(161) DUVVURU MOHAN REDDY Vs. KUNTRAPKAM UMA MAHESWAR RAO[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 12-07-2024 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 39 Rule 1 — The petitioner had filed a suit for a permanent injunction against the respondents, claiming ownership of certain land — The respondents claimed that the land belonged to them and that the petitioner had illegally constructed a compound wall on their land — The trial court appointed an Advocate Commissioner to inspect the site and determine whether there was a wall encompassing the disputed land — The petitioner challenged the appointment of t India Law Library Docid # 2416206
(162) NAZNEEN SULTANA AND OTHERS Vs. KAMALUR ABDUL RAHIM AND ANOTHER[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 12-07-2024 Motor Accident Claims — The deceased died in a road accident caused by a juvenile riding a bike — The deceased's family filed for compensation —Whether the accident was due to rash and negligent driving, and the appropriate amount of compensation —The deceased earned Rs.10,000 per month, and the compensation awarded was insufficient —The insurance company disputed the deceased's income and the compensation amount — The compensation was increased from Rs.11,55,000 to Rs.12,53,750 with 9% interest India Law Library Docid # 2416272
(163) MOHD AKBER Vs. THE STATE OF TELANGANA[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 12-07-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 468, 471, 420, 506, 120(B) read with Section 34 — The case involves a property dispute where the complainant alleges that the accused interfered with his property, forged documents, and committed fraud — Whether the criminal proceedings should be quashed due to alleged procedural errors and the existence of a civil dispute — The investigation was improperly transferred between police stations without court permission, and the complaint is an abuse of process to India Law Library Docid # 2416273
(164) PACHIPULUSU SUBRAMANYAM Vs. C. CHANDRAMMA DIED[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 12-07-2024 Suit for eviction, recovery of arrears of rent, and damages — Impleadment of Parties — The plaintiff died, leaving behind her husband and children —Whether the proposed parties should be impleaded as plaintiffs in the main suit and whether the daughters should be added as parties —The petitioners argued that the deceased plaintiff's Will Deed bequeathed her share to her sons, making them necessary parties — The respondents contended that the daughters are necessary parties and the suit cannot pr India Law Library Docid # 2416274
(165) BETHI SAGAR REDDY Vs. KAPIL CHITS KAKATIYA PRIVATE LTD.[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 12-07-2024 Chit Fund Act, 1994 — Section 64 — The 2nd respondent, a subscriber to a chit fund, failed to pay the amount due — The 1st respondent, the chit fund company, filed for recovery —The petitioner challenged the execution petition on grounds of procedural errors and improper notice — Petitioner claimed procedural errors in the execution petition and improper notice — Respondent asserted that the execution petition was filed in accordance with the law — The court set aside the impugned attachment ord India Law Library Docid # 2416275
(166) RASHEED K.S. AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 11-07-2024 Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - Section 12 - Quashing of proceedings - The petitioners argued that they should not be included as respondents since there were no allegations of domestic violence or cruelty against them - However, the court held that the allegations in the complaint were sufficient to warrant the proceedings against the petitioners - The court also referred to the definitions of "aggrieved person," "domestic relationship," "domestic violence," and "economic India Law Library Docid # 2415984
(167) P. HARISH AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 11-07-2024 Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 - Kerala Highway Protection Act, 1999 - Sections 4 and 7 -Kerala Town and Country Planning Act, 2016 - Sections 61, 76 and 77 -The petitioners claimed that the proposed acquisition of their property for road widening was against the Master Plan and violated the Kerala Highway Protection Act and the Kerala Town and Country Planning Act - However, the court held that the acquisition could onl India Law Library Docid # 2415985
(168) SHANKAR PRASAD PAL @ SHANKAR PAL Vs. STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 11-07-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 467, 468, 420 and 34 - Quashing of FIR - The petitioner claimed that he was falsely implicated in the case as he was the grandson of 'M', whose name had been interpolated in the khatiyan (land record) register - The court held that the genuineness of the allegations cannot be looked into by the court at this stage and that the petitioner can raise the points in his defense during the trial - Petition Dismissed India Law Library Docid # 2415986
(169) AMRITA SWARAJ AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 11-07-2024 Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 323, 504, 427, 506 and 34 - Quashing of the order - The court found that prima facie case was made out against all the accused persons, including the petitioners, based on the contents of the complaint petition and the statement of the complainant recorded on SA - The court also noted that the defense arguments raised by the petitioners regarding the complaint and divorce case filed by the petitioner no.1 would be considered by the trial court at an appropriate stage India Law Library Docid # 2415987
(170) SANDEEP SHUKLA Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (GWALIOR BENCH)] 11-07-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Section 409 - M.P. Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2015 - Condition No.13(2) - Essential Commodities Act, 1955 - Section 7 - Misappropriation of ration material - Penalties - The court found that the complaint did not provide any material to suggest that petitioner was involved in the transportation or misappropriation of ration material, and that the statement of the complainant was merely an opinion without any supporting evidence - The court further noted India Law Library Docid # 2415978
