(61) GANESH Vs. STATE OF U.P. [ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 02-12-2022 This is a second bail application on behalf of the applicant. The first bail application was rejected by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 30.01.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.8363 of 2014. Heard Mr. Ram Babu Sharma , learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. R.P. Mishra, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. India Law Library Docid # 1848003
(62) STATE OF U.P. THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF U.P., LUCKNOW AND OTHERS Vs. ANURAG AND OTHERS [ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (LUCKNOW BENCH)] 02-12-2022 This order will dispose of a bunch of Appeals raising similar questions of law and fact. Writ Petition No. 7631 (SS) of 2018, titled as ''Anurag and another vs. U.O.I. through Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development and others' and Writ Petition No. 27505 (SS) of 2018, titled as ''Amit Verma and others vs. U.O.I. through Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, School Education & Literacy and others' were decided by the Lucknow Bench of this Court by a common order dated July India Law Library Docid # 1848086
(63) U.P. EXPRESSWAYS INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY THRU CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Vs. SAHAKAR GLOBAL LTD. THRU THRU AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY STEPHEN LOBO [ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (LUCKNOW BENCH)] 02-12-2022 A short but seminal question arises in the present Appeal filed under section 37 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (as amended) by the Uttar Pradesh Expressways industrial Development Authority (for short UPEIDA) against an ad-interim Injunction order dated 12.09.2022 (Impugned Order) passed by the Learned Commercial Court, Lucknow under section 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 19969 (as amended). Apparently, in the said impugned order the Learned Commercial Court India Law Library Docid # 1848087
(64) RAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 02-12-2022 This criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the appellant against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 12.06.2013 passed by the Sessions Judge, Rajnandgaon, C.G., in Sessions Trial No.41/2012, whereby the learned court below convicted the appellant herein for offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 3000/-, in default of payment of fine further R.I. for 1 year. India Law Library Docid # 1848230
(65) MUHAMMED RAFI Vs. NOORJAHAN [KERALA HIGH COURT] 02-12-2022 The subject matter of the proceedings is a shop room. The shop room was let out to the tenant on 23.12.2008 on a monthly rent of Rs.850/-. It is alleged by the landlady in the eviction petition that the tenant is not paying rent in respect of the shop room from the month of October, 2009. It is also alleged by the landlady in the eviction petition that she intends to run a textile business in the shop room, after evicting the tenant. India Law Library Docid # 1848594
(66) HARIDAS N.A AND ANOTHER Vs. PADMANABHAN P.P AND OTHERS [KERALA HIGH COURT] 02-12-2022 These review petitions are filed for reviewing the judgment and order dated 12.7.2022 in O.P.(C)No.377 of 2022 to the extent it restrained the defendants in O.S.173 of 2021 or anybody acting on behalf of the governing committee of Nanminda High School Society from making any appointment in the School till the disposal of the Original Suit. India Law Library Docid # 1848595
(67) KINTI CH. SANGMA Vs. GARO HILLS AUTONOMOUS DISTRICT COUNCIL AND OTHERS [MEGHALAYA HIGH COURT] 02-12-2022 This writ petition is presented against the Judgment and Order dated 30.05.2019, passed by the Chief Executive Member, Garo Hills Autonomous District Council in GHADC-REV. Appeal No. 13 A.C. of 2016, setting aside the order dated 28.10.2016, passed by the Executive Member i/c Land Revenue, GHADC, Tura which further directed, for registration of the respondent No. 4 and 5 as Nokmas, of Tochapara II-19 (16) A'khing, and also for correction of the Genealogical Table. India Law Library Docid # 1848774
(68) SHIV KUMAR JAIN Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 02-12-2022 The prayer in the petitions has been made that the respondents be directed to accord benefits to the petitioners in light of order in R.C. Gupta & Ors. v. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees Provident Fund Organisation & Ors.: 2018 (14) SCC 809 and other judgments, which have followed the said judgment including a judgment of this Court. India Law Library Docid # 1848787
(69) KISHAN CHANDRA JEENGAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS [RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 02-12-2022 Learned counsel for the parties submit that the issue raised in the present writ petitions is similar to Tarun Songara v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.15127/2022 & other connected matters, decided on 29.11.2022, wherein, similar petitions have been allowed by the Court and, therefore, petitioners are also entitled to similar relief. India Law Library Docid # 1848914
(70) SONAM TSEWANG BHUTIA AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF SIKKIM THROUGH, THE CHIEF SECRETARY AND OTHERS [SIKKIM HIGH COURT] 02-12-2022 The petitioners challenge the tender process and seek quashing of the bid opening summary dated 14.03.2022 and eight work orders bearing Memo Nos. 1 to 8/WO/JJM/BAC/NDK/2021-22 all dated 29.03.2022 (work orders) awarded in favour of respondent nos. 6, 7 and 8 by the State-respondents after the decision of the Gram Sabha of Gnathang Gram Panchayat Unit headed by the respondent no.5 (the Panchayat Sabhapati) in its meeting held on 14.03.2022 on the ground that he favoured them as they were his rel India Law Library Docid # 1848920
