ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(181) GEOCON CONSULTANCY Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT (AURANGABAD BENCH)] 19-08-2024
E-tender notice —Petitioner challenged the e-tender notice dated 10.06.2024 for solid waste management in Latur, claiming certain tender conditions were arbitrary and unfair —Whether the tender conditions were arbitrary, irrational, and designed to favor a particular bidder — The conditions were unjustified and against guidelines, and the petitioner was entitled to challenge them without participating in the tender process —The conditions were necessary to ensure the selection of a capable contr
India Law Library Docid # 2416902

(182) BABURAO AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT (AURANGABAD BENCH)] 19-08-2024
Service Law — Increment — The case involves teachers from Nanded district who were awarded the "best teacher" award and were entitled to an advance increment as per a 2000 government circular — This benefit was discontinued by a 2018 circular — Whether the teachers selected before the 2018 circular but approved after it are entitled to the advance increment —The court ruled that the view taken in Ganesh Mohan Bagul's case is correct, denying the advance increment to teachers not approved before
India Law Library Docid # 2416903

(183) PRALHAD K. PATIL Vs. THE STATE OF GOA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT (GOA BENCH)] 19-08-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 302 and 34 — Murder — Petitioner seeks premature release after serving over 23 years, including remission —Whether the petitioner's premature release should be granted based on his conduct and the recommendations of various authorities —The petitioner argues for release based on good conduct, family support, and recommendations from the Sentence Review Board and other authorities —The respondents argue against release, citing the nature of the crime, potential t
India Law Library Docid # 2416904

(184) VIVEKANANDA INSTITUTE OF PROFESSIONAL STUDIES AND ANOTHER Vs. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 17-08-2024
Education Law — Increase of B.Tech Seats — Petiioner-VIPS sought to increase its B.Tech. (Electronics Engineering-VLSI Design & Technology) program intake from 60 to 180 seats for the 2024-25 academic session — Despite AICTE approval, the Government of NCT of Delhi (GNCTD) did not grant the necessary No Objection Certificate (NOC) — Whether the petitioner can claim non-adherence to Clause 6.3 of the Policy Guidelines of 2016, and if the state policy is repugnant to AICTE regulations — VIPS argue
India Law Library Docid # 2416896

(185) BAJRANG PUNIA AND OTHERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 16-08-2024
National Sports Development Code, 2011 — Petitioners challenged the Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) for conducting selection trials and not complying with the National Sports Development Code, 2011 — The primary issues are the legality of WFI's actions, compliance with the Sports Code, and the management of WFI by an ad-hoc committee — The petitioners argue that WFI's actions are illegal, the selection trials should be stopped, and an administrator should be appointed to manage WFI — The res
India Law Library Docid # 2416881

(186) COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (PREVENTIVE), WEST BENGAL Vs. BANGARI BHOLA AND OTHERS[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 16-08-2024
Customs Act, 1962 — Section 110 — Seizure of goods, documents and things — The Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), West Bengal seized 200 bags of areca nuts from the Calcutta Airport, suspecting them to be of foreign origin and illegally imported — Whether the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) had jurisdiction to seize goods within the airport and if the seizure was legally justified — The seizure was without jurisdiction and lacked a valid reason to believe the goods were of foreign origin
India Law Library Docid # 2416882

(187) STATE OF WEST BENGAL Vs. SAMBHU NATH GHOSH AND ANOTHER[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 16-08-2024
Arbitration Act, 1940 — Sections 30, 33 and 41 — The case involves a challenge against an arbitral award that was initially decreed but later recalled — The primary issue is whether the arbitral award is valid, given the petitioner's claims of lack of reasons and evidence — The petitioner argues that the award is devoid of reasons, perverse, and not based on evidence, citing several legal precedents — The respondent contends that the award is well-reasoned, based on evidence, and that the Arbitr
India Law Library Docid # 2416883

(188) SWAPAN MALAKAR Vs. PUSPA MAJUMDAR AND OTHERS[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 16-08-2024
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 14 Rule 2 and Order 7 Rule 11 — Suit for declaration, recovery of possession, and injunction — The trial court vacated an ad-interim injunction, and the appellate court refused to admit the appeal — Whether the trial court was justified in vacating the ad-interim injunction and whether the appellate court erred in not admitting the appeal — Petitioner argues that the trial court erred in vacating the injunction without hearing the temporary injunction app
India Law Library Docid # 2416884

(189) M/S. TWINSTAR INDUSTRIES AND ANOTHER Vs. WEST BENGAL SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED AND OTHERS[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 16-08-2024
West Bengal Government Premises (Tenancy Regulation) Act, 1976 — Section 3(1) — Petitioner was allotted plots in 1989 — Due to financial hardship, they failed to pay rent, leading to eviction notices and legal battles — Whether eviction proceedings under the Act, 1976 are maintainable, and whether the petitioners are entitled to lease renewal and restoration of possession — The Petitioners argued financial hardship, compliance with court orders for arrear payments, and requested lease renewal un
India Law Library Docid # 2416885

(190) SHRI CHANDU SHERPA AND OTHERS Vs. RAJU RAI AND OTHERS[SIKKIM HIGH COURT] 16-08-2024
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 6 Rule 17 — Amendment to a written statement in a title suit — Whether the defendant exercised due diligence, if new facts were introduced to fill lacunae, and if the petition is fit for discretionary power under Article 227 — Petitioner argue that the amendments were beyond typographical errors and sought to introduce new facts, filling lacunae in the defendant's case — Respondent contends that the amendments were necessary due to errors in drafting mult
India Law Library Docid # 2416886

