Dispute Related To Infringement Of Copyright Is Arbitrable, Arbitrator Can Be Appointed U/S 11 Of Arbitration Act: Orissa High Court

The Orissa High Court bench of Chief Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh has held that dispute related to infringement of copyright is arbitrable for which arbitrator can be appointed by the court under section 11 of the Arbitration Act. Brief Facts The present application has been filed under section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act, seeking appointment of an Arbitrator to resolve...

On Recusal Of Arbitrator Appointed By Court U/S 11 Of Arbitration Act, Substitute Arbitrator Can Be Appointed U/S 15(2): Uttarakhand HC

The Uttarakhand High Court bench of Acting Chief Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari has held that on recusal of previously appointed Arbitrator appointed by the court under section 11 of the Arbitration Act , a substitute Arbitrator can be appointed by the court under section 15(2) of the Arbitration Act. Brief Facts The present application under section 11 read with section 15 of...

POCSO Act Being Enacted Subsequently Will Prevail Over SC/ST Act In Case Of Conflict: Punjab & Haryana High Court

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has reiterated if there is a conflict between the provisions of POCSO Act and the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, then provisions of the POCSO Act will be applicable as it was enacted subsequently. It also reaffirmed that a regular bail plea moved in a case registered under the provisions of the two special...

Employer Has Right To Lead Evidence Even After Faulty Domestic Enquiry: MP HC

Madhya Pradesh High Court: A single bench of Justice Vivek Jain dismissed a petition filed by a workers' union against an award of Central Government Industrial Tribunal (CGIT). The award was passed in favour of a dismissed worker. He was dismissed on account of unauthorized absence and the CGIT had upheld his dismissal. The Court held that an employer can lead evidence before a tribunal...

[POCSO Act] Quashing Of Serious Offence To Efface Evidence Already Recorded Cannot Be Done Even At Instance Of Survivor: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court dismissed a petition filed by the victim of a POCSO offence to quash the proceedings saying that serious offences are involved and the trial had reached at the end stage.The Court noted that that the accused is alleged of committing serious offences like aggravated penetrative sexual assault against the minor. The accused was the father of the victim. He is accused to...

Karnataka High Court Monthly Digest: November 2024 [Citations: 454 - 489]

Citation 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 454 to 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 489Nominal Index: Mahantesh S Nagur AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 454Siji Malayil & ANR And Union of India & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 455B. SATHYANARAYANACHAR AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 456Raja Yogi Nirmalnathji Maharaj AND KADRI JOGI (YOGISHWAR) MUTT & Others. 2024 LiveLaw...

Andhra Pradesh HC Grants Anticipatory Bail To Man Accused Of Organized Crime, Posting Allegedly Defamatory Content On CM Chandrababu Naidu

The Andhra Pradesh High Court granted anticipatory bail to a man booked for conducting organized crime and for posting allegedly defamatory content against Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu and Deputy Chief Minister Pawan Kalyan on social media which was claimed to have caused political disturbance and potential violence. Justice Harinath N in its order referred to Supreme Court's decision...

Form 26B Under Income Tax Rules Not Required For Refund Once Form 5 Under 'Vivad Se Vishwas' Act Is Issued: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that an assesse claiming refund of excess TDS (tax deduction at source) is not required to fill Form 26B under the Income Tax Rules once Form 5 of the Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 has been issued to them. “A perusal of the Rules would reveal that Form 26B is required to filled up if the assessee claims refund paid under Chapter XXVII-B of the Act,...

J&K COBA 1988 | Authorities Cannot Exceed Grounds Specified In Show Cause Notice When Taking Action Against An Individual: High Court

Reaffirming the foundational principle of administrative law that actions taken against individuals must strictly adhere to the grounds specified in the show cause notice the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has ruled that authorities cannot transgress the boundaries of the notice as such transgressions undermine the principles of natural justice and render subsequent actions...

Specific Exclusion Clause In Agreement Renders Dispute Non-Arbitrable: Punjab & Haryana High Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court bench of Justice Jagmohan Bansal has held that when there is a specific exclusion clause in the agreement, the matter shall not be referred to Arbitration. Brief Facts The applicant filed this application under section 11 of the Arbitration Act, seeking appointment of the Arbitrator. The present application was filed on the basis of an...

16-Yrs Delay In Completing AIIMS Jodhpur Trauma Centre: Rajasthan HC Pulls Up State, Expresses Inclination To Impose ₹50 Crore Cost

The Jodhpur bench of the Rajasthan High Court pulled up the State Government for persistent delays in completion of “critical infrastructure projects” at AIIMS Jodhpur including a trauma centre and expressed its inclination to impose a cost of Rs. 50 crore as well as initiate action for criminal negligence against erring officials.The court however went on to grant one last opportunity to...

Appointment Of Managing Director/Chairman Of Party As Arbitrator Is Prohibited U/S 12(5) Of Arbitration Act: J&K High Court

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court bench of Chief Justice Tashi Rabstan has held that managing director or chairman of a party to the arbitration agreement cannot be appointed as Arbitrator in light of section 12(5) read with Seventh Schedule of the Arbitration Act. Brief Facts The petitioner has filed this application under section 11 of the Arbitration Act,...