Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court Monthly Digest: March 2024

Nominal Index:Neelam Sharma Vs Ashok Kumar 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 31Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Dr. Karan Singh 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 32Choudhary Piara Singh Vs Kuldeep Singh 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 33UT of J&K Vs Ram Rattan 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 34Simranjeet Singh Vs Union Of India 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 35Gulab Singh Vs Kuldeep Singh 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 36Jehangir Ahmad Mir Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 37Ashok Kumar Vs Union of India through Secretary to Govt Industries Department 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 38J&K Housing Board Vs Smt Harbans Kour 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 39Smt. Rachna Gupta Vs Dr. Parmodh Baru 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 40Mohd. Shafi Masi Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 41Mohd. Jameel Vs The State of Jammu and Kashmir 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 42Baldev Singh Vs State of Jammu & Kashmir 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 43Anil Kumar Aggarwal V/s Enforcement Directorate th. its Assistant Director, Jammu 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 44Union of India Vs Chain Singh & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 45Amit Kumar Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 46Om Prakash Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 47Shani Devi Vs Fr. Tomi Principal Christ School 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 48Shabir Ahmad Wani Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 49Jagdish Kumar Vs State of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 50UT of Jammu and Kashmir Vs Rahul Kumar 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 51Qadeer Hussain Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 52Khursheed Ahmad Lone vs Director Social Forestry And Others 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 53Qadeer Hussain Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 54Baseerat-ul-Ain Vs NIA 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 55Ghar Singh Vs University Of Jammu 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 56Vijay Singh Vs Surjit Singh 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 57X” Juvenile V/s Union Territory of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 58Director, Rural Development, Kashmir, Srinagar Vs Abdul Qayoom 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 59Athar Mushtaq Khan Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 60University of Kashmir Vs Saif-Ud-Din Mir 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 61Mohd. Mahroof Vs Union Of India 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 62Sukhdev Singh Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 63Khazan Singh Vs Baldev Singh 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 64TASLEEM ARIF Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 65Munni Vs Presiding Officer Motor Accident Claim Tribunal Kathua 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 66Zeenat Habib Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 67Tajinder Singh @ Jinda Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 68Muneeb Rasool Shenwari Vs RK Goyal & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 69Judgments/Orders:Co-Sharer of Property Cannot Be Restrained From Raising Construction On Exclusive Portion of Joint Property: J&K High CourtCase Title: Neelam Sharma Vs Ashok KumarCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 31Upholding the exclusive construction rights of co-sharers in a joint property the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that a co-sharer of a property who is in exclusive possession of a specific portion of the joint holding cannot be prevented from constructing on that portion.Justice Javed Iqbal Wani observed, “A co-sharer of a property, who is in exclusive possession of a joint holding, cannot be restrained from raising construction on that portion of the joint holding of which he is in exclusive possession”.Leasehold Interest In Land Is Asset Of Company, Capable Of Valuation: Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High CourtCase Title: Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Dr. Karan SinghCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 32The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that leasehold interest in the land is an asset of the company and is capable of valuation. As such, it is to be included in the value of the assets of M/s. Jyoti Private Limited so as to determine the fair market value of shares held by the assessee as well as other shareholders.The bench of Justice Tashi Rabstan and Justice Puneet Gupta, while upholding the ITAT's order, observed that the fair market value is defined under Section 2(22B) of the Act as the price that such an asset would ordinarily fetch on sale in the open market. Therefore, for the purposes of computation of capital gain, the fair market value has to be determined, not the value of shares; the valuation of shares is to be made under Rule 1D of the Wealth Tax Rules.[Cheque Dishonour] Prioritize Compensation In Sentencing U/S 138: J&K High Court Reiterates Compensatory Aspect Of Negotiable Instruments ActCase Title: Choudhary Piara Singh Vs Kuldeep SinghCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 33The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that criminal courts must prioritize compensating the complainant when imposing a fine on an accused convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (NI Act) for dishonoring cheques.A bench comprising Justice M A Chowdhary stressed that for the compensatory aspect to be duly considered, the sentence imposed should align with the cheque amount, if not exceed it. This ensures that any fine imposed can be utilized to compensate the complainant, as per the provisions of Section 357 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) 1973, the bench underscored.Review Of Judgements Is An Exception To General Rule, Parties Can't Be Permitted To Seek Re-Hearing Under...

Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court Monthly Digest: March 2024

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags