(681) AHMED FAKIRSAHEB KOKANI, SINCE DECEASED THROUGH HIS HEIRS AND OTHERS Vs. SHRI MOHAMMEDSAHEB HASANSAHEB KHATIB (DECEASED) BY HEIRS AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 25-07-2024 Maharashtra Land Revenue Code 1966 — Section 29 — Dispute over land ownership — The petitioner and his heirs, claim ownership of the land through a Sanad (document) issued by the government in 1920, which granted the land to the original Sanad holder in perpetuity — The respondents and his heirs, claim to be the legal occupants of the land and have applied for permanent grant of the land — The court examines the Sanad and the relevant sections of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code (MLRC) and the India Law Library Docid # 2416301
(682) BOMBAY REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED AND OTHERS Vs. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 25-07-2024 Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 — Section 96 — High Court ruled that the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) was not legally entitled to deduct Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) of INR 9,91,95,076/- from the compensation amount payable to the petitioner for acquiring its property under the provisions of the Acquisition Act, 2013 — The court held that the provisions of Section 96 of the Act exempt the compensation am India Law Library Docid # 2416302
(683) SHRI RAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. GURNAM SINGH @ GAMA SINGH AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 25-07-2024 Motor Accident Claim — Appeal against award — The main issue is whether the acquittal of the driver in the criminal court affects the claim under the Motor Vehicles Act — The appellant argues that the witness (PW-2) turned hostile in the criminal court, leading to the driver's acquittal, which should impact the claim — The respondents argue that criminal court findings are not binding on civil courts and the claim should be decided based on the evidence before the Tribunal — The appeal is dismis India Law Library Docid # 2416621
(684) THE BANGALORE AND OTHERS Vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER AND OTHERS[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 25-07-2024 Karnataka Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prohibition of transfer of certain lands) Act, 1978 — Sections 4(3) and 5 — The Bangalore Rural and Ramanagara District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. (BBRRDCCB) sanctioned a loan to Javahar House Building Co-operative Society Ltd., which defaulted on repayment India Law Library Docid # 2417017
(685) DHANUSH B.N. AND OTHERS Vs. KARNATAKA STATE[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 25-07-2024 Karnataka State Law Universities Regulations Governing the Five year B.A. LL.B. Integrated Degree Course in Law — Regulations 13 and 15A(d) — Petitioners, students of Christ Academy Institute of Law, were not allowed to write the 9th semester exam due to insufficient attendance and sought permission to attend the 10th semester India Law Library Docid # 2417018
(686) SMT. NAGAMMA AND OTHERS Vs. RUDRAYYA AND OTHERS[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT (DHARWAD BENCH)] 25-07-2024 Joint Family Property — Partition Suit — The case involves a partition suit where the plaintiffs claim joint family ancestral properties — They rely on an agreement of sale dated 11.12.2002 to show possession — The main issue is whether the agreement of sale, which was followed by a sale deed, should be subject to separate stamp duty and impoundment — The petitioners argue that the agreement of sale should not attract separate stamp duty as it has merged into the duly stamped and registered sale India Law Library Docid # 2417031
(687) MOHIT KUCCHAL Vs. STATE AND OTHERS[UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] 25-07-2024 Adoption — Petitioner adopted a child from respondent no. 3, who is the biological mother — The adoption was later validated by a registered deed —Whether the proceedings against Mohit Kucchal should continue despite the valid adoption —The petitioner argued that the child was adopted with the biological mother's consent and that continuing the proceedings would harm the child's future —The State acknowledged the adoption but noted that Section 370 IPC is not compoundable —The court quashed the India Law Library Docid # 2417073
(688) SMT. USHA JAIN AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S VIGNESHWARA DEVELOPWELL P. LTD.[DELHI HIGH COURT] 24-07-2024 Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — Section 14 — Moratorium on the company during the insolvency process — Petitioner sought the release of an amount of Rs 44,41,250, which was deposited as per an order of the court— The respondent company had agreed to buy back the allotted unit at a specified price in a Developer-Anchor Option Agreement — The petitioner argued that the amount was due and payable by the respondent company, and the court had acknowledged it to be so — However, the responden India Law Library Docid # 2416284
(689) SHARAD BHANSALI AND ANOTHER Vs. MUKESH AGGARWAL AND ANOTHER[DELHI HIGH COURT] 24-07-2024 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 37(2)(a) — Stamp Act, 1899 — Article 23A of Schedule I-A — Sections 23A and 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — The Delhi High Court dismissed an appeal against an order passed by an Arbitral Tribunal — The dispute involved an Agreement to Sell (ATS) for the sale of a property, and Respondent 2, who was not a party to the ATS, argued that it was insufficiently stamped — The court held that Article 23A of Schedule I-A to the Indian Stamp Ac India Law Library Docid # 2416285
(690) JAI KARAN Vs. DELHI JAL BOARD AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 24-07-2024 Service Law — Denial of full pension, gratuity, and other benefits — Petitioner sought a quashing of an order by the CAT and set aside two government orders — The petitioner claimed that he was wrongly denied full pension, gratuity, and other benefits for his services rendered to DJB — The High Court held that the Tribunal's decision was correct in relying on the government orders dated 14.05.1968 and 10.03.1986, which stated that only 50% of the length of service rendered by a daily wage or wo India Law Library Docid # 2416286
