ive
(901) M/S COMPASSION UNLIMITED PLUS ACTION (CUPA) Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 21-11-2024 Public Interest Litigation (PIL) — For cleanliness in public parks in Bengaluru, particularly regarding pet waste management — The main issue is the enforcement of Solid Waste Management Bye-laws, 2020, and ensuring pet owners carry biodegradable poop bags in public parks — Petitioner argued that irresponsible pet parenting leads to unclean parks, and the authorities have failed to maintain cleanliness — They emphasized the need for pet owners to use disposal bags for pet waste — The State and B India Law Library Docid # 2420537
(902) NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. NIM LHAMU SHERPA AND ANOTHER[SIKKIM HIGH COURT] 21-11-2024 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Sections 149(2) and 170 — The primary legal point in this case is that an insurance company's ability to appeal a compensation award from the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT) is limited by the Motor Vehicles Act (MV Act) — Specifically, Section 170 of the MV Act requires the insurer to obtain an order from the MACT to contest a claim on grounds beyond those specified in Section 149(2) — Without this order, the insurer's grounds for appeal are confined to the stat India Law Library Docid # 2421071
(903) ABHIJEET JOSHI AND OTHERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT (SRINAGAR BENCH)] 21-11-2024 Indian Forest Service (Recruitment) Rules, 1966 — Rule 2(g)(i) — Jammu and Kashmir Forest Service (Gazetted) Recruitment Rules, 1970 — The appellants, members of the J&K Forest Gazetted Service, challenged a judgment directing the notification of the "State Forest Service" and the preparation of a list for induction into the Indian Forest Service (IFS) — Whether the High Court can direct the State to notify the "State Forest Service" under Rule 2(g)(i) — The appellants argued that no Mandamus li India Law Library Docid # 2420487
(904) PRINCE PARVAIZ HANJI Vs. UT OF J&K AND OTHERS[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT (SRINAGAR BENCH)] 21-11-2024 Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 — Section 3 — The petitioner filed a petition to quash a detention order — The petitioner challenged the detention order on grounds of non-awareness of bail, non-furnishing of material for effective representation, and non-addressal of representation against detention — The petitioner argued that the detaining authority was unaware of his bail status, did not provide necessary materials for representation, and India Law Library Docid # 2420488
(905) SHAKEEL MOHD Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF J&K AND OTHERS[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT (JAMMU BENCH)] 21-11-2024 J&K Public Safety Act, 1978 — Section 8(1) (a) — Petitioner was detained under the Act, 1978, for alleged involvement in bovine smuggling and other criminal activities — Multiple FIRs were registered against him — The petitioner challenged the detention order on grounds of non-supply of necessary documents, non-communication of rights, and improper application of mind by the detaining authority — Petitioner argues that the detention was arbitrary, and the petitioner was not provided with all nec India Law Library Docid # 2420505
(906) OM PARKASH AND OTHERS Vs. KHAZOOR SINGH AND ANOTHER[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT (JAMMU BENCH)] 21-11-2024 Agreement to Sell — The appellants challenged an order by the Principal District Judge, Udhampur, regarding a specific performance of an Agreement to Sell land — The agreement involved 225 kanals of land, but the appellants only owned 80 kanals — The main issues were the enforceability of the unregistered Agreement to Sell, the delay in filing the suit, and whether the plaintiffs were entitled to specific performance — The appellants argued that the agreement was unenforceable due to non-registr India Law Library Docid # 2420506
(907) SALEEM MOHD AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT (JAMMU BENCH)] 21-11-2024 Ranbir Penal Code — Section 323, 343 and 366 — Kidnapping — The appellants were convicted of kidnapping a woman, taking her to various locations, and attempting to force her into marriage — The main issues were whether the prosecutrix was kidnapped against her will and whether the appellants' actions constituted wrongful confinement and assault — The appellants argued that the prosecutrix willingly accompanied them and that the prosecution's story lacked material details and was inconsistent — T India Law Library Docid # 2420507
(908) A.V.RAVEESWARA REDDY Vs. STATE OF A.P AND OTHERS[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 21-11-2024 This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code (for short “Cr.P.C.”) seeking to quash the order dated 27.11.2018 passed in Criminal Revision Petition No.04 of 2017 on the file of the III Additional Sessions Judge, Kurnool at Nandyal. India Law Library Docid # 2420913
(909) CHENNAREDDY VENKATA SATYA NAGABHUSHANAM RAO Vs. CHENNAREDDY HAARANATH BABA AND OTHERS[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 21-11-2024 The Petitioner is the Plaintiff. A suit was filed in the year 2011 seeking the relief of declaration to declare that the wall shown as ‘MN’ in the plaint sketch to a height of 1.2 feet and in a length of 40.3 feet and the wall shown as ‘OP’ in the plaint sketch to a height of 7.7. feet, to a width of 1.4 feet and in a length of 13.4 feet are common party walls belonging to the Plaintiff and the Defendants and for consequential permanent injunction restraining the Defendants from interfering with India Law Library Docid # 2420914
(910) S. PURUSHOTHAMA Vs. THE CHAIRMAN, KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 21-11-2024 Service Law — Suspension — The petitioner challenged his suspension and punishment orders, which included withholding two annual increments with cumulative effect — He was accused of disobedience and insubordination — The main issues were whether the Chairman of the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal (KSAT) had the authority to deploy the petitioner to the Belagavi Bench and whether the deployment order was valid without assuring payment of TA & DA — The petitioner argued that the Chairman India Law Library Docid # 2420555