(191) BHOLENATH DEVELOPERS LTD. AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 16-08-2024
Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 — Section 37 — Minor modification of final Development plan — Petitioners applied for Transferable Development Rights (TDR) for a plot in Mumbai, which was reserved for a playground — Despite complying with requirements, they were denied incentive TDR — Whether the petitioners were entitled to additional 20% incentive TDR under the 2016 Notification, given the delay in processing their application — Petitioner said that they had a vested right to
India Law Library Docid # 2416887

(192) M/S. CHANDIWALA ENTERPRISES Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 16-08-2024
Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958 — Sections 47(C)(5) and 48 — Allowance for spoiled stamps — Development Agreement — Stamp duty paid — Later sought a refund, claiming the agreement was unenforceable — Whether the Development Agreement qualifies for a stamp duty refund under Section 47(c)(5) of the Maharashtra Stamp Act — The petitioner argued that the agreement failed its intended purpose and should be eligible for a refund under Section 47(c)(5) — The respondents contended that the Development Agree
India Law Library Docid # 2416888

(193) SHRI. TIKENDRA SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA AND OTHERS[MEGHALAYA HIGH COURT] 16-08-2024
Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 — Sections 7(7), 7(3A) and 8 — Employees approached the court for interest on delayed gratuity payments — The employer had previously agreed to pay gratuity but not the interest — Whether the employees are entitled to interest on delayed gratuity payments and if the delay in filing the petition affects their claim — Employees argued that they are entitled to interest as per the Act, 1972, and that the delay in filing should not deprive them of this right — The emplo
India Law Library Docid # 2416889

(194) SHRI. THOMBOR SHADAP Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA AND OTHERS[MEGHALAYA HIGH COURT] 16-08-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302 — Murder — The incident occurred on 29.12.2011, and the appellant was convicted based on eyewitness testimonies — The main issues were the delay in recording eyewitness statements, the credibility of the witnesses, and the lack of motive and proper identification of the accused — The appellant argued that the delay in recording statements, lack of proper identification, and inconsistencies in witness testimonies raised doubts about the prosecution's case — Th
India Law Library Docid # 2416890

(195) SHRI DISROYWEL WAHLANG Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA[MEGHALAYA HIGH COURT] 16-08-2024
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Sections 3(a), 4, 7 and 8 — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 319, 321, 323, 354, 354B, 361, 366, 375(a) , 375(2)(i)(j) and 376 — Rape and sexual assault of a minor girl — The main issue was whether the conviction and sentence by the Trial Court were justified based on the evidence presented — The appellant argued that the case was fabricated, citing inconsistencies in the victim's testimony and lack of medical evidence supporting recent se
India Law Library Docid # 2416891

(196) PRASAR BHARATI BOARD CASTING CORPORATION OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs. GOUTAM BALLAV MOHANTY AND OTHERS[ORISSA HIGH COURT] 16-08-2024
Service Law — Equal pay for equal work — Casual lighting assistants at Doordarshan Kendra claimed entitlement to revised wages similar to employees awaiting regularization — Despite memorandums enhancing wages, they continued to receive lower pay — Whether casual lighting assistants are entitled to the same pay as regularised employees under the principle of "equal pay for equal work" — Petitioner's argues that the differences in employment requirements justify variations in pay — The casual wor
India Law Library Docid # 2416892

(197) MAHESHBHAI DHIRUBHAI DARJI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANOTHER[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 16-08-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 306 — Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — Section 3(2)(v) — Abetment of suicide — The applicant was accused of abetting the suicide of his subordinate, who allegedly faced discrimination and mental harassment at work — Whether the applicant's actions constituted abetment of suicide under Section 306 of the IPC and whether the provisions of the SC ST Act were applicable — The applicant argued that there was no direct eviden
India Law Library Docid # 2416893

(198) CHHELABHAI CHOTHABHAI MUNDHVA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 16-08-2024
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) — The appellant was convicted for demanding and accepting a bribe of Rs. 1500 for issuing an NOC for a residential scheme — Whether the trial court erred in convicting the appellant without direct evidence of the demand for a bribe — Petitioner argues that the prosecution failed to prove the demand for a bribe, and the complainant turned hostile — Respondent argues circumstantial evidence and the Phenolphthalein test proved the
India Law Library Docid # 2416894

(199) BABU LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 16-08-2024
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Sections 13(1)(d) and 13(2) — A Bank manager, was convicted for demanding and accepting a bribe for sanctioning a loan — The conviction was based on a complaint and a trap set by the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) — Whether the demand and acceptance of the bribe were proven beyond reasonable doubt, and whether the work of the complainant was pending with the appellant at the time of the trap — The appellant argued that the money was a processing fee, not a brib
India Law Library Docid # 2416895

(200) DEEPAK DABAS Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION[DELHI HIGH COURT] 16-08-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 304, 323 and 34 — Petitioner a former Assistant Superintendent at Tihar Central Prison, is seeking interim bail — He is accused of being involved in the death of undertrial prisoner, who died due to multiple blunt force injuries — Whether petitioner should be granted interim bail given the allegations and the ongoing trial — Petitioner argue for bail on grounds of parity with co-accused who were granted bail, and claims the trial is delayed due to a Supreme Cour
India Law Library Docid # 2416880