ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(741) DR. CHINMAY ANKLESHWARIA Vs. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 22-07-2024
Education Law — Admission — Addition of Additional Seat — Additional seat for the DM Cardiology course in the Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh, for the July 2024 session — The court noted that the petitioner, who had secured the sixth rank in the INI-SS Entrance Test for the July 2024 session, was denied admission due to the institute's failure to advertise an additional seat that had become vacant after a doctor resigned mid-session — The court obser
India Law Library Docid # 2416220

(742) ASHOK SHARMA Vs. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI[DELHI HIGH COURT] 22-07-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 420, 406, 409 and 120B — Cheating and criminal breach of trust — Bail — The chargesheet had already been filed, and the applicant had been in custody since December 21, 2021 — The court considered the delay in trial, the applicant's age (73 years), and his wife's serious health issues in granting bail — Bail Allowed — The court clarified that any observations made in the order were for the purpose of deciding the bail application and should not influence the ou
India Law Library Docid # 2416221

(743) RAJESH RAI Vs. KHAJAN SINGH@ DURVEEN SINGH AND ANOTHER[DELHI HIGH COURT] 22-07-2024
Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923 — Sections 4A and 30 — Grant of compensation who sustained injuries in a work-related accident — The High Court dismissed an appeal filed by an employer against an order passed by the Commissioner of Employee's Compensation granting compensation to the employee who sustained injuries in a work-related accident — The court found that the employer had failed to prove that the employee was a casual worker and had not provided any evidence to contradict the employee
India Law Library Docid # 2416222

(744) AJAY MELWANI Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 22-07-2024
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Sections 9(A), 25 (A),29 and 59 — Quashing of FIR — The applicant argued that he was not aware of the amendment to the NDPS Order that added N-Phenethyl-4-Piperidone (NPP) to Schedule B, which required an NOC from the Narcotics Commissioner for export — The court held that ignorance of the law is not a defence and that the applicant's failure to obtain the required NOC prima facie constituted an offence under the NDPS Act — The court also no
India Law Library Docid # 2416227

(745) TINSUKIA MUNICIPAL BOARD AND OTHERS Vs. ASHIM CHAKRABORTY AND OTHERS[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 22-07-2024
Service Law — Grant of pay scale benefits of the Sixth Pay Commission to temporary employees — The court found that the Chairperson of the Tinsukia Municipal Board had no jurisdiction to issue such an order, as any decision regarding pay scales for temporary employees must be taken by the Municipal Board after obtaining concurrence from the State Government — The court also noted that the order granting the pay scale benefits was stayed by the same authority on April 1, 2017, and that order has
India Law Library Docid # 2416228

(746) TAJINDER KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 22-07-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 307, 427 and 506 — The petitioner and the complainant reached a compromise, and the petitioner filed a petition under Section 482 CrPC to quash the FIR and all subsequent proceedings — The court considered various judicial precedents on the quashing of FIRs under Section 307 IPC and concluded that in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, continuing the proceedings would not serve any fruitful purpose — Therefore, the court invoked its inherent juris
India Law Library Docid # 2416229

(747) AMIT KUMAR SARAWGI AND ANOTHER Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 22-07-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 147, 149, 353, 389, 120(B), 420, 417, 467, 468 and 471 — The High Court dismissed a criminal petition filed by petitioners who sought to quash orders issued by the S.D.J.M., Giridih, — The petitioners were accused of fraud and forgery related to a loan from the State Bank of India and evading arrest during the investigation process — The court found that the orders issued by the S.D.J.M., Giridih, were in accordance with the Code of Criminal Procedure and that t
India Law Library Docid # 2416231

(748) THE STATE OF TRIPURA Vs. JALIL MIAH AND OTHERS[TRIPURA HIGH COURT] 22-07-2024
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Sections 21(C), 25, 29 and 37 — Bail — The court held that filing of a charge-sheet alone is not a ground to grant bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, and the materials available on record did not suggest that there were reasonable grounds to believe that the accused were not guilty of the alleged offences — The court set aside the order granting bail and directed the accused to surrender.
India Law Library Docid # 2416246

(749) SOW. SHARDA SHARAD SAHANE Vs. SHARAD UTTAMRAO SAHANE[BOMBAY HIGH COURT (AURANGABAD BENCH)] 20-07-2024
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 15 — The High Court dismissed the second appeal filed by the appellant/wife against the judgment and order of the District Judge — The appellant had challenged the decree of divorce passed by the trial court, which dissolved her marriage with the respondent/husband — The High Court found that the delay condonation application filed by the appellant/wife was infructuous for all practical purposes since the respondent/husband had remarried after getting the decre
India Law Library Docid # 2416209

(750) SAMRIDDHI YOGESH SAVALE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT (AURANGABAD BENCH)] 20-07-2024
Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-Notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000 — Section 7(2) — The Petitioner challenging the decision of the STCSC to refuse to validate her Tokre Koli Scheduled Tribe (ST) certificate and cancel it — The petitioner claimed that her ancestors were consistently described as "Koli Dhor" or "Tokre Koli" in pre-constituti
India Law Library Docid # 2416210

