(501) ZEENATH IBRAHIM AND OTHERS Vs. JOY DANIEL[KERALA HIGH COURT] 07-11-2024 Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 — Sections 11, 12(1) and 12(3) — Eviction — The landlord filed a Rent Control Petition for eviction due to arrears of rent — The tenant disputed the amount owed and failed to pay the admitted arrears, leading to an eviction order — The main issue is whether an application under Section 12(1) is maintainable in an appeal against an order passed under Section 12(3) — The landlord argued that the tenant must pay admitted arrears to contest evictio India Law Library Docid # 2419648
(502) HARIHARAN V.V. AND OTHERS Vs. PAILOTH AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 07-11-2024 Motor Accident Claims — Rash and Negligent Driving — Gratuitous passenger — The appellants are the legal heirs of ‘N’, who died in a motor accident while traveling as a spare driver in a lorry — The accident was caused by the rash and negligent driving of the first respondent — The appellants challenged the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal and the exoneration of the insurance company from liability — The appellants argued that the insurance policy covered the risk of a spare driver an India Law Library Docid # 2419649
(503) BULK TRADING S.A. AND OTHER Vs. MAHENDRA SPONGE AND POWER LTD. AND OTHER[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 07-11-2024 Foreign Awards (Recognition and Enforcement) Act, 1961 — Section 2(b) — Contract for the sale of coal — The respondent failed to open a letter of credit (LC) as required, leading to an arbitral award in favor of the petitioner — The main issue is whether the enforcement of the foreign arbitral award should be refused on the grounds of public policy due to the Covid-19 pandemic — The petitioner argues that the respondent's failure to open the LC was not justified by the pandemic, as banks were ex India Law Library Docid # 2419710
(504) GHASIYA AND OTHER Vs. GANGOTRI BAI AND OTHER[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 07-11-2024 Limitation Act, 1963 — Article 58 — The plaintiffs sought a declaration of title and possession over certain lands — The property was initially recorded in the name of the late ‘C’, and after his death, the plaintiffs (his family) claimed ownership — Defendant No.1, ‘C’s brother, had the property mutated in his name through an ex parte order by the Tehsildar — The main issue was whether the suit filed by the plaintiffs was barred by limitation under Article 58 of the Limitation Act, which prescr India Law Library Docid # 2419711
(505) BEDRAM SAHU AND OTHER Vs. HARIRAM AND OTHER[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 07-11-2024 Will — Ancestral property — The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction regarding ancestral property — The defendant counterclaimed based on a Will executed by ‘G’, the widow of ‘K’, in his favor — The main issues were whether the plaintiff had rights to the property as a legal heir, the validity of the Will executed by ‘G', and the ownership and possession of the disputed land — The plaintiff argued that the Will was suspicious and not properly attested, and that ‘G' was India Law Library Docid # 2419712
(506) MR. VOORADI VIJAYA MARUTI PRASAD Vs. MR. VENGALA RAMANAIAH[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 07-11-2024 Suit for Recovery — The petitioner challenged the orders dismissing his petitions to set aside an ex parte decree and to grant leave to defend a suit for recovery of money based on a promissory note — Whether the petitioner showed special circumstances to set aside the ex parte decree and whether the trial court followed the correct procedure under Order 37 of CPC — The petitioner argued that he was unable to appear in court due to dengue fever and that his counsel did not properly advise him ab India Law Library Docid # 2419768
(507) SULTANULULOOM EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY Vs. ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 07-11-2024 Education Law — AICTE's withdrawal of approval for their institutions due to title disputes and non-compliance with AICTE regulations — Challenged — The main issues include the legality of AICTE's actions in adjudicating title disputes, the validity of the Two-Man Justice Committee's report, and the compliance of the petitioner's institutions with AICTE regulations — The petitioners argue that the AICTE's actions are arbitrary, illegal, and beyond its jurisdiction — They claim to have possessory India Law Library Docid # 2419773
(508) PANKAJ BHOOTRA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 07-11-2024 Service Law — Suspension — The petitioner was suspended due to allegations of submitting forged documents for his appointment as General Manager (Marketing) at RCDF — The main issue is whether the suspension was justified given the allegations and the ongoing departmental enquiry — The petitioner argues that his documents were verified and approved by a committee, and that the suspension is unjustified as he is not influencing the enquiry — The respondents claim that the petitioner’s name was ad India Law Library Docid # 2419827
(509) SMT SHALINI KAPOOR AND ANOTHER Vs. SHRI HIMANSHU KAPOOR AND ANOTHER[DELHI HIGH COURT] 07-11-2024 Protection of Women from the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 — Section 12 — Petitioner and Respondent married in 2010 and have a child — Wife filed a complaint under the Domestic Violence Act in 2017, leading to a maintenance order — The court needed to decide if the reduction in maintenance for wife was justified and if husband’s income was correctly assessed — Petitioner-wife argued that the trial court failed to consider discrepancies in husband’s income affidavit and his second marriage — She al India Law Library Docid # 2419997
(510) MANJU DEVI AND ANOTHER Vs. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD AND ANOTHER[DELHI HIGH COURT] 07-11-2024 Motor Accident Claims — Death in accident — Rash and Negligent Driving — The appellants, parents of the deceased ‘Y’, filed a claim for compensation after their son died in a road accident — The accident involved a motorcycle and an car driven by R-2 — The main issue was whether the accident was caused by the rash and negligent driving of the car by R-2 — The appellants argued that the accident was caused by the car driven by R-2, supported by witness testimony and police records — They claimed India Law Library Docid # 2419998
