(1)
M. SRIKANTH Vs.
STATE OF TELANGANA AND ANOTHER .....Respondent D.D
21/10/2019
Facts:The case involves a complaint filed by the sister of accused No. 1, alleging forgery in claiming ownership of a property.The complaint accuses accused No. 1 of creating forged documents, including a will and a deed of confirmation.Accused No. 4 is implicated for entering into a lease agreement based on the allegedly forged documents.The property ownership is disputed among legal heirs, leadi...
(2)
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI Vs.
M/S I-VEN INTERACTIVE LIMITED, MUMBAI .....Respondent D.D
18/10/2019
Facts:The respondent filed an income tax return for A.Y. 2006-07.Notices under Section 143(2) were sent to the address in the PAN database.Assessee claimed a change of name and address, communicated via an alleged letter dated 06.12.2005.The alleged letter was not produced, and the assessee failed to prove its existence.Assessing Officer completed the assessment under Section 143(3).The assessee c...
(3)
STATE OF WEST BENGAL Vs.
INDRAJIT KUNDU AND OTHERS .....Respondent D.D
18/10/2019
Facts:The victim, a painter and artist, had a relationship with the first respondent, her English teacher.On 05.03.2004, the victim visited the first respondent's house to finalize their marriage proposal.The parents of the first respondent, respondent Nos. 2 and 3, allegedly shouted at the victim, calling her a call-girl.Disturbed, the victim returned home and committed suicide on 06.03.2004...
(4)
S.P. MISRA AND OTHERS Vs.
MOHD. LAIQUDDIN KHAN AND ANOTHER .....Respondent D.D
18/10/2019
Facts:The original partnership deed involved two partners, namely late Smt. Hashmatunnisa Begum and late Sri Jai Narayan Misra.Late Sri Jai Narayan Misra filed Original Suit No. 580 of 1988, claiming reliefs related to the partnership property.The suit was decreed on 14.07.1993, after which the original plaintiff passed away.The legal heirs of the original plaintiff sought execution of the decree ...
(5)
HOOGHLY MILLS COMPANY LTD. Vs.
THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANOTHER .....Respondent D.D
17/10/2019
Facts:The appellant company entered into an agreement for the sale of a property.The 2nd respondent, a former director, allegedly wrongfully withheld possession after the termination of his directorship.Dispute arose regarding the company's right to recover possession of the property.Issues:Maintainability of an application under Section 630(2) during the pendency of a civil suit.Timing of an...
(6)
MANI PUSHPAKJOSHI Vs.
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ANOTHER .....Respondent D.D
17/10/2019
Facts:The prosecutrix, a small child, alleged sexual harassment in a school managed by the appellant.Photos introduced by the child's parents implicated a person with spectacles as the accused.Inconsistencies in the statements of the child and the anger of her father against the school management, including the appellant.Issues:Whether a prima facie case against the appellant for the alleged ...
(7)
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Vs.
ARVIND KHANNA .....Respondent D.D
17/10/2019
Facts:Arvind Khanna, the respondent, was accused of receiving foreign contributions without permission from the government.The defense claimed the funds were gifts from the respondent's father, Mr. Vipin Khanna.Issues:Whether the High Court, in a Section 482 CrPC petition, overstepped its jurisdiction by making findings on disputed facts.The correctness of the respondent's defense needed...
(8)
BARASAT EYE HOSPITAL AND OTHERS Vs.
KAUSTABH MONDAL .....Respondent D.D
17/10/2019
Facts: The case involves Barasat Eye Hospital and Kaustabh Mondal under the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955. The respondent (pre-emptor) sought pre-emption rights, and the dispute centered around the deposit requirement and procedural aspects under Sections 8 and 9 of the Act.Issues:Activation of the right of pre-emption: Whether the right is triggered only upon the deposit of the specified amo...
(9)
DR. LAKSHMAN Vs.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS .....Respondent D.D
17/10/2019
Facts:Appellant filed criminal appeals against the High Court's decision to quash complaints under various sections of IPC, CrPC, and NI Act.Complaints alleged offenses including cheating, fraud, and criminal conspiracy related to a land procurement agreement.High Court quashed complaints based on a subsequent agreement, citing novation of the contract.Issues:Whether the High Court erred in e...