ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(341) ABB INDIA LTD. Vs. PATIALA LOCOMOTIVE WORKS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 14-11-2024
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 11 — Dispute arose regarding the composition of the Arbitral Tribunal — The main issue is the composition of the Arbitral Tribunal, specifically whether it should consist of retired Railway officials or independent members — Appellant proposed a retired Supreme Court Judge as an arbitrator, seeking an independent tribunal — Respondent insisted on a tribunal of three retired Railway officials, as per their circular — The court decided that the trib
India Law Library Docid # 2420271

(342) MOHAMAD ASHRAF MALIK Vs. STATE OF J&K[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT (SRINAGAR BENCH)] 14-11-2024
Ranbir Penal Code — Sections 354, 376 and 511 — Molesting a 10th-grade student — Whether the trial court correctly convicted the appellant under Section 354 RPC while acquitting him of charges under Section 376/511 RPC — The appellant argued that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt and that the trial court erred in convicting him under Section 354 RPC — The respondent maintained that the trial court rightly convicted the appellant under Section 354 RPC based on the
India Law Library Docid # 2420481

(343) MOHAMMAD IQBAL DRANGAY Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF J AND K AND OTHERS[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT (SRINAGAR BENCH)] 14-11-2024
Preventive Detention — The petitioner challenged a preventive detention order issued by the Divisional Commissioner — The main issues include the legality of the detention order based on old FIRs from 2019 and 2021, the delay in passing the detention order, and whether the detention was justified given the petitioner's activities post-2021 — The petitioner argued that the detention order was based on stale material, lacked a proximate link to current activities, and violated legal and constituti
India Law Library Docid # 2420482

(344) GOWAHAR AHMED KHANDAY AND ABDUL QAYOOM KHANDAY Vs. UT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND OTHERS[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT (JAMMU BENCH)] 14-11-2024
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Sections 8, 20 and 29 — The appellants were convicted for possessing commercial quantities of charas — The appellants challenged the conviction on grounds of insufficient evidence, procedural lapses, and lack of civil witnesses — They argued that the evidence was unreliable due to contradictions in witness statements and procedural breaches, such as not filling the CFSL form on the spot — The prosecution maintained that the evidence was cred
India Law Library Docid # 2420509

(345) ROYAL ORCHID ASSOCIATED HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. M/S. HOTEL GRAND CENTRE POINT[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 14-11-2024
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 9 — Arbitration (Proceedings Before the Courts) Rules, 2001 — Rule 9 — Franchise agreement for operating a hotel — The petitioner alleges that the respondent interfered with hotel operations — The main issue is whether the trial court erred in vacating the interim order of temporary injunctions that restrained the respondent from interfering with the hotel's operations — The petitioner argued that the respondent's interference violated the franchi
India Law Library Docid # 2420529

(346) ASHWITH KUMAR Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 14-11-2024
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 3 Rule 4 — The petitioner sought to quash a notification related to the post of Clerk-cum-Data Entry Operator at the Meramajalu Grama Panchayath — The main issue was whether the petition could be withdrawn without the petitioner's signature on the withdrawal memo — The petitioner's counsel argued that the signed 'Vakalatnama' authorized the counsel to withdraw the petition without the petitioner's signature on the memo — The respondents did not raise spec
India Law Library Docid # 2420538

(347) SETH TRADING COMPANY LIMITED Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 14-11-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 420 and 406 — The petitioner had a long-standing business relationship with the accused — The dispute arose from dishonored cheques issued by the accused for goods worth Rs. 61,75,792 —Whether the order of the Magistrate refusing police investigation and treating the case as a complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. was justified — The petitioner argued for setting aside the Magistrate's order and allowing a police investigation under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. due to t
India Law Library Docid # 2420564

(348) MOPPURI VENKATA NAGA BHASKAR RAO Vs. MOPPURI PRAVALLIKA YAGNAM PENCHALAMMA AND OTHERS[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 14-11-2024
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 125 — Maintenance — Husband petitions to quash a maintenance increase for his wife, who filed under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. alleging desertion — He claims she left and has income, disputing her maintenance need — A pending criminal case involves domestic violence and restitution — The High Court dismisses his petition to quash, upholding the increase as not an abuse of process, considering the wife's need and the husband's capacity.
India Law Library Docid # 2420730

(349) UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. S. PAVAN KUMARI AND OTHERS[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 14-11-2024
Motor Accident Claims — Death by rash and Negligent Driving — The claimants sought compensation for a fatal accident caused by the negligent driving of the offending vehicle's driver — They proved the deceased's income from land, a rice mill, and seasonal business — The insurer disputed the income evidence and the award's size — The Tribunal found the driver negligent and accepted the income evidence, awarding dependency compensation — The Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, dismissing the app
India Law Library Docid # 2420731

(350) CHRISTOPHER AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF KERALA[KERALA HIGH COURT] 13-11-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 120B, 366, 366A, 376(2)(n) and 376D — Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Sections 5(l) 6, 5(g) and 6 — Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 — Section 77 — Gang rape and sexual assault of a minor girl — The main issues are whether the evidence on record is sufficient to convict the accused and what the appropriate punishment should be if they are found guilty — The defense argued that the prosecution's case is plagued
India Law Library Docid # 2419654

