ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(461) SAHIL ALIAS SALLU AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 11-11-2024
Criminal Law — Murder and Conspiracy — The main issue is whether the trial court correctly convicted the appellants based on the evidence presented — The appellants argue that the prosecution's case is full of discrepancies, key witnesses turned hostile, and the evidence was not sufficient to convict them — The State argues that the evidence, including the statements of the complainant and other witnesses, supports the conviction, and the appellants' criminal backgrounds justify the sentences —
India Law Library Docid # 2420266

(462) M/S RISE PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, FARIDABAD[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 11-11-2024
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Sections 11 and 12(5) — The petitioner was allotted a Group Housing plot by the Municipal Corporation, Faridabad (MCF) but claims MCF failed to complete infrastructure work while demanding installment payments — Whether the petitioner, having approached RERA, is barred from invoking arbitration under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act, and whether the petition is barred by res judicata — The petitioner argues for the appointment of an independent arbitrato
India Law Library Docid # 2420268

(463) GAGANDEEP KHURANA Vs. M/S SHAM JEWELS AND INFRA AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 11-11-2024
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 11 — The petitioner and respondents entered into a partnership deed to form company — Disputes arose, leading the petitioner to invoke the arbitration clause — The main issues were whether the arbitration proceedings were maintainable given the unregistered status of the partnership firm and the validity of the arbitration clause invocation date — The petitioner argued for the appointment of an arbitrator based on the partnership deed and claimed
India Law Library Docid # 2420269

(464) IN RE: XXX Vs. STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERS[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 11-11-2024
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 — Section 531 — Applicability of — Bail applications and criminal petitions filed after its enforcement on July 1, 2024, for FIRs registered before this date — The main issue is whether applications for pre-arrest or regular bail should be filed under the old Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, or the new BNSS, 2023, if the FIR was registered before July 1, 2024 — The petitioner argues that any application for bail or criminal petition filed after th
India Law Library Docid # 2420428

(465) KUMRU BHUMIJ TINSUKIA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 11-11-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302 — Murder — The conviction was based on the "last seen together" theory and an extra-judicial confession — The main issues were the reliability of the "last seen together" theory and the validity of the extra-judicial confession — The appellant argued that the evidence was insufficient for conviction, highlighting inconsistencies in witness testimonies and the lack of corroborative evidence — The prosecution defended the conviction, asserting that the evidence
India Law Library Docid # 2420429

(466) SANJEEV GUPTA Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF JAMMU & KASHMIR[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT (JAMMU BENCH)] 11-11-2024
J&K Control of Building Operations Act, 1988 — Section 7(3) — The appellant challenged a demolition order issued on 07.01.2011 for unauthorized construction on a plot — The original allottee was ‘A’ — Whether the appellant has the locus to challenge the demolition order under Section 7(3) of the Act — The appellant claimed possession based on an Agreement to Sell and a will executed by the original allottee, arguing he had the right to challenge the demolition order — The respondents argued that
India Law Library Docid # 2420513

(467) THE STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. MS. LATHA H N[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 11-11-2024
Service Law — Post of Teacher — Blind Candidate — Whether the reservation for 'low vision' candidates excludes 'blind' candidates and if the KSAT's order was justified — The petitioners argued that the reservation for 'low vision' candidates does not include 'blind' candidates and that the KSAT's order was erroneous — The respondent argued that blind candidates should be considered for the position as per the statutory notifications and that the KSAT's order was justified — The court found that
India Law Library Docid # 2420539

(468) SMT. NAYAN GHOSH AND ANOTHER Vs. TARUN GHOSH[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 11-11-2024
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 21 Rule 97 — Application for Police Help under Order XXI Rule 97 CPC vs. Police Help under General Principles — The court distinguished between an application under Order XXI Rule 97 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) for removal of obstruction and an application seeking general police help for execution of a decree — It held that an application for police help to aid in the execution of a decree, even if titled under Rule 97, is not strictly bound by t
India Law Library Docid # 2420573

(469) DEBAL BANERJEE @ DEBDAL BANERJEE @ DEBDULAL BANERJEE Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 11-11-2024
Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 — Sections 3, 4 and 5 — Definition and Application of "Customer" —The court clarified that a customer, who merely pays for sexual services without being involved in the management, keeping, or procurement of a brothel, does not fall under the purview of sections 3, 4, or 5 of the ITPA — A customer's actions alone do not constitute keeping, managing, or procuring a brothel, nor do they amount to inducing or taking a person for prostitution with the intent of
India Law Library Docid # 2420574

(470) CHEDALA GUNDANA Vs. STATE OF AP[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 11-11-2024
Vide judgment dated 27.02.2017 in the aforesaid Sessions Case, the appellant was convicted of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘IPC’) and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.500/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of three months.
India Law Library Docid # 2420873

