High Courts Weekly Round-Up

Allahabad High Court Marital Status Of A Daughter Alone Not A Ground For Rejecting Claim For Compassionate Appointment: Reiterates Allahabad HC [Mala Devi v. State of UP] The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court has reiterated that marital status of a daughter alone cannot be the ground for rejecting her application for compassionate appointment in terms of The U.P. Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974. With this observation, Justice Manish Mathur has directed the state to reconsider the Petitioner's application for an appointment in place of her deceased father. Allahabad HC Dismisses Challenge To Election Of Central Minister Santosh Kumar Gangwar [Rakesh Agarwal v. Santosh Kumar Gangwar] Reiterating the settled law that statements made in an election petition must be specific and backed by cogent evidence, the Single Bench comprising Justice Naheed Ara Moonis dismissed a challenge to the election of MP Santosh Kumar Gangwar, Minister of State with independent charge in the Ministry of Labour and Employment, Govt. of India. Bombay High Court Land Acquisition Proceedings Cannot Be Held Null And Void Only Because Notice Was Not Issued: Bombay HC [The State of Maharashtra v. Suryakant Sakharam Rane (deceased)] The Bombay High Court last Monday ruled that proceedings under the land acquisition act cannot be held to be null and void simply because the notice was not issued to the new purchaser of the property in question, whose name was not reflected in the revenue records. Justice Sadhna S Jadhav heard State of Maharashtra's second appeal against a judgment by District Judge, Kolhapur wherein original plaintiff's appeal was allowed and it was held that the state's acquisition was not valid as embargo of Section 22A of the Maharashtra Private Forests (Acquisition) Act, 1975 would apply as the land that was acquired, was less than 12 hectare. Bombay HC Imposes Rs 5 Lakh Cost On Adani Enterprises For Seeking Belated Review Of Order Appointing Arbitrator [Antikeros Shipping Corporation v. Adani Enterprises Ltd.] The Bombay High Court quantified Rs.5 lakh as costs to be paid to Antikeros Shipping Corporation, a company incorporated under the laws of Liberia, while allowing appeals filed by them against an order of a single judge condoning delay of 7 years in a review application by Adani Enterprises. Division bench of Chief Justice Pradeep Nandrajog and Justice Bharati Dangre set aside the single bench's order condoning delay of 7 years and observed- "The torpedo fired by the respondent is declared to be a dud and it sinks without hitting its target." Deceased Entitled To Compensation Even If He/She Boarded The Wrong Train & Died While Alighting; Bombay HC Directs Railways To Pay Rs. 8 Lakh The Bombay High Court allowed an appeal against the order of the Railway Claims Tribunal, Nagpur and directed Central railways to pay Rs.8 lakh as compensation to the family of one Arjun Gawande who died while alighting from a train at Badnera station. Justice MG Giratkar of the Nagpur bench relied on Supreme Court and Bombay High Court judgements cited by the appellant's counsel RG Bagul and held that even though the deceased boarded the wrong train which did not have a stoppage at Badnera station, the Tribunal's finding that the deceased responsible for his own death was not sustainable. ● Calcutta High Court Criminal Trial Need Not Be Split Up Against Company Which Is Refusing To Be Represented Before Court [Titec Finance Ltd. v. The State of West Bengal & Ors.] The Calcutta High Court has held that where a company having notice, fails to represent itself in criminal judicial proceedings, the courts must proceed with the trial without splitting the trial in terms of Section 317(2) of CrPC. The Single Bench comprising Justice Jay Sengupta clarified that where the non-representation of the company is deliberate, with an intention to delay the proceedings, the abovementioned requirements under Section 305(3) need not be fulfilled and the trial need not be split up in terms of Section 317(2). ● Delhi High Court Delhi HC Allows Delhi Police To Interrogate Sanjeev Chawla In Tihar Till Feb 28 [Sanjeev Kumar Chawla v. The State] Delhi High Court has allowed the Delhi Police to interrogate Sanjeev Chawla, alleged cricket bookie involved in one of cricket's biggest match-fixing scandals, in Tihar jail. The Single Bench of Justice Anu Malhotra has held that the Delhi Police will be allowed to interrogate Chawla in Tihar, only till February 28. Post that date, his arrest period of 15 days will conclude. The court very categorically highlighted that after the expiry of the said period, Delhi Police will not be permitted to further interrogate Chawla on this matter. ● Chattisgarh High Court Chattisgarh HC Confirms Death ...

High Courts Weekly Round-Up

Arabhi Anandan

Tags