413947

(957) STATE OF U.P. THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECY. HOME, LUCKNOW AND OTHERS Vs. OM PRAKASH CHAUDHARY[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (LUCKNOW BENCH)] 29-03-2024
Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 - Chapter 9 Rule 14 - Contents of review application - The respondent-petitioner had earlier filed a writ petition challenging a termination order - The writ petition was dismissed, but the petitioner concealed this fact in a subsequent writ petition - Whether the respondent-petitioner’s second writ petition is maintainable for the same cause of action - Whether the petitioner’s concealment of material facts affects the case - The petitioner argues that the secon
India Law Library Docid # 2403683

(958) SUHAIL AHMAD AND ANOTHER Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION, FAIZABAD AND OTHERS[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (LUCKNOW BENCH)] 29-03-2024
U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 - Section 48 - Notification of record operations - Original tenure holder ‘U’ sold land to private respondent No. 5 through a sale deed dated 08.09.1992 - The sale deed related to Gata No. 1055/2-12-5 (0.660 hect.) situated at Village-Manjha, Shahnewajpur, Pargana-Haweli Awadh, Tehsil-Sadar, District-Ayodhya - New number 389 Gha was assigned to Gata Nos. 254, 1054M, 1055M, and 1056M after a process under Section 48 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 - The claim of pet
India Law Library Docid # 2403684

(959) ABDUL HASAN Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION AMETHI AND OTHERS[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (LUCKNOW BENCH)] 29-03-2024
U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 - Sections 19 and 19(1)(e) - Conditions to be fulfilled by a Consolidation Scheme - The petitioner challenges a revisional order and an order passed by the Settlement Officer Consolidation - The dispute relates to the allotment of a chak (parcel of land) under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 - Whether the impugned orders were passed without considering the petitioner’s genuine grievance - Whether the orders violate the principles embodied in
India Law Library Docid # 2403685

(960) RANA PRATAP SINGH Vs. NEETU SINGH AND OTHERS[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 29-03-2024
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 125 – Maintenance – Maintenance allowance to wife and her children – Wife filed an application for maintenance, alleging mistreatment by her husband - The husband claimed that his wife was living away from him without reasonable cause - He also argued that her maintenance claim was barred due to a decree for restitution of conjugal rights - Whether Wife had sufficient income to maintain herself - The trial court misread evidence and failed to consider the
India Law Library Docid # 2403686