(81) ADO INDIA PVT. LTD. Vs. ATS HOUSING PRIVATE LIMITED[DELHI HIGH COURT] 09-12-2024 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Applicability of CPC Provisions in Arbitration Proceedings — Special vs. General Law — The court held that while the Arbitration Act is a special law, its provisions do not cover every procedural aspect — When the Arbitration Act is silent on a particular matter that is covered by the CPC, the CPC provisions can be applied. India Law Library Docid # 2420669
(82) B.P. SINGH (THROUGH PAIROKAR) Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION[DELHI HIGH COURT] 09-12-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 120B, 420 and 467 — Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 13(1)(d) — Overvaluation of a property for a bank loan — The key issue was whether the valuation report prepared by accused was indeed fraudulent and whether the trial court adequately considered the evidence regarding property valuation — Accused’s counsel argued that the valuation report was a professional opinion and not conclusively proven to be fraudulent — He highlighted discrepancies in othe India Law Library Docid # 2420664
(83) LECHAMPS (SEA) PTE LTD Vs. ASHISH GUPTA AND ANOTHER[DELHI HIGH COURT] 09-12-2024 Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 — Section 12(5) — Liability of Directors for Company's Contempt — The court affirmed that a director of a company can be held liable for contempt of court if the contempt was committed with the director's consent or connivance, or due to the director's neglect — This is in line with Section 12(5) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. India Law Library Docid # 2420665
(84) PRASHANT LUTHRA Vs. STATE AND ANOTHER[DELHI HIGH COURT] 09-12-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 328, 376, 323, 377, 493, 509 and 506(I) — Consensual Relationships and False Promises of Marriage — Duration of Relationship — The court emphasized that a prolonged physical relationship (in this case, nearly two years) without protest or insistence on marriage by the female partner suggests a consensual relationship rather than one based on a false promise of India Law Library Docid # 2420666
(85) SAPNA AND ANOTHER Vs. SHIVESH GARG[DELHI HIGH COURT] 09-12-2024 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 37 — Scope of Grant or Denial of Leave to Defend under Order 37 — The court reaffirms that the trial court has discretion in granting leave to defend under Order XXXVII CPC, which must be exercised to ensure justice. India Law Library Docid # 2420667
(86) SH MUKESH NAGAR Vs. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI ACTING THROUGH ITS LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR EAST AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 09-12-2024 Land Acquisition — Finality of Land Acquisition Awards — The court reaffirms that once a land acquisition award is finalized and compensation is paid, no subsequent petition can be filed to recall or reopen the acquisition proceedings under any pretext, even after a significant period of time (21 years in this case). India Law Library Docid # 2420668
(87) DR. ABHISHEK SHUKLA AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 09-12-2024 Medical entrance examinations — Methodology of ranking candidates — Normalization and Incentivized Marks — Normalisation Before Adding Incentivized Marks — The Court held that incentivized marks should be added to the 'normalized scores’ of candidates, not the raw scores — This is crucial as adding marks pre-normalization leads to a compounded benefit based on the difficulty level of the shift, which is unfair. India Law Library Docid # 2420813
(88) MUNESHWAR PRASAD Vs. TEERATH DIED THROUGH LRS RAM ASHRAY CHAMAR AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 09-12-2024 Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Section 54 — Non-Registration of Sale Deed Below Rs. 100 Does Not Invalidate It — The court held that a sale deed executed for a consideration of Rs. 50/-, which was below the threshold requiring registration under Section 54, is still a valid document and not void for non-registration. India Law Library Docid # 2420814
(89) BHARAT HIRJI DEDHIA AND ANOTHER Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 09-12-2024 Insurance Act, 1938 — Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India Act, 1999 — Whether the Insurance Ombudsman's award directing the Oriental Insurance Company to pay Petitioner Rs. 27,13,582/- for a health insurance claim should be upheld — The Insurance Company challenged the award, arguing that the Ombudsman exceeded its jurisdiction and that the insurance policies were void due to alleged misrepresentations in the proposal form, and that the charges for the surgery were not reason India Law Library Docid # 2421021
(90) PUNJAB STATE COOPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD. Vs. ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR (GENERAL), COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES, PUNJAB AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 09-12-2024 Service Law — Unauthorized absence — An employee's unauthorized absence from duty does not automatically get condoned or "wiped out" simply by the employer granting leave for that period, and that disciplinary actions taken for such absence can remain valid even if the absence is later regularized with leave — The court held that the Revisional Authority incorrectly set aside the punishment of stopping four annual increments, because it misinterpreted the Appellate Authority's order — The Appell India Law Library Docid # 2421112
(91) KULJIT SINGH Vs. PAWAN GOYAL AND ANOTHER[DELHI HIGH COURT] 06-12-2024 Liability for Unpaid Cheque and Binding Nature of Undertakings in Commercial Transactions — Plaintiff supplied goods to defendant no. 1, who issued a dishonored cheque for Rs. 9,83,677/- — Defendant claimed ignorance of the goods' delivery and a conspiracy — Was defendant liable for the unpaid amount? — Did the dishonored cheque and undertaking bind him? — Plaintiff India Law Library Docid # 2420670