(471) GADDAM VENKATA RAMANA Vs. EMANI LAKSHMANA MURTHY AND OTHERS[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 11-11-2024
This second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure is filed aggrieved against the decree and judgment, dated 24.11.2010 in A.S.No.172 of 2007 on the file of IV Additional District Judge, East Godavari, Kakinada, allowed in part by its judgment and decree, dated 09.08.2007 in O.S.No.154 of 2000, on the file of II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada (for short 'trial Court’).
India Law Library Docid # 2420874

(472) SMT PANGULURI PRAMEELA RANI Vs. PARIMI ASHOK KUMAR[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 11-11-2024
The petitioner/wife filed the present petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking transfer of H.M.O.P.No.42 of 2023, on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Ongole, Prakasam District, to the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Gurazala, Guntur District, to be clubbed and heard along with H.M.O.P.No.74 of 2024, for trial.
India Law Library Docid # 2420875

(473) SMT. PENMETSA LALITHA KUMARI Vs. SRI PINNAMARAJU RANGA RAJU AND OTHERS[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 11-11-2024
The deceased 5th respondent, in the appeal, who is the mother of the 1st respondent, the appellant and the 7th respondent, had executed certain deed of gift in favour of the 1st respondent on 11.01.2005, conveying a house property situated in Akuveedu Town.
India Law Library Docid # 2420876

(474) SMT. SUNITA BAI SAHU Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 08-11-2024
Proof of Age — The petitioner filed for compensation under the Mukhyamantri Jan Kalyan (Sambal) Yojna, 2018, after her husband's death due to electrocution — Her application was rejected because her husband's age was recorded as 64 years — Whether the age mentioned in the Aadhar Card can be considered for determining eligibility under the scheme — The petitioner argued that the age should
India Law Library Docid # 2419394

(475) KRISHI UPAJ MANDI SAMITI PICHHORE AND OTHERS Vs. MUKESH KUMAR BHATT[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 08-11-2024
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 — Section 25F — Retrenchment — The respondent was employed as a daily rated Nakedar in 1992 and was removed in 1994 — He initiated conciliation proceedings in 2009, leading to a series of legal actions — The main issue is whether the retrenchment of the respondent was legal and if the provisions of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act were complied with — The petitioners argue that they complied with all necessary provisions of the Act, including Section 25F,
India Law Library Docid # 2419395

(476) JOBAN SINGH @ JOBANBIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 08-11-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 379-B(2), 341, 336, 411, 201 and 34 — Arms Act, 1959 — Sections 25 and 27 — The petitioner is accused in an FIR involving robbery and use of firearms — The incident involved the theft of a motorcycle and firing shots to intimidate the victim — The main issue is whether the petitioner should be granted bail, considering the severity of the charges and his alleged habitual offending — The petitioner claims false implication and highlights that the motorcycle was r
India Law Library Docid # 2419451

(477) GURCHARAN SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 08-11-2024
Service Law — Army — Disability Pension — The petitioner was enrolled in the Army in 1971 and invalided out in 1978 due to a disability (Neurosis - Depressive Reaction) assessed at 20% — His claim for disability pension was initially rejected — The main issues were whether the petitioner was entitled to the service element of the disability pension and the correct percentage of disability pension — The petitioner argued for the inclusion of the service element in his disability pension and for t
India Law Library Docid # 2419447

(478) KULDEEP SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 08-11-2024
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Sections 22, 61 and 85 —Petitioner-accused was arrested based on secret information for possessing a large quantity of narcotic pills — He has been in custody for over 2 years —Whether accused should be granted bail despite the serious allegations and his involvement in another case — The petitioner claims false implication, improper search procedures, and argues for bail citing prolonged custody and the right to a speedy trial — The State o
India Law Library Docid # 2419448

(479) VARINDER SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 08-11-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 307, 324, 323, 326, 148, 149 and 120B — Arms Act, 1959 — Sections 25, 27, 54 and 59 — The petitioners are accused of causing injuries with a kirpan and a pistol — The main issue is whether the petitioners should be granted bail considering the allegations and evidence presented — The petitioners argue that the allegations are fabricated, and no gunshots were fired — They also highlight their lack of criminal antecedents and the potential injustice of further pre
India Law Library Docid # 2419449

(480) UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs. No. 15399955Y EX HAV ARJUN SINGH AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 08-11-2024
Service Law — Discharge — Disability Pension — Discharged from the Army due to disabilities assessed at 66.4% composite for life — His claim for disability pension was initially rejected, but later allowed by the Armed Forces Tribunal — Whether the disabilities were attributable to or aggravated by military service, thus entitling the respondent to disability pension — The Union of India argued that the disabilities were neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service, citing medical
India Law Library Docid # 2419450