(911) MUNIRAJU Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 21-11-2024 Property Dispute — The petitioners claim ownership of 5 acres of land in Sy.No.1 granted to their predecessor in 1939-40 — They allege that the land has not been properly surveyed and fear eviction due to the State's utilization plans for the Ashraya Scheme — The main issue is the lack of proper survey (phodi, durasti, and hudbast) of the land, leading to confusion and potential illegal eviction of the petitioners — The petitioners request the court to direct the authorities to conduct the neces India Law Library Docid # 2420559
(912) MOHD AMIN Vs. MOHD IQBAL[DELHI HIGH COURT] 20-11-2024 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 14 — The dispute involves a ‘Compromise Agreement' between parties regarding a property development project that was later abandoned — The respondent sought reversion of the land and compensation — The main issues were whether the claims were barred by limitation and whether the respondent was entitled to compensation for the demolished structures — The petitioner argued that the claims were barred by limitation and that the India Law Library Docid # 2419972
(913) VINEET TANEJA Vs. RITU TANEJA[DELHI HIGH COURT] 20-11-2024 Family Court Act, 1984 — Sections 6 and 12 — Petitioner challenges that orders from the Family Court regarding visitation rights and the cross-examination of counselors — The main issues were whether the petitioner could cross-examine the counsellors and whether the grandmother could have visitation rights — Petitioner argued that his right to cross-examine the counsellors was denied, which compromised the fair adjudication of the case — He also sought visitation rights for the grandmother — Res India Law Library Docid # 2419968
(914) INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. Vs. M/S FIBERFILL ENGINEERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 20-11-2024 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 37 — Dispute over a contract for high mast signage systems — Appellant withheld Rs. 22,08,528 from respondent’ payments due to delays — Whether the Arbitral Tribunal erred in rejecting respondent’s claim for the withheld amount and interest — Respondent argued that the delays were not attributable to them and that appellant had not proven any actual loss due to the delays — Appellant contended that the withheld amount was justified under the contr India Law Library Docid # 2419969
(915) THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA Vs. CA SHRI SUBHAJIT SAHOO AND ANOTHER[DELHI HIGH COURT] 20-11-2024 Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 (prior to the Amendment Act, 2006) — Section 21(5) — The case involves CA ‘S’, who was found guilty of professional misconduct by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) for issuing Utilisation Certificates without proper verification — Whether CA 'S' was guilty of professional misconduct under clause (7) of Part I of the Second Schedule to the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 — The ICAI argued that ‘S’ was negligent in his duties, issuing certificat India Law Library Docid # 2419970
(916) SUKHVINDER KUMAR BHARDWAJ Vs. SMT VINITA[DELHI HIGH COURT] 20-11-2024 Rent and Eviction — The appellant was a tenant in a DDA MIG Flat owned by the respondent — Multiple rent agreements were executed, but the appellant did not vacate the property after the last agreement expired and used it for commercial purposes — The main issues were the recovery of possession of the property, arrears of rent, and mesne profits — The appellant challenged the jurisdiction of the Trial Court, claiming the property was used for commercial purposes — The appellant argued that the T India Law Library Docid # 2419971
(917) PRATIBHA CHAUHAN Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 20-11-2024 Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 — Section 19 — Selection Process — Petitioners challenged the selection process of the Himachal Pradesh Administrative and Allied Services Examination, 2013, claiming that reserved category candidates were wrongly selected against general category vacancies — Whether candidates who availed reservation benefits in the preliminary examination can be considered for general category posts in the final selection — Petitioner argues that the Reserved category candida India Law Library Docid # 2420066
(918) KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGTHAN AND OTHERS Vs. BALWINDER KUMAR[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 20-11-2024 Service Law — Dismissal from Service — Respondent a sweeper at Kendriya Vidyalaya was dismissed from service on 03.07.1997 for alleged misconduct, including failing to perform duties and damaging school property — The main issue is whether the Civil Court had jurisdiction to entertain the suit filed by respondent, given the notification dated 17.12.1998 that brought Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan under the Central Administrative Tribunal's jurisdiction from 01.01.1999 — The appellants argued that India Law Library Docid # 2420252
(919) DILIP KUMAR BAJAJ AND ANOTHER Vs. GENERAL MANAGER, METRO RAILWAY, KOLKATA[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 20-11-2024 Metro Railways (construction of works) Act 1978 — Section 25 and 22 — The petitioners, former owners of a building in Kolkata, claimed compensation from the Metro Railway for loss of rent, which vacated the premises due to damages caused by metro construction — The case has a long history with multiple court hearings — The main issue was whether a valid lease existed between the petitioners and the Syndicate Bank, as no registered lease deed was produced — The petitioners argued that an oral sub India Law Library Docid # 2420689
(920) NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. NIRMALABEN GHANSHYAMBHAI BHATIYA AND OTHERS[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 20-11-2024 Motor Accident Claims — Death in road accident — His heirs filed a compensation claim of Rs. 6,00,000, and the tribunal awarded Rs. 4,06,000 — The main issues were whether the driver of the offending vehicle had a valid license and whether the compensation awarded was adequate — The insurance company argued that the driver did not have a valid license at the time of the accident, thus they should not be liable for compensation — The claimants argued that the insurance company failed to prove the India Law Library Docid # 2420197