(171) SMT. KANCHAN RAWAT AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 11-07-2024 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Sections 125 and 482 - Maintenance - The applicant filed an application seeking enforcement of an interim maintenance order passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Ghazipur - The applicant's husband was directed to pay Rs. 4,000 per month as interim maintenance allowance, but he failed to pay the arrears of Rs. 80,000 as directed by the court - The applicant sought a direction from the court to pay the arrears and increase the interim maintenance allowance to India Law Library Docid # 2415979
(172) VIJUBHAI MULJIBHAI CHAUHAN Vs. BHAVANBHAI DHANABHAI BHARVAD[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 11-07-2024 Limitation Act, 1963 - Section 5 - Condonation of delay in filing an application for restoration of a civil suit - The petitioner claimed that the delay was due to the death of his counsel and his own ill health - However, the court found that the petitioner had not provided sufficient explanation for the delay and that there was no gross negligence or lack of due diligence on his part - The court also noted that the merits of the case could not be considered while dealing with the application India Law Library Docid # 2415980
(173) ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER CENTRAL EXCISE Vs. M/S INDIAN MAGNETICS AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 11-07-2024 Central Excise Act, 1944 - Section 9(1) - Offences and Penalties - Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) -Sections 468 and 473 - Forgery for purpose of cheating - Discharged of the accused by the Trial Court - The High Court held that the accused, who was the Managing Director of the company, could be held liable by virtue of his position and there was no requirement to prove that he was in charge and responsible for the company's affairs - The court also clarified that the provisions of secondary evidence app India Law Library Docid # 2415981
(174) PRITHVI CHAND AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF H.P. AND ANOTHER[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 11-07-2024 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2012 - Section 12 - Application to Magistrate - Quashing a summons order - The court held that the exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is to be done sparingly and only in the rarest of rare cases - The court cannot conduct a mini-trial or enter into an appreciation of evidence at this stage - The court must only examine whether the allegations made in the complaint prima facie establis India Law Library Docid # 2415982
(175) RAJAT KUMAR BHALOTIA Vs. SAI TECH MEDICARE PVT LTD. AND ANOTHER[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 11-07-2024 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Sections 138 and 141 - Dishonour of Cheque - Quashing of a complaint - The court held that the complaint was not filed by an unauthorized person and that the accused's position as a director and authorized signatory made him liable under Section 141 of the NI Act - The court also rejected the petitioner's argument that the cheque was not issued in the discharge of a legal liability, stating that such a defense could only be considered after the trial - The cou India Law Library Docid # 2415983
(176) RAMPURITHR LRS MAHENDRAPURI SINCE DECAESED AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF M.P AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 11-07-2024 Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959 — Section 57 — The case revolves around a dispute over ownership of a temple and its land — The appellants claimed to be the Bhumiswami (owner) of the temple and land, while the respondents (State of M.P.) argued that the land belonged to the State Government — The court examined various sections of the Revenue Code (MPLRC) and case law to determine the status of the appellants as Bhumiswami — It was determined that the appellants, who were priests of the t India Law Library Docid # 2416002
(177) LILY PACKERS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. VAISHNAVI VIJAY UMAK AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 11-07-2024 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Sections 11(6) and 21 — Lock-in clauses in employment contracts are valid and enforceable during the term of the contract — The court dismissed the argument that such clauses violate the fundamental rights of employees under the Constitution — The court also held that disputes related to lock-in clauses are arbitrable under the Act, 1996 — The court appointed a sole arbitrator to resolve the disputes arising from the employment contracts between the petit India Law Library Docid # 2416004
(178) PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-8 Vs. SAMSUNG INDIA ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD[DELHI HIGH COURT] 11-07-2024 Income Tax Act, 1961 — Section 143(1) and 142(2) — Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd. (STI) paid royalty to Samsung Korea for technical know-how — The Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) determined the Arm's Length Price (ALP) of the royalty as 'Nil' —Whether the ITAT erred in deleting the Transfer Pricing (TP) adjustments of INR 1,99,57,161/- on the ground of payment of royalty — STI acted as a contract manufacturer for Samsung Korea, and the royalty payments were essentially payments to itself —ST India Law Library Docid # 2416005
(179) NEW OKHLA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 11-07-2024 Income Tax Act, 1961 — Section 10(46) — Refusal of the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) to grant it certification under Section 10(46) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 — The court found that NOIDA's activities were primarily for the benefit of the general public and not for profit, and therefore it should be exempt from taxation — The court also noted that other similar bodies constituted under the same law, such as Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority and Yamuna Expressway Industrial D India Law Library Docid # 2416006
(180) MUKESH MARWAHA AND ANOTHER Vs. RAJIV BHAKRI AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 11-07-2024 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 15A — Payment of rent during the pendency of a suit for possession, recovery of arrears of rent, mesne profits, and injunction — The court found that the lower court failed to consider the documents on record, including a reply to a legal notice, which indicated the existence of a landlord-tenant relationship — The court remanded the case back to the lower court to consider the application afresh and dispose of it within four weeks — The court emphasized India Law Library Docid # 2416007