(661) M/S. COLGATE PALMOLIVE (INDIA) LTD. Vs. MUMBAI MAHANAGAR PALIKA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 26-07-2024 Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai Octroi Rules, 1965 — Rule 2(7)(b) — BMC's method of calculating octroi duty based on the Maximum Retail Price (MRP) of goods — Challanged — The Court dismissed the petition, stating that the petitioner had not paid the duty under protest and that the BMC had the authority to use an alternative method to calculate the duty — The court also held that the BMC's action would not result in unjust enrichment, as the petitioner had passed on the burden of the all India Law Library Docid # 2416300
(662) JAHANGIR @ EKKA @ IBRAHIM Vs. STATE (GOVT OF NCT, DELHI)[DELHI HIGH COURT] 26-07-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 302 and 34 — Arms Act, 1959 — Section 25 — Application for Parole — Petitioner a Bangladeshi national, in custody for 17 years, serving life sentences in two cases — Acquitted in three other cases, bail revoked after failed appeal in 2009 — Applied for parole to attend to family matters, including elderly mother and minor daughter — Counsel argued for reform and reintegration, emphasizing parole's importance — State opposed parole due to petitioner's foreign sta India Law Library Docid # 2416303
(663) NAU NIHAL SINGH RANA Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 26-07-2024 Service Law — Interest on retirement dues — Petitioner, a former Indian Railway Personnel Officer, sought to claim interest on his retirement dues, including gratuity, leave encashment, and other benefits — The petitioner had faced a failed disciplinary action and had to undergo further litigation to secure his retirement benefits — The High Court held that the petitioner was not let off on technical grounds and that the judgment in the case of S.K. Dua was not applicable in this case — The cour India Law Library Docid # 2416304
(664) SUSMITA PANDIT Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANOTHER[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 26-07-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 354A, 506 and 34 — Sexual Harrasment — High Court quashed the charges against the petitioner on the grounds that a woman cannot be prosecuted for an alleged commission of the offence punishable under Section 354A of the IPC — Section 354A is gender-specific and applicable only to male accused persons, as it explicitly mentions "a man" committing any of the acts listed — The court referred to several judgments emphasizing the strict construction of penal statutes India Law Library Docid # 2416306
(665) ABDUL LATEEF @ MUSTAK KHAN AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF UP AND 2 OTHERS[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 26-07-2024 U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Rules, 2021 — U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 — The Allahabad High Court has quashed 5 FIRs registered under the Act, 1986, and their corresponding gang charts, citing procedural irregularities and violation of guidelines issued by the court — The court observed that competent authorities did not follow the rules and guidelines while preparing and approving the gang charts, including not recording proper sati India Law Library Docid # 2416307
(666) OCL IRON AND STEEL LIMITED Vs. UNION OF INDIA[DELHI HIGH COURT] 26-07-2024 Coal Mine Auctions — The High Court has set aside the decision of the Nominated Authority of the Ministry of Coal, Government of India, which disqualified OCL Iron and Steel Ltd. from participating in coal mine auctions — The decision was based on the company's alleged outstanding dues attributable to its erstwhile management — The court held that the company's new management, which has undergone corporate insolvency resolution process, should not be held liable for past dues that have been addr India Law Library Docid # 2416305
(667) MAHENDER SINGH Vs. SUKHDEV SINGH (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS.[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 26-07-2024 Limitation Act, 1963 — Article 97 — Period of limitation for a suit to recover money paid upon an existing consideration which subsequently fails — Suit for possession — The plaintiff-appellant filed a suit for possession by way of pre-emption for land sold to the defendant-respondent — The sale deed was executed on 07.10.1988 and registered on 13.10.1988 — Whether the plaintiff had a superior right to pre-empt the sale, whether the sale consideration was bona fide, and whether the suit was time India Law Library Docid # 2416620
(668) STATE Vs. T.MANJUNATH AND ANOTHER[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 26-07-2024 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Sections 7, 8, 13(1)(d) r/w 13 (2) — The case involves allegations of bribery against Senior Motor Vehicle Inspector, who was accused of demanding and accepting bribes from tipper vehicle drivers India Law Library Docid # 2417019
(669) SHREE GARODI STEELS Vs. M/S. YOJAKA INDIA PRIVATE LTD.[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 26-07-2024 Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002 — Section 34 — The case involves Appellant) and Respondent regarding the possession and auction of a property due to loan default India Law Library Docid # 2417022
(670) SRI DAYANANDA POOJARY AND OTHERS Vs. SRI SURENDRA T. MENDON AND OTHERS[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 26-07-2024 Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 — Section 77 — The plaintiffs sought possession of 10 cents of land claiming it was inherited and occupied by the defendants without legal right India Law Library Docid # 2417023
