ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(1) GAMMON ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PVT. LTD. Vs. ROHIT SOOD[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 16-10-2024
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 34 — MSME unit — Place of Jurisdiction — The Facilitation Council at Shimla passed an award against the Petitioner, which was challenged under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act — The main issue is whether the jurisdiction to hear a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act is governed by the MSMED Act or the original arbitration agreement between the parties — The Petitioner argues that the original agreement, which confers exclusive jurisd
India Law Library Docid # 2418765

(2) SUDHIR MADHAVRAO KUDALE AND OTHERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 15-10-2024
National Highways Act, 1956 — Section 3D — The petitioners claim ownership of a building, which was allegedly demolished by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) without due process and compensation during the widening of NH-4 — Whether the demolition of building was lawful and if the petitioners are entitled to compensation — The petitioners argue that the demolition was illegal, they were rendered homeless, and no compensation was paid — NHAI contends that the structures were unautho
India Law Library Docid # 2418766

(3) MR. SHASHIKANT GANGAR Vs. ADITYA BIRLA FINANCE LIMITED AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT (GOA BENCH)] 15-10-2024
Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 — Section 34 — The petitioner is challenging an order that dismissed his appeal and confirmed the rejection of his suit by the Commercial Court — The suit involves allegations of fraud and collusion related to a loan sanctioned by Aditya Birla Finance Limited to Libox Chem (India) Private Limited — Whether the suit is barred by Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act — Whether the allegations of fraud and
India Law Library Docid # 2418767

(4) TATA CAPITAL LIMITED Vs. PRIYANKA COMMUNICATIONS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 15-10-2024
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 11 — Appointment of an arbitrator — Disputes arising from a Sanction Letter dated August 19, 2019, related to a Working Capital Demand Loan (WCDL) and other financial facilities provided to Respondent — The main issue is whether the disputes are arbitrable given the provisions of the SARFAESI Act and the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 — Appellant argued that there is a valid arbitration agreement and that the d
India Law Library Docid # 2418768

(5) HIRAMAN YASHWANT KATHE AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 15-10-2024
Maharashtra Industrial Development Act, 1961 — Section 34 — Petitioners, agriculturists from Nashik, challenge the Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation's (MIDC) decision not to refer their compensation dispute to a civil court — They argue their land was misclassified, affecting compensation — Whether the land should be classified as seasonally-irrigated or perennially-irrigated, impacting the compensation rate — Petitioners argue that the land was wrongly classified, leading to lower
India Law Library Docid # 2418769

(6) M/S. BHIMALE AND SONS Vs. MOTI DINSHAW IRANI AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 15-10-2024
Property Dispute — Rent and Eviction — Sub-letting — Default in paying rent payments — The case involves a dispute over a plot of land and a shed — The plaintiffs claim ownership and allege that the original tenant unlawfully sublet the premises to the defendants, who defaulted on rent payments — The main issues are the legality of the subletting, the default in rent payment, and the rightful ownership and tenancy of the property — The plaintiffs argue that the defendants are illegal sub-tenants
India Law Library Docid # 2418770

(7) THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS Vs. RAJAGONDA BHIMGONDA PATIL[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 14-10-2024
Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — Condonation of Delay — The State of Maharashtra filed a review petition seeking to overturn a 2017 judgment related to land acquisition in Kolhapur — The petition was delayed by 1679 days — The main issue was whether the delay in filing the review petition could be condoned and whether the review petition had merit — The State argued that the delay was due to administrative procedures, the COVID-19 pandemic, and heavy rainfall — They also cited a Supreme Court
India Law Library Docid # 2418771

(8) AZHARALI JAFERALI QURESHI Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 14-10-2024
Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 332 r/w 34 — The applicant was convicted for obstructing a public servant and causing injury during a raid on his shop for selling unauthorizedly slaughtered mutton without a license — Whether the applicant's conviction was justified given the contradictions in witness testimonies and lack of proper statutory procedure by the prosecution — The defence argued that the prosecution's case was based on unreliable witness testimonies, lack of statutory action, and procedur
India Law Library Docid # 2418772

(9) TANAJI DATTU PADWAL Vs. DIRECTOR OF ENFORCEMENT AND ANOTHER[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 14-10-2024
Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 — Section 4 — The applicant was arrested in connection with a case involving the PMLA and other offences — He has been in custody since March 2021 — Whether the applicant should be granted bail considering his long incarceration and the severity of the offences — The applicant argues for bail on the grounds of parity with a co-accused who was granted bail, lack of direct benefit from the crime, and long incarceration — The prosecution opposes bail, citing
India Law Library Docid # 2418773

(10) MR. BHOJRAJ HASARAM GURUNANI AND ANOTHER Vs. MR. ABDUL MAJID HAJI KADARSO MANER AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 11-10-2024
Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 — Section 8 — The case involves a dispute over a shop — The landlord sought eviction of the tenant on grounds of unlawful subletting, bonafide need, and default in rent payment — The main issues are whether the tenant unlawfully sublet the premises, whether the landlord has a bonafide need for the premises, and whether the tenant defaulted on rent payments — The tenant argued that the rent was paid and the premises were not sublet — He also contested the landlo
India Law Library Docid # 2418774