(691) KARMYOGI BUILDERS PVT LTD Vs. REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES[DELHI HIGH COURT] 24-07-2024 Companies (Court) Rules, 2009 — Rule 9 —Companies Act, 1956 — Section 560(6) — Petitioner company sought to revive its name and accept its pending statutory returns after being struck off from the Register of Companies — The court held that the petitioner's remedy lies with the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) under Chapter XXVII of the Companies Act, 2013 — The court dismissed the petitioner's application and advised it to approach the NCLT for redressal of its grievances — The court note India Law Library Docid # 2416287
(692) PRAMOD AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT (NAGPUR BENCH)] 24-07-2024 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 196(1) — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 295A, 504 and 506 — Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace — The High Court has quashed and set aside a FIR and a charge-sheet filed against two applicants on the basis of an FIR lodged by a non-applicant — The Court found that the prosecution had not proved that the applicants insulted or attempted to insult the religion or religious beliefs of any class of citizens of India with del India Law Library Docid # 2416288
(693) X (MINOR VICTIM) Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 24-07-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 363 and 376 — Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Sections 3 and 4 — Rape of Minor — The case deals with a minor girl who was raped and became pregnant as a result — The petitioner sought a medical termination of her pregnancy, which was denied due to the advanced stage of the pregnancy — The petitioner then sought the court's intervention to allow her to proceed with the delivery and place the child for adoption — The court granted the petiti India Law Library Docid # 2416289
(694) M/S KITPLY INDUSTRIES AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 24-07-2024 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 — The High Court has set aside the summoning orders in several cases involving the same applicants and the same opposite parties — The court found that the Trial Court committed a legal error by considering the impleadment application for the Company, which was the principal offender, without deciding it on merit — The court also found that the Revisional Court failed to correct this error, leading to the perpetuation of the legal error — The court India Law Library Docid # 2416290
(695) ANIL SINGH Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF JAMMU AND OTHERS[JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT (JAMMU BENCH)] 24-07-2024 Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 — Section 3 — J&K Public Safety Act, 1978 — Section 8(1)(a) — Detention — Quashing of — The detention was linked to his alleged involvement in drug trafficking, supported by two FIR’s — The High Court dismissed an appeal against a detention order — The appellant challenged the order citing procedural flaws and insufficient evidence — The court found that all procedural requirements were met, the evidence suppor India Law Library Docid # 2416295
(696) SHRI. LALRINMAWIA RALTE Vs. THE STATE OF MEGHALAYA AND OTHERS[MEGHALAYA HIGH COURT] 24-07-2024 Service Law — Dismissal from Service — Petitioner, a police officer, challenged his dismissal from service on the grounds that the disciplinary proceedings against him were flawed and violated the rules of procedure — The petitioner argued that he was not provided with a list of documents and witnesses relied upon by the department, the Enquiry Officer also acted as a prosecutor, and he was not given an opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses or examine the enquiry report before the dismissal India Law Library Docid # 2416297
(697) RAMSINGH THAKUR Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 24-07-2024 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 223 — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 153(3) — The High Court held that a writ petition for directing the police to register an FIR is not maintainable unless the four exceptions enumerated in the case of Whirlpool Corporation vs. Registrar of Trade Marks, Mumbai and Ors. (1998) 8 SCC 1 come into play — The court cited several Supreme Court judgments, including Lalita Kumari vs. Government of U.P. & Ors. (2014) 2 SCC 1, Sakiri Va India Law Library Docid # 2416298
(698) ANIL SINGH Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR THROUGH ITS COMMISSIONER/SECRETARY HOME AND OTHERS[JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT] 24-07-2024 Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 — Section 3 — Power to make orders detaining certain persons — Detention — Intra-court appeal — High Court of Jammu & Kashmir dismissed an intra-court appeal challenging the order of detention of the appellant under the Act, 1988— The court found that the Detaining Authority had thoroughly examined the issue and passed the order of detention with proper application of mind — The documents relied upon by the De India Law Library Docid # 2416299
(699) SRI. JAIPREETH Vs. STATE BY MANDYA EAST POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 24-07-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 399 and 402 — Making preparation to commit dacoity — Anticipatory bail — Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail — The petitioner claims false implication and highlights that co-accused have been granted bail — The State opposes bail, citing the petitioner's criminal antecedents and ongoing investigation — The court grants anticipatory bail with conditions — The court considers the petitioner's age and the fact that co-accused are already on bail India Law Library Docid # 2416361
(700) M/S DEVTREE CORP. LLP. Vs. M/S BHUMIKA NORTH GARDENIA[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 24-07-2024 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 9 — The dispute involves the enforceability of an arbitration agreement and property sales during pending arbitration — The non-party appellant argued they were not bound by the agreement and that Section 9 proceedings against them were not maintainable — The respondent claimed the appellant was bound due to their connection to the original parties and the principle of lis pendens — The court ruled that the appellant was bound by the agreement and India Law Library Docid # 2416377