(71) RADHIKA Vs. THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME, PROHIBITION AND EXCISE DEPARTMENT, FORT ST. GEORGE, CHENNAI - 9. AND OTHERS [MADRAS HIGH COURT (BENCH MADURAI)] 01-12-2022 The petitioner is the sister of the detenu viz., Baskar @ Rengadurai, son of Panneerselvam, aged about 40 years. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by his order in Detention Order P.D.No.69/2022 dated 19.06.2022 holding him to be a "Sexual Offender", as contemplated under Section 2(e) of Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. The said order is under challenge in this Habeas Corpus Petition. India Law Library Docid # 1854933
(72) MANOHAR BAPPAJI GAIKWAD Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 01-12-2022 The petitioner was working as a Lower Division Clerk with the Civil Court at Kallam, Dist.Osmanabad. On 21/11/2006, he received an advance increment on account of excellent work in pursuance to the minutes of the meeting dtd. 18/10/2006 conducted by the Advisory Committee recommending candidates for such advance increments. India Law Library Docid # 1855172
(73) JAGDISH LAHU BADHE Vs. STATE CO-OPERATIVE ELECTION AUTHORITY [BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 01-12-2022 In the present writ petition the petitioner is challenging the order dtd. 21/11/2022 passed by respondent no.2 - District Co-operative Election Authority / Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies (Dairy), Nashik Division, Nashik whereby the appeal filed under Sec. 152A of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (hereinafter refereed to as '1960 Act ') by respondent no.5 is allowed and his nomination form for election to Respondent No.4 - Dudh Sangh is accepted.
(74) MR. SREE YESHWANT MORAJKAR Vs. MRS. PUSHPA MANDREKAR [BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 01-12-2022 The appellants are the legal representatives of Sree Yeshwant Morajkar, the original Defendant in Regular Civil Suit No.59/2003/C instituted in the Court of Civil Judge, Junior Division at Vasco (Trial Court). India Law Library Docid # 1855170
(75) EVERISTO REMEDIO SEQUEIRA Vs. SHAIK HASINA [BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 01-12-2022 In nutshell, it is the contention of the appellant that the respondent issued promissory notes dtd. 18/4/2012 amounting to Rs.3, 00, 000.00 and Rs.1, 30, 000.00 - each in favour of the appellant and towards repayment of such amount, issued two cheques dtd. 15/6/2012 drawn on Saraswat Bank, Curchorem, Sanvordem, Goa for a sum of Rs.3, 00, 000.00 and Rs.1, 30, 000.00 each. On presentation of such cheques, the banker returned it vide memo dtd. 2/7/2012 with remark "funds insufficient". The appellan India Law Library Docid # 1855094
(76) MADAN PAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER [ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 01-12-2022 On 02.12.1999 a police party intercepted three persons in a routine patrolling duty and after exchange of firing two persons were apprehended but one person managed to run away. Said two injured-accused were arrested and three FIRs were lodged being Case Crime No. 228 of 1999, under Section 307 IPC and Case Crime No. 229 of 1999 as well as Case Crime No. 230 of 1999, under Section 25 Arms Act, Police Station Roza, District Shahjahanpur and accused Yaqub alias Gulam Khwaja and Arish were remanded India Law Library Docid # 1848085
(77) SHIVKUMAR DESHMUKH Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 01-12-2022 This criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the appellant against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 18.04.2013 passed by VIth Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur, C.G. in Sessions Trial No.05/2013 whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under :- India Law Library Docid # 1848169
(78) CHANDAN CHOUHAN Vs. AJARUDDIN KHAN AND OTHERS [CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 01-12-2022 This appeal filed by the claimant/appellant arises out of the award dated 31.01.2017 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for short the "Tribunal") Raigarh (C.G.) in Claim Case No. 574/2013 whereby in an injury case compensation of Rs. 2,90,100/- has been awarded to the claimant/appellant herein. India Law Library Docid # 1848229
(79) FRESHMI D. MOMIN Vs. SWELLISH M. SANGMA [MEGHALAYA HIGH COURT] 01-12-2022 The appellant who is stated to be the widow of one (L) Lookingbirth M. Marak, an employee of Irrigation Department, Government of Meghalaya is before this Court by the instant appeal under Rule 3 of the Meghalaya High Court Jurisdiction over District Council Court Order, 2014 read with Rule 6 and Section 384 of the Indian Succession Act, 1985. In a short compass, the appellant is aggrieved with the rejection of her application for revocation of Succession Certificate granted on 09.06.2015 in fav India Law Library Docid # 1848749
(80) RAKESH KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [MEGHALAYA HIGH COURT] 01-12-2022 The petitioner had applied for leave in the month of August, 2010 on account of illness of his mother and the same was granted to him w.e.f. 23.08.2010 to 08.09.2010, but even after the expiry of his leave due to serious illness of his mother, he was not able to resume duty and could do so only on 06.10.2010. No show cause or warning was issued to him for the 28 days of overstayed leave. India Law Library Docid # 1848750