Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court Weekly Roundup December 4 - December 10, 2023

Nominal Index:The New India Assurance Co. Ltd Vs Safder Ali 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 305Subash Choudhary Vs J&K Special Tribunal Jammu 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 306NADEEM UR REHMAN & OTHERS Vs UT OF J&K & OTHERS 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 307M/s Oikos India Pvt. Ltd Vs M/s K.C. Hotels Pvt. Ltd 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 308Zareefa Banoo Vs Manzoor Ahmad Sheergujri 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 309Mahroz Akhter Vs Dr Azmat Gouhar 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 310Director Health Services and Another Vs. Iqbal Ahmad Baqal 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 311Judgments/Orders: Rigid Constraints Of Formal Pleadings Need Not Be Strictly Adhered To In A Claim Plea Under Motor Vehicles Act: J&K High CourtCase Title: The New India Assurance Co. Ltd Vs Safder AliCitation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 305Dismissing an appeal challenging an award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT) under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High court reitrated that in a claim petition submitted under the Motor Vehicles Act, the rigid constraints of formal pleadings need not be strictly adhered to.A bench of Justice Javed Iqbal Wani clarified that it is not mandatory for a claimant to explicitly enumerate all the details in the petition, hence allowing for a more flexible approach in presenting the case.Merely Affixing Notice On Outer Building Not Substantial Compliance With Service Unless Credible Evidence Shown: J&K High CourtCase Title: Subash Choudhary Vs J&K Special Tribunal JammuCitation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 306The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh held that merely affixing a notice on the outer part of a building structure would not be substantial compliance with actual service under Section 7(2) of the J&K Control of Building Operations Act, 1988.In allowing the plea, a single bench of Justice Javed Iqbal Wani held:"No doubt Section 7(2) provides the mode of service of notice upon the violator by affixing the same on the outer door of some conspicuous part of the unauthorizedly raised building providing that such affixing of notice would be deemed to have been duly served upon the violator, yet mere affixing of notice on the outer conspicuous part of the building cannot said to be substantial compliance of the actual service of notice and thus the theory of communication of such a notice cannot, in law, be invoked unless it is by credible evidence shown that the notice was actually affixed at site.". NEET PG | Special 'Stray Vacancy' Round Not For Upgradation, Only Meant For Candidates Who Were Not Allotted Any Seats: J&K High CourtCase Title: NADEEM UR REHMAN & OTHERS Vs UT OF J&K & OTHERS.Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 307Clarifying the mandate of Stray Round in NEET PG counselling the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that the Special Stray Vacancy Round does not function as an upgradation round, and individuals who have already secured seats in prior rounds are ineligible for any upgradation opportunities.In dismissing the review plea, a bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar added that the Special Stray Vacancy Round of counselling comes into play only when certain seats persistently remain unoccupied after the culmination of all preceding counselling rounds and is hence exclusively accessible to candidates who were not allotted any seats, either in the All India Quota or the State Quota.Territorial Challenges Do Not Undermine Core Jurisdiction: J&K High Court Says Untimely Jurisdictional Objections Cannot Invalidate DecreesCase Title: M/s Oikos India Pvt. Ltd Vs M/s K.C. Hotels Pvt. Ltd.Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 308The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that objections on territorial or pecuniary jurisdiction, if not raised at the appropriate juncture, cannot be subsequently introduced in proceedings.In such instances, a decree rendered without timely jurisdictional objections was not deemed null and void since challenges related to the territorial or pecuniary jurisdiction were not considered foundational or striking at the Court's core of jurisdiction, Justice Rajesh Sekhri explained.MV Act | Apportionment Of Compensation Not Guided by Personal Laws, Consideration Of Dependency On Deceased Paramount: J&K High CourtCase Title: Zareefa Banoo Vs Manzoor Ahmad SheergujriCitation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 309The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that the Court cannot be guided by personal law while deciding on the compensation in a claim petition since it needed to be apportioned by taking into consideration the dependency of the Claimants.Justice M.A Chowdhary clarified that only if any Claimant dies before being awarded compensation of his share, the same may be released among his legal heirs as per applicable laws of inheritance.Domestic Violence Act Doesn't Provide Windfalls, Concrete Evidence Regarding Income Needed For Fair Assessment Of Maintenance: J&K High CourtCase Title: Mahroz Akhter Vs Dr Azmat GouharCitation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 310The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has observed that concrete evidence ...

Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court Weekly Roundup December 4 - December 10, 2023

Basit Amin Makhdoomi

Tags