(671) SRI. SRINIVAS AND OTHERS Vs. SRI. M.C. NARAYANASWAMY[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 26-07-2024 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 9 Rule 9 — The case involves a dispute over ancestral/joint Hindu Undivided Family properties — The appellants claim these properties were purchased by their father ‘C’ who died intestate in 1994 India Law Library Docid # 2417024
(672) SMT. BALIGAR CHANDBI Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT (DHARWAD BENCH)] 26-07-2024 Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 — Sections 2, 3(e), 3(o) and 5 — The petitioner was employed on a contract basis and sought to resume her job after maternity leave but was denied India Law Library Docid # 2417028
(673) S. NAGARAJAN AND ANOTHER Vs. NADOJA DR. MAHESH JOSHI[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT (DHARWAD BENCH)] 26-07-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 499, 500, 34 and 120B — The petitioners, accused Nos. 3 and 4, are involved in a case of defamation and conspiracy related to a sexual harassment complaint filed by accused No. 1 against the respondent India Law Library Docid # 2417029
(674) ANWARBHASHASAB Vs. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT (DHARWAD BENCH)] 26-07-2024 Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 — Section 10(4-A) — The petitioner, a driver, was dismissed for unauthorized absence — He challenged the dismissal, claiming it was unfair and that he was ill during the absence India Law Library Docid # 2417030
(675) STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS Vs. KULDEEP AND OTHERS[UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] 26-07-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 302, 120B and 506 — Murder — Whether the death penalty was justified and if the appellants had any chance of reform —The appellants argued that the case was not of honor killing, they were young, had no criminal history, and the court did not balance mitigating and aggravating circumstances —The prosecution maintained that the appellants were guilty beyond reasonable doubt, supported by multiple eyewitnesses and forensic evidence —The court upheld the death sent India Law Library Docid # 2417074
(676) HARI SINGH BISHT AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS[UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] 26-07-2024 Service Law — Petitioners were engaged on contract for non-teaching posts at Uttarakhand Technical University and later through UPNL — They challenged government orders affecting their wages — The main issues were wage disparity among outsourced employees and the petitioners' claim for regularization and pay parity with regular employees — Petitioners argued for equal pay for equal work, regularization of their services, and claimed higher wages based on a university decision — Respondents conte India Law Library Docid # 2417075
(677) DEVENDRA SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ANOTHER[UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] 26-07-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 307, 149 and 506 — The case involves an attack by masked assailants, leading to serious injuries —Whether the revisionists should be summoned under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for their alleged involvement in the attack — Petitioner's Arguments — The revisionists argued they were not named in the FIR, had alibis, and the accusations were based on enmity — Respondent's Arguments — The informant's counsel argued that the revis India Law Library Docid # 2417076
(678) DILIP SHARMA Vs. PUJA AGARWALA @ PUJA SHARMA[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT (CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI)] 25-07-2024 Hindu marriage Act, 1955 — Section 24 — Maintenance application under Section 24 of the Act filed by wife against her husband — Husband had previously filed a suit declaring their marriage void, alleging that his wife was already married at the time of their union — Despite the pending status of this suit, the lower court granted interim maintenance of Rs. 30,000 per month — On appeal, the High Court set aside the lower court's decision — The court found that the lower court erred in its assessm India Law Library Docid # 2416291
(679) KESORAM TEXTILES MILLS LIMITED AND ANOTHER Vs. THE KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND OTHERS[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 25-07-2024 Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 — Section 192(2) — Appellant challenged the KMC property tax assessment for their premises, arguing it was done without jurisdiction and violated natural justice principles — The main issues were the jurisdiction of KMC to assess property tax for periods before 1984 and whether the assessment was done following proper legal procedures — Appellant argued that the assessment was done under the wrong legal provisions, without jurisdiction, and without giving India Law Library Docid # 2416292
(680) SHRI. ARINDOM DAS Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA[MEGHALAYA HIGH COURT] 25-07-2024 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Sections 7, 8 and 18 — The appellant, a teacher convicted for molesting a student — The main issues were the delay in filing the FIR, contradictions in the survivor's statements, and the reliability of the prosecution's evidence — The appellant argued that the delay in filing the FIR made it suspicious, the survivor's statements were inconsistent, and the evidence was unreliable — He also claimed the case was filed out of revenge over a tui India Law Library Docid # 2416296