(1)
MUHAMMED MUSTHAFA Vs.
STATE OF KERALA D.D
01/04/2024
HIGH COURTS
Bail Application - Grant of Bail – Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985(NDPS) – Petitioner accused of possession of 36.740 grams of Methamphetamine, initially believed to be MDMA – Chemical analysis report confirmed substance as Methamphetamine, classified as intermediate quantity – Petitioner has no criminal antecedents – Held, considering the complet...
(2)
Sreeja C.C Petitioner/Respondent/Defendant:
a Vs.
Yesoda.C Respondent/Petitioner/Plaintiff: D.D
01/04/2024
HIGH COURTS
Application for Amendment of Relief – Sought at End of Trial – Request to modify relief from declaration of a document as void to cancellation of the document – Consideration of legal implications and due diligence by the plaintiff – Plaintiff’s limited knowledge of legal terms and reliance on legal advice [Para 6].
Order VI Rule 17 C.P.C. – Limitat...
(3)
Rajeev Ruia ... Appellant Vs.
Mahesh Vennalakanti ... Respondent D.D
01/04/2024
HIGH COURTS
Marriage and Divorce - Appeal challenging Family Court's decision on property ownership - Facts surrounding the purchase of disputed Juhu Flat and tenancy of Cuffe Parade Flat - Family Court's dismissal of Mrs. Rajeshri V. Mahesh's judicial separation petition and decree of divorce in favor of Respondent, based on grounds under Sections 13(1)(i-a) and 13(1)(i-b) of the Hindu Marriage A...
(4)
Appellants: Smt. Prembai, Chammo Bai Vs.
Respondents: Doulaltram, Ranjeet Singh, The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. D.D
01/04/2024
HIGH COURTS
Motor Vehicle Accident Compensation – Enhancement and Recovery - Appeals – by claimants and by Insurance Company heard together due to their interconnected nature, dealing with compensation for a motor vehicle accident resulting in death. [Paras 1, 2]
Background: Accident involving deceased Mangilal, claim filed by wife and daughter for compensation of Rs. 33,25,000....
(5)
Avtar Singh @ Jagtar Singh @ Jagga ...Appellant Vs.
State of Punjab ...Respondent D.D
01/04/2024
HIGH COURTS
NDPS - Compliance with Section 42 NDPS Act – Challenge to Conviction – Conviction for Offense under Section 21(b) read with Section 31 NDPS Act Upheld – Evidence and Procedure Examined – Compliance with Section 42 and 50 NDPS Act Established – Appellant Previously Convicted under NDPS Act – Held, no merit in appeal; conviction and sentence confirmed. [Paras 1-18...
(6)
ABC. .......PETITIONER Vs.
XYZ. .......RESPONDENTS D.D
01/04/2024
HIGH COURTS
Jurisdiction of Family Courts – Suit for Possession/Injunction – Contested issue of Family Court's jurisdiction over suits for possession or injunction filed by in-laws claiming property ownership and involving daughter-in-law – Family Courts Act, 1984, Sections 7(1)(d), 8 – Civil Procedure Code, Section 9 – Held, such disputes incidentally indicating matrimonial ...
(7)
RAJEEV JHAWAR ... Petitioner Vs.
DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT ... Respondent D.D
01/04/2024
HIGH COURTS
Quashing of NBW Sought by Petitioner – Alleged involvement in bribery to influence a CBI case – Petitioner's repeated absence and failure to comply with court directives – Non-Bailable Warrants (NBW) issued – Petitioner’s application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of NBW and related proceedings [Paras 1, 9-14, 20-38].
Quashing of Non-Baila...
(8)
XXX …..Petitioner Vs.
STATE … Respondents D.D
01/04/2024
HIGH COURTS
Factual Background – Complaints were made by the petitioner under Sections 498A and 406 IPC against her husband and in-laws, alleging severe demands for dowry and subsequent physical and mental cruelty after her marriage in 1998 – The FIR was filed in December 2002 and charge-sheet filed in July 2004 – Magistrate took cognizance on the same day the charge-sheet was filed [Paras 2...
(9)
Godrej and Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. Interio Division .....Petitioner Vs.
Shivkranti Kamgar Sanghatana. .....Respondent D.D
28/03/2024
HIGH COURTS
Classification of Employees as Workmen – Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 – Section 2(s) – Interpretation by Industrial Tribunal – Challenge in High Court – High Court upholds Tribunal’s classification of certain employees as ‘workmen’ under the Act. Tribunal found that these employees primarily performed manual, skilled, and unskilled work, contrary to...