Trending
Lawyer's Mistake Should Not Affect Litigant, Courts Must Be Lenient While Setting Aside Ex-Parte Decrees: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court recently emphasised that the interest of the litigant should not be affected due to the errors or mistakes committed by the lawyers. The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice Mohammed Shaffiq added that the courts should normally take a lenient view while setting aside ex parte decrees. The court added that ex parte decrees must be awarded only in...
Punjab & Haryana Bar Council To Hold Extraordinary Meeting Over High Court's Method Of Designating Senior Advocates
The Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana will hold an extraordinary meeting on October 23 to deliberate on the method adopted by the High Court in designating Senior Advocates.The Punjab and Haryana High Court on October 20, has designated 76 lawyers as Senior Advocates, among those elevated, five are women. 210 advocates had applied for Senior designation in 2024.In a notice issued by Bar...
Mere Registration Of FIR Does Not Constitute Misconduct, Increments Cannot Be Withheld On That Ground: Punjab & Haryana High Court
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that the mere registration of an FIR against an employee does not amount to misconduct and, therefore, cannot be a valid ground to withhold annual incrementsJustice Harpreet Singh Brar said, "The increment earned by an employee stands as an acknowledgment of services duly rendered during the preceding period. It is a vested right accruing over the...
O.XI R.14 CPC | Co-operative Arbitration Court Can Order Any Party To Produce Documents In Its Possession: Kerala High Court
In a recent judgment, the Kerala High Court has observed that the Co-Operative Arbitration Court conducting a trial in an election petition has the power to invoke provision under Order XI Rule 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure to order any party to produce documents in his possession as it deems necessary.Referring to Section 70(3) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969, Justice K....
MV Act | Registered Owner Liable In Accident Cases Until Legal Transfer Of Vehicle Is Completed: HP High Court
The Himachal Pradesh High Court held that a registered vehicle owner remains legally liable for an accident until ownership is formally transferred under Section 50 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, even if a sale agreement had been executed prior to the accident.The Court reiterated that: “Section 50 of the Motor Vehicles Act provides that where ownership of any motor vehicle registered...
Seeing Is Not Merely Visual, Blind Candidate Can't Be Disqualified From Recruitment If Able To Perceive & Discharge Duties: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has ruled that a blind candidate can't be ousted from recruitment for a job post if he is able to perceive and discharge required duties.Moreso, a division bench of Justices C. Hari Shankar and Ajay Digpaul ruled, when the Committee constituted under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 has identified the said post as one which can be filled by a blind/...
Scarcity Of Jobs In Country, Denying Appointment To Candidate Over Procedural Lapse Is Unjust: Punjab & Haryana High Court
Highlighting the prevailing scarcity of employment opportunities in the country, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has observed that denying a deserving candidate an appointment solely on the basis of a procedural lapse is unjust and unfair.The Court directed the issuance of an appointment letter to a candidate who was unable to join within 30 days of his selection for the post of constable,...
Delhi High Court Weekly Round-Up: October 13 To October 19, 2025
Citations 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1296 to 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1326NOMINAL INDEXLALIT @ LUCKY v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1296 Popular Front of India v. Union of India 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1297 PRAVEEN SINGH v. HIGH COURT OF DELHI AND ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1298 STATE OF NCT OF DELHI V/s MOHD. TAHIR HUSSAIN & ORS. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1299 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 v...
S.238 IBC Is Non-Obstante Clause, Overrides Provisions Of Electricity Act: Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court has held that the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 overrides the provisions of Electricity Act, 2003 read with Electricity Supply Code, 2005.A bench of Justice Arindam Sinha and Justice Prashant Kumar held“Section 238 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 is a non- obstante clause meaning it grants the IB Code a power of overriding effect on other laws, for...
When Two Or More Courts Have Jurisdiction, Parties' Choice Of Court Prevails Even If Cause Of Action Arises Elsewhere: Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court held that when parties to a contract have agreed to exclusive jurisdiction of a particular court, suit instituted in other courts is not maintainable even if the cause of action has arisen in other jurisdiction. Setting aside the interim injunction granted by the commercial court at Bengaluru, the Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and...
Ernakulam Consumer Commission Holds Aditya Birla Health Insurance Liable For Wrongful Claim Rejection
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ernakulam, bench comprising Shri D.B. Binu, President, Shri V. Ramachandran, Member, and Smt. Sreevidhia T.N, Member, held M/s Aditya Birla Health Insurance Company Ltd. liable for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice for unjustly repudiating the complainant's cashless and reimbursement claims arising from an accidental...