(92) NITIN SAXENA Vs. AMIT SAXENA[DELHI HIGH COURT] 06-12-2024 Limitation Act, 1963 — Articles 58 and 59 — Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 7 Rule 11(d) — Limitation for Cancellation of Release Deeds — The Court held that the period of limitation to seek cancellation of a registered document like a release deed is three years from the date of the document — In this case, the release deeds were executed on 13.08.2014, so the limitation period expired on 13.08.2017. India Law Library Docid # 2420671
(93) M/S. DURGA TRADERS Vs. THE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR AND OTHERS[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 06-12-2024 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Sections 11(6) and 12(5) — Appointment of Arbitrator — Ineligibility of Designated Arbitrators under Section 12(5) — The court held that an arbitrator who is a manager, director, or has a similar controlling influence in an affiliate of one of the parties directly involved in the dispute is ineligible to be appointed under Section 12(5) of the Act — This applies not only when the designated arbitrator is from the management but also when they are nominate India Law Library Docid # 2420725
(94) CH. ANNAPURNA Vs. THE STATE OF ANDHRA[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 06-12-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 409, 418, 420 and 423 — Misappropriation of Funds — Anticipatory bail — Accused claims to have discovered the misappropriation and filed a private complaint, leading to dual complaints against her and others — Whether the petitioner should be granted anticipatory bail considering the nature of allegations, her role, and the progress of the investigation — The petitioner's counsel argues her innocence, her role in exposing the misappropriation, and the lack of si India Law Library Docid # 2420726
(95) KORIVI @ KILARU UDAYA LAKSHMI Vs. VALLURU SAMBASIVA RAO AND OTHERS[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 06-12-2024 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 — Mandatory Injunction — The plaintiff sued for an injunction against the defendant for building on their property, with the defendant claiming ownership and permits — The plaintiff tried to add new documents late, citing errors and a related writ petition — The court, considering Supreme Court precedents and the relevance of the documents to the writ petition, allowed the additions but set strict timelines and warned against delays. India Law Library Docid # 2420727
(96) KAILASH HADA Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 06-12-2024 MP Civil Service (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966 — Rule 14 — The petitioner, a Gram Rojgar Sahayak appointed on contract, was accused of demanding bribes from beneficiaries for releasing Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojna instalments — A show cause notice was issued after an audio recording surfaced — The petitioner denied allegations, citing witness statements — His services were terminated following an inquiry under Clause 15 of appointment rules — Whether termination of the petitioner India Law Library Docid # 2420815
(97) PAWAN KUMAR DOOKIA Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 06-12-2024 Coal Indian Executives Conduct, Discipline and Appeal Rules, 2021 — Rule 30 — The petitioner filed a complaint against respondent No.5, alleging misuse of position for securing employment for his son without prior sanction — The respondent authorities dismissed the complaint as unsupported and issued a charge sheet against the petitioner for misconduct — Was the complaint filed by the petitioner valid and justified? — Petitioner states that the complaint was factually correct, as only post-facto India Law Library Docid # 2420816
(98) STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. VISHAL PRAKASH SHINDE AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 06-12-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 498A, 323, 504 read with Section 34 — Cruelty — The central legal issue in this case is whether the acquittal of the respondents was correct — The State of Maharashtra appealed the trial court's acquittal, arguing that the complainant, the wife of Respondent No.1, was subjected to cruelty and harassment — The trial court, however, found that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt — Key issues included a lack of specific details in India Law Library Docid # 2421002
(99) RAHUL MADAN SHARMA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 06-12-2024 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) — Section 8(c) read with 27 — Whether the proceedings against the petitioner should be quashed — The court considered whether the prosecution had sufficient evidence to proceed with the charges, given that the police claimed to have witnessed the petitioner smoking Ganja, but destroyed the alleged evidence at the scene — The court found that the prosecution's case lacked any incriminating material, as no substance was seized, and th India Law Library Docid # 2421003
(100) GANGARAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 06-12-2024 Rajasthan Prisoners Open Air Camp Rules, 1972 — Rule 3 — Whether a prisoner convicted under the POCSO Act or Section 376 of the IPC can be moved from jail to an open air camp — The court notes conflicting views on the interpretation of Rule 3 of the Rajasthan Prisoners Open Air Camp Rules, 1972, specifically the meaning of the word "ordinarily" in the context of eligibility for open air camps — Some benches have interpreted "ordinarily" to not be an absolute prohibition, while others have held t India Law Library Docid # 2421188