(11) RAKESH MATASHARAN SHUKLA Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 11-10-2024
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 248(2) of Cr.P.C. — Sections 279, 354D and 337 — Rash and negligent driving, stalking, and causing injuries — Whether the applicant's actions constituted stalking under Section 354D of the IPC and whether the conviction for rash and negligent driving was justified — The applicant argued that the evidence was inconsistent and that the prosecution failed to prove the elements of stalking — They also contended that the delay in filing the FIR was not a
India Law Library Docid # 2418775

(12) DINKAR SHANKAR DESHMUKH AND ANOTHER Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 11-10-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B read with 34 — The applicants, former sub-Registrars, are accused of registering transactions involving forest land, which is prohibited by law — Whether the applicants can be held criminally liable for registering transactions that were prohibited by law, given their duties under the Registration Act — The applicants argue that their role as Registering Officers is limited to verifying the execution and identity of the par
India Law Library Docid # 2418776

(13) ISMAIL BABALAL ATTAR Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 10-10-2024
Secured Loan — Waiver of — The petitioner applied for a loan waiver under the "Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Shetkari Sanman Yojana-2017" for an agricultural loan of Rs.1,92,000/- taken from the Bank of Maharashtra — The main issue is whether the petitioner's loan, secured by gold ornaments, qualifies for the loan waiver scheme — The petitioner argued that the loan was for agricultural purposes and should be eligible for the waiver — The Bank of Maharashtra contended that loans secured by gold are
India Law Library Docid # 2418777

(14) CHOLAMANDALAM M. S. GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. SMT. POONAM GUPTA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 10-10-2024
Motor Accident Claims — Quantum of Compensation — The case involves a motor accident claim where the deceased was hit by a dumper truck, resulting in his death — The widow and parents of the deceased filed for compensation — The main issues are the quantum of compensation and the liability of the insurance company versus the driver/owner of the dumper — The insurance company argued that the compensation awarded was too high and that deductions for personal expenses were not applied — They also c
India Law Library Docid # 2418778

(15) THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. PRADIP VISHWANATH JAGTAP[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 10-10-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302 — Murder of Four Family Members, including his wife, due to suspicions about her fidelity — Death Penalty by the trial court — "rarest of rare" category — The main issues revolve around the validity of the conviction and the appropriateness of the death penalty — The defence argued that the evidence was insufficient, witnesses were unreliable, and the accused was falsely implicated — They also contended that the death penalty should be commuted to life impris
India Law Library Docid # 2418779

(16) THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER Vs. SMT. SUNITA SHANKARRAO VHATKAR AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 10-10-2024
Service Law — Permanency — The State of Maharashtra challenged the Industrial Court's order granting permanency to several contract employees — Whether the Industrial Court's order granting permanency based on 240 days of service was valid — The State argued that permanency cannot be granted without sanctioned posts and proper selection procedures, citing the Municipal Council, Tirora case — The employees argued they were selected through a proper process and had been working for many years, thu
India Law Library Docid # 2418780

(17) AKHIL BHARAT KRISHI GO SEVA SANGH Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 10-10-2024
The petitioner-Trust claims that the State of Maharashtra owes them Rs. 1,19,35,750 for conducting fodder feeding camps under a government scheme — The main issue is whether the petitioner complied with the scheme's requirements and is entitled to the claimed amount — There are also disputes about the number of animals, proper certification, and compliance with the scheme — The petitioner argues that they complied with all requirements, and the Tahsildar certified the animal numbers — They claim
India Law Library Docid # 2418781

(18) RAJESH SANGAMLAL JAISWAL AND ANOTHER Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 10-10-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 376(2)(g), 366A, 292, 500 and 506 (II) and 34 — Information Technology Act, 2000 — Section 67 — The appellants were convicted for multiple offences including rape, abduction, and criminal intimidation — The incident involved the recording and dissemination of a video of the crime — The main issues revolved around the admissibility of the video evidence, the credibility of the victim's testimony, and the delay in reporting the crime — The appellants argued that t
India Law Library Docid # 2418782

(19) ‘X’ Vs. MAHARASHTRA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 10-10-2024
Education Law — Expulsion — Petitioner, a student at Maharashtra National Law University (MNLU), was expelled for alleged sexual harassment — The Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) found him guilty for the second time, leading to his expulsion — The main issues include procedural fairness, the applicability of the University Grants Commission (UGC) regulations, and the proportionality of the punishment — The petitioner argued that the ICC did not follow proper procedures, such as allowing cross
India Law Library Docid # 2418783

(20) VARUN KHANDELWAL Vs. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 10-10-2024
Rajasthan Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1964 — Allotment of plot and cancellation of the same due to non-compliance — The petitioner, claiming to be a tenant, sought re-allotment after the plot was handed over to RIICO — Whether the petitioner was a tenant and if the procedures under the Rajasthan Public Premises Act were followed during the possession handover — The petitioner argued that the eviction process was not followed correctly and that the power of attorney
India Law Library Docid # 2418818