(61) DAYA NAND CHANDELA Vs. STATE[DELHI HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 452, 307 and 34 – The case involves an attack on the residence of an MLA, with the appellant and co-accused convicted for offences under IPC - Petitioner aged 70, seeks to suspend his conviction to contest the Lok Sabha Elections 2024, citing his political career and public service record - The State opposes the suspension, noting previous similar applications were dismissed and the trial court's conviction was based on detailed evidence - The application for su India Law Library Docid # 2414852
(62) VANDANA BATRA Vs. ANUPAM GUPTA AND ANOTHER[DELHI HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) – Order 6 Rule 17 – Amendment of Pleadings - Property Dispute – Partition - The case revolves around the partition of Late 'M's estate, with the plaintiff and defendants being his children - The plaintiff argues for a 1/3rd share in the estate, claiming Late 'M' died intestate - Defendant no. 1 seeks to amend their written statement to include additional properties for partition, claiming Late 'M' left a Will - The court allowed the amendment, citing that the ame India Law Library Docid # 2414853
(63) REMAL SOLANKI AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF M. P. AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024 Service Law – Termination - The petitions challenge the unilateral termination of services of the petitioners from their teaching positions - The main issue is whether the termination of services without a departmental enquiry is legal - The petitioners argue that their services were terminated without a departmental enquiry and without an opportunity to be heard, making the termination illegal - The respondents claim that the petitioners' appointments were fraudulent and thus, their services we India Law Library Docid # 2414854
(64) TRBEX IMPEX PVT. LTD. Vs. M/S ASHOK FINE SPUN[MADHYA RADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 10-05-2024 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Section 11 (6) - Petitioner filed for an arbitration against respondent over an unpaid amount of Rs. 5,22,84,012/- under an agreement for solar electricity supply - The main issue was whether the arbitration clause in the agreement, which uses the word "may," mandates arbitration or if it's optional - Petitioner argued for the appointment of an arbitrator as per the agreement's dispute resolution clause – Respondent contended that arbitration was optional India Law Library Docid # 2414855
(65) SMT. ROHANI AHIRWAR Vs. MUKESH LADIYAI[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Sections 174, 200 and 482 - The petitioner filed a complaint under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. after her husband's death on 10.12.2015 - Despite an inquest inquiry, no charge-sheet was filed, leading her to file a complaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. The main issue was the discrepancy between the incident date and the respondent's statement under Section 200- The petitioner argued that the trial Magistrate erred by not considering the respondent's extra-judic India Law Library Docid # 2414856
(66) RAJARAM YADAV Vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER, SAGAR DIVISION AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024 Limitation Act, 1963 – Section 5 – The petitioner filed a petition regarding a mutation entry based on a partition order from 2005 - Respondent No.5 applied for the mutation in 2017, which was granted, leading to the petitioner's appeals being dismissed due to limitation - The main issue was whether the mutation entry and subsequent orders were lawful, considering the delay in the application for mutation and the petitioner's non-inclusion in the proceedings - The petitioner argued that the orde India Law Library Docid # 2414857
(67) DATTATRAYA MAHADEV UGALE AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024 Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 - Section 81(3)(c) and 154 – Auditor – The petitioners, who are agriculturists, challenged an order granting a stay on the audit of a cooperative society - The main issues were whether the order under Section 81(3)(c) of the Act, 1960 is quasi-judicial or administrative, and if it's administrative, whether a revision under Section 154 is maintainable - Petitioner's Arguments - They argued that the order passed under Section 81(3)(c) is merely administr India Law Library Docid # 2414885
(68) NIKHILESH KESARICHAND JHAVERI AND OTHERS Vs. NEW ERA FABRICS LIMITED AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024 Presidency Small Causes Courts Act, 1882 - Section 41 – Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order 18 Rule 2 - The case involves a dispute over leasehold rights to property - The Petitioner’s -Jhaveri family, split into two groups, is contesting against Respondent regarding eviction and lease rights - The main issue is whether defendants who are not adversarial to the plaintiffs can be permitted to lead evidence in an eviction suit against other defendants - The petitioners argue that defendants whose i India Law Library Docid # 2414886
(69) KORES (INDIA) LTD. Vs. ASHISH KUMAR AHOOJA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Section 138 – The case revolves around Hewlett Packard (HP), Kores (India) Ltd., and Ambitious Marketing, a retailer - Disputes arose over business transactions and reciprocal promises, leading to the issuance of 16 dishonored cheques by Ambitious Marketing to Kores - The main issue is whether there is a legally enforceable debt/liability between the parties - The case examines the roles and relationships between the parties, including the relevance of Memorand India Law Library Docid # 2414887
(70) SHRI SHRIPAD DWARKANATH GUPTE AND OTHERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024 Service Law – Promotion - Promotion process of Artisan Staff in the Naval Dockyard Mumbai - The court found that the petitioners' challenge was academic, as the majority of them had already been promoted on a grade-wise basis - The court also noted that there was a significant delay of six years in agitating their grievance, and the petitioners were estopped from challenging the promotion process - The court further held that the Office Memorandum (OM) dated 14th June 2010 and the Operative Inst India Law Library Docid # 2414888