(511) AMIT TARA AND OTHERS Vs. DEEPAK TARA AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 07-11-2024 Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018 — Rule 4, Chapter VII — 120-day limit for filing written statements — Partition Suit — The case involves a dispute over a 200 sq. yard plot originally owned by the ‘D' — The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration, partition, and injunction against his siblings and other family members — The main issue is whether the written statement filed by the defendants can be accepted despite being submitted beyond the prescribed period under the Delhi High Court India Law Library Docid # 2419999
(512) ANJUM NAYYAR Vs. YAVAR EHSAN[DELHI HIGH COURT] 07-11-2024 Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939 — Section 2 — Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937 — Section 2 — The marriage between appellant and respondent was solemnized in 1997 — They separated in 2016, and the husband pronounced Talaq in 2020 — They filed a joint petition for dissolution of marriage, which was dismissed by the Family Court — Whether the Family Court can declare the dissolution of marriage through Mubaraat (mutual consent) under Muslim Personal Law — The petitioner India Law Library Docid # 2420000
(513) MATA PRASAD AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF U.P.[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (LUCKNOW BENCH)] 07-11-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 and 304 Part I — Alteration of sentence — The appellants were convicted for the murder in 1998 — The incident involved multiple accused armed with various weapons — The main issues were whether the prosecution witnesses supported the case, if there was a motive due to previous enmity, the reliability of witnesses, delay in lodging the FIR, and if medical evidence corroborated with ocular evidence — The appellants argued that the FIR was delaye India Law Library Docid # 2420034
(514) STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. SHEELA DEVI AND ANOTHER[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 07-11-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 306 and 34 — Abetment to suicide — ‘K’ Suicide by self-immolation after being allegedly harassed by mother and sister over a land dispute — Whether the harassment by the accused constituted abetment to suicide under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the IPC — The State argued that the trial court failed to appreciate the evidence properly, including the dying declaration and testimonies proving harassment — The defense contended that mere disputes and abuses do India Law Library Docid # 2420086
(515) SHOBHNABEN Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANOTHER[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 07-11-2024 Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 — Appointment of Guardian — The petitioner seeks to be appointed as the guardian of her husband who is in a comatose state following a severe stroke — She needs this appointment to manage his financial affairs and support their family — The main issue is whether the court can appoint a guardian for an adult in a comatose state, given the lack of specific legislation for such cases — The petitioner argues that her husband's condition and the absence of specific legal India Law Library Docid # 2420203
(516) STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR Vs. MASOOD AHMAD GANGOO[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT (SRINAGAR BENCH)] 07-11-2024 Prevention of Corruption Act, 2006 — Section 5(2) — Ranbir Penal Code, 1932 — Section 161 — The case involves accused of demanding and accepting a bribe of Rs. 14,000 in 2005 while serving as Manager JKPCC — The trial court acquitted him in 2016 — Whether the respondent demanded and accepted the bribe, and if the trial court's acquittal was justified — The prosecution argued that the trial court failed to appreciate the evidence, which included testimonies and documents proving the respondent's India Law Library Docid # 2420477
(517) STATE (NOW UT) OF J&K AND OTHERS Vs. ABID HUSSAIN[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT (SRINAGAR BENCH)] 07-11-2024 J&K High Court Rules, 1999 — Rules 65 and 66(4) — The petitioners sought a review of a judgment dated October 18, 2023, which directed the execution of a decree from October 16, 2008, in favor of the respondent — Whether the judgment should be reviewed based on the respondent's age and the alleged non-executability of the decree — The petitioners argued that the decree is not executable as the respondent has reached the age of 65 and that this aspect was not considered in the original judgment — India Law Library Docid # 2420478
(518) MUZAFFAR AHMAD BHAT AND OTHERS Vs. BASHIR AHMAD SODAGAR AND OTHERS[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT (SRINAGAR BENCH)] 07-11-2024 Succession Act, 1925 — Section 384 — The case involves a dispute over the issuance of a succession certificate for the debts and securities of the deceased — The main issue is whether the appellants or the respondents are entitled to the succession certificate for the deceased's assets — The appellants argue that they are the nearer heirs under Muslim Law and thus entitled to the succession certificate — They claim the trial court erred in granting the certificate to the respondents — The respon India Law Library Docid # 2420479
(519) SRI. KRISHNAPPA M.T Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 07-11-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 34 and 504 — Derogatory statements after losing an election — The main issue is whether the Magistrate's order permitting the registration of a crime under Sections 504 and 34 of the IPC was made with proper application of mind — The petitioners argue that the Magistrate's order lacks application of mind and that the subsequent proceedings are null due to this foundational error — The Additional State Public Prosecutor contends that the Magistrate's order does s India Law Library Docid # 2420522
(520) HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. DETA HANSDA AND OTHERS[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 07-11-2024 Motor Accident Claims — Gratuitous Passengers and Insurance Liability — The court held that passengers boarding a tractor-trailer without the vehicle being insured for carrying passengers are considered gratuitous passengers — The insurance company is not liable for compensation if the accident occurs due to the violation of insurance policy conditions regarding the carriage of passengers. India Law Library Docid # 2420578