(751) HARSHIT NAMDEV Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANOTHER[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 20-07-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 306 and 498-A — Quashing of the FIR and the proceedings — The applicant was accused of abetment of suicide and cruelty under Sections 306 and 498-A of the IPC — The court held that there were prima facie allegations against the applicant warranting his prosecution — The court found that the deceased was harassed by her in-laws, including the applicant, and that the applicant was related to the husband of the deceased by virtue of marriage — The court also held t
India Law Library Docid # 2416211

(752) MOHD. HANEEF Vs. MAHENDA KUMAR AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 20-07-2024
M.P. Panchayat Election Petitions and Corrupt Practices Rules, 1995 — M.P. Panchayat Raj Avam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993 — Section 36(1)(e) — Disqualification — The High Court quashed an order by the Election Tribunal that had set aside the election of the petitioner as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat — The petitioner had been disqualified under Section 36(1)(e) of the Adhiniyam, which states that an employee dismissed for corruption or disloyalty is disqualified for being an office bearer of Pancha
India Law Library Docid # 2416212

(753) MANNU KUMAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 20-07-2024
Bihar Drugs Controller Cadre Regulation, 2014 — Clause 5(1) — Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945 — Rule 49 — Eligibility criteria for the post of Drug Inspector — The petitioner, who held a Pharm D (Doctorate of Pharmacy) degree, argued that the requirement of a degree in Pharmacy or Pharmaceutical Sciences or Medicine with specialization in Clinical Pharmacology or Microbiology from a University established in India by law was too restrictive and that holding a higher qualification should pre-supp
India Law Library Docid # 2416213

(754) AMIT KUMAR AJAD AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 20-07-2024
Service Law — Selection Process — High Court has quashed the selection process for the post of Special Survey Assistant Settlement Officer in Bihar due to arbitrary changes in the rules during the selection process — The court found that the decision to award 20 marks/points to all candidates for work experience, regardless of their actual experience, was unjust and violated the principles of natural justice — The court directed the selection committee to reconsider the final select list, recast
India Law Library Docid # 2416214

(755) JAFEL DIN AND OTHERS Vs. ABDUL GANI (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS AND OTHERS[JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT] 20-07-2024
J&K Code of Civil Procedure, Svt. 1977 — Section 96 — The respondents filed a civil suit seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction against 14 defendants to prevent them from altering the nature of certain lands in Jammu — Whether a co-sharer can file a suit against another co-sharer — The trial court dismissed the suit, but the 1st appellate court overturned this decision, directing the trial court to proceed with the case — The High Court ordered the deletion of defendants No. 4 to 14, leaving
India Law Library Docid # 2416528

(756) ZAFAR-ULLAH KRYPAK Vs. THE UNION TERRITORY OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR THROUGH COMMISSIONER/SECRETARY AND OTHERS[JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT] 20-07-2024
Jammu and Kashmir Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976 — Section 21 — The case involves petitioner challenging the 1971 khasra girdawari entries regarding land in Bhaderwah, Doda, which was recorded as an orchard — The main issue is whether the 1971 khasra girdawari entry was valid and if the appeal against it was maintainable under the Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976 — The petitioner argued that the 1971 entry was manipulated and that the appellate authority acted beyond its jurisdiction — The respondents, su
India Law Library Docid # 2416561

(757) STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS Vs. MR. BABAN YESHWANT GHUGE[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 19-07-2024
Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1982 — Rule 130(1)(c) — Entitlement of a state government employee to receive gratuity upon the conclusion of judicial proceedings, specifically in light of Rule 130(1)(c) of the Rules, 1982 — The court found that the expression "judicial proceedings" in the rule includes both the initial trial and any subsequent appeals, and that gratuity is not payable until all judicial proceedings, including appeals, are concluded and final orders are passed — The
India Law Library Docid # 2416173

(758) AKHIL BHARATIYA SAMAJWADI ADHYAPAK SABHA AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 19-07-2024
Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Rules, 2011 — Rule 4(5) — Maharashtra Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education (Manner of admission of Minimum 25% children in Class-I or Pre-School at the entry level for the children belonging to disadvantaged groups and weaker section) Rules 2013 — The High Court has declared the Maharashtra (Amendment) Rules 2024, ultra vires the RTE Act, 2009, and Article 21-A of the Constitution — The amendment rules added a proviso to Rule 4(5)
India Law Library Docid # 2416174

(759) M/S BPL LIMITED Vs. M/S MORGAN SECURITIES & CREDITS PVT. LTD.[DELHI HIGH COURT] 19-07-2024
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 34 — Commercial Courts Act, 2015 — Section 13 — Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 64 — Arbitral award — Appellant appealed against an arbitral award that required it to pay respondent under all Bills of Exchange, except one — The dispute arose from the appellant's failure to repay Rs. 25,79,91,096 due on Bills of Exchange — The High Court upheld the arbitral award, rejected the appellant's grounds of appeal, and dismissed the appeal — The
India Law Library Docid # 2416165

(760) SH. RAKESH KUMAR SHARMA Vs. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY[DELHI HIGH COURT] 19-07-2024
Cancellation of Allotment — The petitioner challenged the DDA for canceling the allotment of a flat despite full payment being made later — The original allottee had deposited the amount after the stipulated time — Whether the cancellation of the flat allotment was valid despite the delayed payment and if the petitioner has any right to the flat — The petitioner argued that the payment was made, and the DDA did not cancel the allotment until after the payment — They also cited previous court ord
India Law Library Docid # 2416166