(71) NEW INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. M/S. KLM ENGINEERING COMPANY LTD. AND OTHER[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024 Transfer of Property Act, 1882 - Sections 111 and 113 - Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 - Sections 2(e), 4, 7 and 8 – The New India Insurance Company Ltd owns a building called Mayfair Gardens, where Respondent No.1, a sick company, occupied Flat No. on a leave and license basis that expired in 1999 - The applicant demanded possession, citing the expiry of the license and the need for the premises - The primary issue was whether the respondent is an unauthorized o India Law Library Docid # 2414889
(72) ECHJAY INDUSTRIES PVT LTD. AND OTHERS Vs. RAJENDRA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024 Income Tax Act 1961 - Section 132 - Search and Seizure - The petitioners challenged the authorizations for the search action, claiming they were unconstitutional, ultra vires, invalid, and without jurisdiction - The petitioners argued that the search action lacked reliable information to form a belief under Section 132(1), non-observance of safeguards rendered the search illegal, and there were alternate provisions available to the department - The respondents contended that there was informatio India Law Library Docid # 2414890
(73) AIRPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA WORKERS UNION AND OTHER Vs. THE UNDER SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF LABOUR, GOVT. OF INDIA AND OTHER[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024 Airport Authority of India (Leave) Regulations 2003 – Petitioner No.2, widowed and appointed on compassionate grounds, remarried and had two children - Her application for maternity leave was rejected due to having more than two surviving children, as per the AAI Leave Regulations 2003 - The petitioner argued that her first child from her previous marriage should not be considered, as it was before her employment with Respondent No.2. She contended that she is entitled to maternity leave for the India Law Library Docid # 2414891
(74) SADASHIV AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT (AURANGABAD BENCH)] 10-05-2024 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) - Section 54 - Maharashtra Land Revenue (Partition of Holdings) Rules, 1967 - Rule 7 - Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 - Section 85 - Partition of estate or separation of share – A sister has been pursuing her right to a share in her parent's property since 1992 - Her partition suit was decreed in 2006, and subsequent appeals were dismissed by 2021 - An execution petition was filed in 2020 - The main issue is the legality of the partition process under Sectio India Law Library Docid # 2414892
(75) M/S. LASHKARIA HOUSING AND INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD. Vs. SLUM REHABILITATION AUTHORITY AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024 Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 - Section 13(2) - Power of Slum Rehabilitation Authority to develop slum Rehabilitation area – The case revolves around the termination of a developer's appointment as the developer for a Slum Rehabilitation Scheme (SRS) in Mumbai - The petitioner, who was appointed after the previous developer was terminated, challenged the order passed by the Apex Grievance Redressal Committee (AGRC) and the Chief Executive Officer of India Law Library Docid # 2414893
(76) ESHTIYAQ AHMED MUSHTAQ AHMED QURESHI Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024 Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 – Sections 57(1)(a)(i) and 60 – The petitioner is challenging the legality of an externment order that exempts him from certain districts for 18 months under section 57(1)(a)(i) of the Act, 1951 - The main issue is whether the order was justified based on a single conviction and if there was sufficient material to believe the petitioner would commit similar offenses again - The petitioner argues that the order violates his fundamental rights and is disproportionate India Law Library Docid # 2414894
(77) DAYA NAND RISHI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR[PATNA HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323 and 302 – Murder – Dispute over Land - The main issue was the credibility of the prosecution's story, the inconsistencies in witness testimonies, and the lack of evidence against the appellant - The appellant's counsel argued that the case was fabricated to escape a criminal case against the informant and others for the murder of the appellant's brother - The State contended that the appellant and others assaulted and killed the deceased India Law Library Docid # 2414895
(78) S.M EHTESHAMUL HASAN REHMANI AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024 Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 - Section 24(2) - Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956- Section 26A –Land acquisition for a canal project - Disputes over possession and compensation - The main issue is whether the petitioners can retain possession of the acquired lands, claiming that physical possession was never taken by the State - The appellants argue that they have been in possess India Law Library Docid # 2414896
(79) NEERAJ KUMAR SINGH Vs. TESU KUMARI[PATNA HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Sections 5, 7 and 9 - Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Section 498A - Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 - Sections 3 and 4 – Matrimonial Dispute -Restitution of conjugal rights - The appellant's marriage was solemnized on November 9, 2003, but issues arose when his family pressured him to remarry for dowry - The primary issue was the validity of the marriage and whether the respondent was entitled to restitution of conjugal rights - The respondent argued that the marriage was valid India Law Library Docid # 2414897
(80) SUNIL KUMAR MODAK Vs. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND OTHERS[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024 Service Law – Medical Leave - Absence and Salary payment - A Grade-IV employee was transferred to Chhagolia High School and sought medical leave for tuberculosis - This led to a dispute over his absence and salary payment - The main issue is whether petitioner's leave from 11.05.2017 to 20.06.2017 should be sanctioned and his salary released - Petitioner argues he was entitled to leave for medical reasons and that his continued absence was due to illness - The school and authorities argue that India Law Library Docid # 2414915