(1)
Vidyasagar Prasad ...Appellant Vs.
UCO Bank & Anr. ...Respondents D.D
22/10/2024
Corporate Insolvency - Initiation of CIRP – Application under Section 7 of the IBC – Acknowledgment of Debt in Balance Sheet – Validity of Application Confirmed – The appellant challenged the initiation of CIRP on the grounds that the Section 7 application was barred by limitation, and the debt owed to UCO Bank was not specifically acknowledged in the Corporate Debtor's...
(2)
UT of Jammu and Kashmir & Others...Appellants Vs.
Fayaz Ahmad Lone...Respondent D.D
22/10/2024
Service Law - Disciplinary Proceedings – Procedural Lapses – Quashing of Dismissal Order – The respondent, a storekeeper implicated in a misappropriation case involving government rations, was dismissed following departmental proceedings – The CAT found procedural deficiencies in the inquiry and set aside the dismissal, allowing for fresh proceedings – The High Court ...
(3)
Uma & Anr....Appellants Vs.
The State Rep. by the Deputy Superintendent of Police...Respondent D.D
22/10/2024
Criminal Law – Murder Conviction – Appeal against the conviction under Sections 120B and 302 IPC – Appellants convicted for the murder of the deceased based on circumstantial evidence and medical testimony – High Court reversed the Trial Court’s acquittal and sentenced the appellants to life imprisonment – Prosecution established the guilt of the appellants beyo...
(4)
HDFC BANK LTD....Appellant(s) Vs.
THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS....Respondent(s) D.D
22/10/2024
Criminal Law – FIR Quashing – HDFC Bank officials accused of violating a restraining order under Section 132(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 – FIR registered for offenses under Sections 34, 37, 120B, 201, 206, 217, 406, 409, 420, and 462 IPC – High Court dismissed the writ petition to quash the FIR – On appeal, Supreme Court held that the allegations did not prima faci...
(5)
Horrmal (Deceased) through his LRs and others...Appellant(s) Vs.
State of Haryana and others...Respondent(s) D.D
21/10/2024
Land Acquisition – Compensation – Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Enhanced Compensation Restored – The appellants challenged the High Court's reduction of compensation, asserting that their lands in Mewat had immense potential due to strategic location near infrastructure developments. The Reference Court had enhanced compensation based on relevant sale e...
(6)
Haryana Urban Development Authority...Appellant(s) Vs.
Abhishek Gupta etc....Respondent(s) D.D
21/10/2024
Land Acquisition – Section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act – Compliance with Procedure – Objections Dismissed – The respondents challenged the acquisition of their land, asserting that their objections under Section 5A were not duly considered and that similarly situated lands were exempted from acquisition – Held: The State Government complied with the mandatory proce...
(7)
K.C. Kaushik and Others ...Appellants Vs.
State of Haryana and Others ...Respondents D.D
21/10/2024
Service Law - Revision of Pension – Government-Aided College Staff Entitlement – Rule 6 of the Haryana Civil Services (Revised Pension) Part I Rules, 2009 – The appellants, retired from government-aided private colleges before 01.01.2006, claimed entitlement to revised pension under Rule 6 on par with government college staff – Held: Revised pension is payable to the appell...
(8)
S.P. Pandey...Appellant Vs.
Union of India & Ors....Respondents D.D
21/10/2024
Service Law – Disciplinary Proceedings – Admonition – The appellant, an Airman in the Indian Air Force, was charged with insubordination and violation of good order after an incident at a railway crossing – The appellant was admonished and later sought quashing of the Admonition, arguing the proceedings were flawed due to lack of proper sanction under Section 83 of the Air ...
(9)
Manish Kumar Rai...Petitioner Vs.
Union of India & Ors....Respondents D.D
21/10/2024
Service Law – Pay Discrepancy – Appellant, an Artificer III in the Indian Navy, challenged the lower grade pay granted to Artificers I, II, and III, compared to the non-technical Chief Petty Officers, despite their technical competence and relative ranks – The appellant contended this was discriminatory, arguing that Artificers of Class III and above should receive the same grade...