(351) NIYAS Vs. MOHANA AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 13-11-2024
Motor Accident Claims — Enhancement of Compensation — The appellant was injured in a motorcycle accident caused by the rash and negligent driving of an autorickshaw by the first respondent — The main issue was the adequacy of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), which the appellant found insufficient — The appellant argued that the Tribunal did not correctly fix the notional income and failed to grant compensation for loss of earning capacity — He also claimed t
India Law Library Docid # 2419655

(352) UNION BANK OF INDIA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 13-11-2024
Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 — Section 35A — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 149, 409, 420, 467, 468 and 471 — Transfer the investigation of a fraud case involving Rs. 94.73 crores to the CBI — The main issues were whether the High Court had jurisdiction under Article 131 of the Constitution and whether Section 35A of the Banking Regulation Act empowered the RBI to direct such a transfer — The petitioner argued that the RBI's powers under Section 35A a
India Law Library Docid # 2419696

(353) ANIL TUTEJA Vs. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT AND OTHER[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 13-11-2024
Necessity of Affording Opportunity of Hearing in Prisoner Transfer Cases — The Court held that in any proceedings involving the transfer of a prisoner, it is obligatory for the court to afford the prisoner an opportunity of hearing — This is in line with the fundamental principle of natural justice, audi alteram partem (hear the other side) — The Court emphasized that without providing such an opportunity, any transfer order would be vulnerable to challenge on the grounds of procedural improprie
India Law Library Docid # 2419706

(354) BRIJESH KUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANOTHER[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 13-11-2024
Arms Act, 1959 — Section 18 — The petitioner applied for a second firearm license for a pistol, citing the difficulty of carrying his existing 12 bore gun — His application was rejected by the authorities — Whether the petitioner is entitled to a second firearm license under the Arms Act, 1959 — The petitioner argued that there is no legal bar to possessing two weapons and cited a previous court order supporting his claim — The respondents argued that the petitioner did not demonstrate a justifi
India Law Library Docid # 2419834

(355) MONU KUMAR @MANU KUMAR Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR[PATNA HIGH COURT] 13-11-2024
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 4(2) — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 363, 366 and 366(A) — Kidnapping and rape — The appellant was convicted for kidnapping and raping a minor — The main issue was whether the appellant's conviction was justified based on the evidence presented — The appellant argued that the evidence was insufficient and inconsistent, particularly the victim's statements and the lack of corroboration from police and medical reports — The prosec
India Law Library Docid # 2419884

(356) JAMERUDDIN ANSARI @ JAMRUDDIN ANSARI Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR[PATNA HIGH COURT] 13-11-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 376, 341, 323 and 504 — Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 4(2) — The appellant was convicted of raping a 16-year-old girl — The reliability of the victim's testimony, discrepancies in dates, and the nature of the relationship between the appellant and the victim — The defense argued that the victim's testimony was inconsistent and unreliable, pointing out discrepancies in the dates and her previous relationship with the appellant —
India Law Library Docid # 2419886

(357) UPENDRA SINGH Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 13-11-2024
Land Acquisition — Gairmajarua Malik land — Compensation — The petitioner claims ownership of land, which was acquired for the widening of National Highway-2 — The land was originally recorded as Gairmajarua Malik land and has been in the petitioner's family for generations — The main issue is whether the petitioner is entitled to compensation for the acquired land, despite the rejection of his Raiyati claim by the local authorities — The petitioner argues that his family has been in continuous
India Law Library Docid # 2419888

(358) ARVIND KUMAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 13-11-2024
Service Law — Retiral Benefits — The petitioner retired as an Assistant Engineer and seeks payment of his retiral benefits — The State decided to recover an alleged excess payment of Rs. 7,41,799 from his earned leave — Whether the recovery of excess payment from the petitioner's retiral benefits is lawful — The petitioner argues that the recovery is illegal, citing the Supreme Court's decision in Rafiq Masih, which prohibits recovery from retired employees if the excess payment was made more th
India Law Library Docid # 2419874

(359) BEER BAHADUR MANJHI AND OTHERS Vs. BAIJ NATH MANJHI AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 13-11-2024
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 6 Rule 17 — Amendment of Plaint — The petitioners filed a civil miscellaneous petition to set aside an order rejecting their amendment petition in a title suit — The main issue is whether the trial court erred in rejecting the amendment petition, which sought to include subsequent events and formal amendments in the plaint — The petitioners argued that the amendments were necessary to reflect subsequent dispossession and were relevant for the adjudication
India Law Library Docid # 2419880

(360) BINDI MANDAL AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF BIHAR[PATNA HIGH COURT] 13-11-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, and 323 — Land Dispute — The case involves a land dispute where the informant claimed ownership of a piece of land and accused the appellants of forcibly cutting maize crops and firing a gunshot — The main issue was whether the appellants were guilty of the offenses under sections 147, 148, 149, 307, and 323 of the IPC and section 27 of the Arms Act — The appellants argued that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt,
India Law Library Docid # 2419882