Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 05 To June 11

Citations 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 148 to 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 155NOMINAL INDEXRajni Devi Vs State of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 148Hakim Din Vs Akbar Noor & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 149Union of India v. S.P. Singla Construction Pvt. Ltd 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 150Raja Sajad Ahmad Wan Vs State of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 151M/s Best Crop Science Industrial Area Versus Union of India 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 152Mahant Subash Shah Vs Kabir Singh & Anr 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 153State of J&K Vs Davinder Kumar & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 154State (now UT) of J&K Vs Bashir Ahmad 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 155Judgements/Orders:Order 6 Rule 17 CPC Aims To Advance Substantial Justice Through Amendment Of Pleadings & Not To Impede It : Jammu And Kashmir High CourtCase Title: Rajni Devi Vs State of J&KCitation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 148The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reiterated that the actual purpose of Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) in the legal system is to advance the cause of justice rather than impede it.Expounding the law on the subject, Justice Javed Iqbal Wani observed that the underlying object of Order 6 Rule 17 Court should try the merits of the case that comes before it and should consequently allow the amendments that may be necessary for determining the real question in controversy between the parties, as ultimately the Courts exist for doing justice between the parties and not for punishing them.[Impleading Legal Heirs Of Deceased Defendant] Jammu & Kashmir High Court Differentiates Between Order 1 Rule 10 And Order XXII Rule 4 CPCCase Title: Hakim Din Vs Akbar Noor & Ors.Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 149Differentiating the ambit and scope of Order-1 R-10 (2) and Order-XXII R-4 CPC, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court ruled that while Order-1 R-10 (2) enables the Court to add, substitute or strike down a person impleaded as party to the suit, Order-XXII R-4 on the other hand requires the plaintiff to bring legal heirs/representatives of a deceased defendant on record.Therefore, where a case is covered by Order-XXII R-4, the provisions of Order-1 R-10 (2) stand excluded on the well known principle “general words do not derogate special provisions”, the court clarified.Requirement To Refer The Claims To Dispute Adjudication Board (DAB) Is Mandatory: Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh HCCase Title: Union of India v. S.P. Singla Construction Pvt. Ltd.Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 150The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that the requirement to refer the dispute to DAB, as per the GCC of FIDIC Contracts, is mandatory and the failure to comply with the provision results in making the dispute non-arbitrable.The bench of Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul held that when the agreement between the parties provides for reference of claims to DAB as pre-arbitration requirement and also provides for the consequences for the non-compliance, the parties must necessarily follow the agreed procedure and failure would result in the claims becoming non-arbitrable.Jammu & Kashmir High Court Acquits Man In 22 Years Old Rape CaseCase Title: Raja Sajad Ahmad Wan Vs State of J&K.Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 151The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court acquitted a man accused of having committed a rape about 22 years ago. It observed that non-examination of the material Prosecution witnesses i.e. the Doctor and the Investigating Officer, not only causes prejudice to the case of the accused, but also to the case of the Prosecution and creates a reasonable doubt against his involvement in the offence.GST Budgetary Support Scheme Can’t Be Interpreted Liberally: J&K And Ladakh High CourtCase Title: M/s Best Crop Science Industrial Area Versus Union of IndiaCitation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 152The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Courts held that the GST Budgetary Support Scheme cannot be interpreted liberally.The bench of Chief Justice N. Kotiswar Singh and Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul observed that the new scheme provides certain benefits by way of budgetary support to such units that were granted excise duty exemption under an earlier tax regime prior to the introduction of the GST regime. However, budgetary support is conditional and not blanket.No Appeal Or Revision Against Delay Condonation In Filing Application U/S 34 For Setting Aside Arbitral Award: Jammu & Kashmir High CourtCase Title: Mahant Subash Shah Vs Kabir Singh & AnrCitation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 153The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that no appeal or revision would lie against an order allowing an application for condonation of delay accompanying an application filed under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act for setting aside arbitral award.A bench of Justice Javed Iqbal Wani said the legislature by using expression an appeal shall lie from the orders provided therein "and from no others" in Section 37 (Appealable orders) has taken away the right to appeal against all orders except specified in Section 37 (1) and (2).Examination-In-Chief Of Witness Can't...

Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 05 To June 11

Basit Amin Makhdoomi

Tags