tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-39161501409354256972024-03-13T17:20:29.443+05:30JudgementsRakesh Shekhawathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17830031877729972398noreply@blogger.comBlogger225125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3916150140935425697.post-49396496399341667172014-08-29T22:47:00.003+05:302014-08-29T23:01:18.624+05:30Mr.Ramanbhai Mathurbhai Patel V State of Maharashtra & Anr.
Negotiable Instruments Act - Criminal Procedure Code- Section 177 - If a cheque payable at all branches,
the drawer of the cheque had given an option to the banker of payee to get the
cheque cleared from the nearest available branch of bank of the drawer. It,
therefore, follows that the cheque has been dishonoured within the
territorial jurisdiction of Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, that Rakesh Shekhawathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17830031877729972398noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3916150140935425697.post-40391296562253194542014-08-05T08:48:00.000+05:302014-08-05T10:29:37.473+05:30Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr.
Negotiable Instruments Act - Criminal Procedure Code- Section 177 - A complaint about a bounced cheque must only be filed at the place where the bank dishonoured it. The
general rule stipulated under Section 177 of
Cr.P.C applies to cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act. Prosecution in such cases can, therefore, be launched
against Rakesh Shekhawathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17830031877729972398noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3916150140935425697.post-13692874042444347612014-07-24T22:27:00.001+05:302014-07-26T07:46:03.653+05:30Rajesh Valel Puthuvalil & Anr. Vs. Inland Waterways Authority of India & Anr.
Acquisition of land and building - Rs.1,43,430/- awarded towards value of building - Valuation not supported by any record - Reference court accepted commissioner's valuation of building at Rs.4,45,000/ - In appeal, High Court reduced the same to Rs.3,50,000/- on guess estimate, holding that the value of construction fixed by Reference Court was on higher side. Held, there being Rakesh Shekhawathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17830031877729972398noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3916150140935425697.post-32161964869880470132014-07-22T22:50:00.000+05:302014-07-22T22:50:19.895+05:30Manohar Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Anr.
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 498A - Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 - Section 4 - A
compoundable offence can be compounded in view of a compromise, if the
Court finds it proper to do so even after conviction if the appeal is
pending.
Supreme Court of India
Criminal Appeal No.1498 OF 2014 [Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.8795 of 2012]
Hon'ble Rakesh Shekhawathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17830031877729972398noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3916150140935425697.post-62578738122089989752014-07-22T22:43:00.000+05:302014-07-22T22:43:27.013+05:30Yogendra Yadav & Ors. Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Anr.
Sections 341, 323, 324, 504 and 307 r/w 34 - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 231(2) r/w 311 -High
Court can quash a criminal proceeding in exercise of its power under
Section 482 of the Code having regard to the fact that the parties have
amicably settled their disputes and the victim has no objection, even
though the offences are non-compoundable.
continuation
of Rakesh Shekhawathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17830031877729972398noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3916150140935425697.post-53059401094022655752014-07-22T22:30:00.003+05:302014-07-22T22:45:56.730+05:30Sathiyamoorthy And Ors. Vs. State Represented By The Inspector of Police, Madurai
Indian
Penal Code, 1860 - Section 325 and 341 - Since the accused and the
victim have entered into a compromise, it would be in the interest of
both sides to reduce the sentence awarded to the accused to the sentence
already undergone.
Supreme Court of India
Criminal Appeal No.1169 OF 2014
Hon'ble Judge(s): Ranjana Prakash Desai & N.V. Ramana
Date of Judgment: 21/07/2014
Rakesh Shekhawathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17830031877729972398noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3916150140935425697.post-45236534191696680922014-07-21T22:51:00.001+05:302014-07-21T23:02:18.741+05:30C.K. Dasegowda & Ors. Vs. State Of Karnataka
Indian Penal Code - Sections 34, 114, 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 326, 307; Criminal Procedure Code - Sections 209, 235(1), 313- Appeal is
filed by the appellants questioning the correctness of the judgment and
final order dated 11.08.2010 passed by the High Court. setting aside
the order of acquittal of the appellants passed by the trial court
thereby Rakesh Shekhawathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17830031877729972398noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3916150140935425697.post-20697922764200400522014-04-17T18:20:00.000+05:302014-04-17T18:50:20.739+05:30Nagar Palika Parishad, Mihona and Anr. Vs. Ramnath and Anr
Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Section 38 - Perpetual injunction when granted.
M.P. Municipalities Act, 1961 - Section 187 - Section 319 - Bar of suit in absence of notice.
Supreme Court of India
Civil Appeal No. 4454 OF 2014
Hon'ble Judge(s): SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA, V. GOPALA GOWDA.
Date of Judgment: APRIL 9 2014
Nagar Palika Parishad, Rakesh Shekhawathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17830031877729972398noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3916150140935425697.post-73619967662474237642014-04-14T13:42:00.000+05:302014-04-14T13:43:47.714+05:30V. Kala Bharathi & Ors. Vs. The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Branch Chittoors
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Order XXI Rule (1) -Whether the amount deposited by the judgment debtor in a decree is to be
adjusted first towards interest or towards principal decretal amount? -
If the amount deposited by the judgment debtor falls short of the
decretal amount, the decree-holder is entitled to apply the rule of
appropriation by appropriating the amount Rakesh Shekhawathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17830031877729972398noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3916150140935425697.post-63376759113966439852014-04-14T13:16:00.004+05:302014-04-14T13:16:49.753+05:30Brijesh Kumar & Ors. Vs. State of Haryana & Ors
Limitation Act S.5 - Condonation of delay -
Delay of more than 10 years in filing appeal - No sufficient grounds
assigned - simply because in some of the cases filed appeal in time,
were given enhanced compensation - there is no obligation on the part of
court to condone the delay . Order of High Court refusing to condone delay giving cogent
and valid reasons is proper. The Courts Rakesh Shekhawathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17830031877729972398noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3916150140935425697.post-85522426956054184732014-04-14T13:02:00.003+05:302014-04-14T13:18:29.264+05:30Kesharbai @ Pushpabai Eknathrao Nalawade (D) by LRS. & ANR. Vs. Tarabai Prabhakarrao Nalawade & Ors
Civil Procedure Code O.20, R. 18 -Suit for partition - Burden of proof - Plaintiff claiming that suit property though
joint was left out of family arrangement - Burden to prove that suit
property is not self-acquired property is on plaintiff ” Cannot be
placed on defendant.
Where in joint family
partition has been made it is presumed that there is complete partition
of all Rakesh Shekhawathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17830031877729972398noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3916150140935425697.post-72248827750181728622012-04-19T20:46:00.000+05:302012-04-19T20:46:08.299+05:30United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Laxmamma & Ors.Motor Vehicles Act - Sections 145, 147 and 149- Liability of insurance company towards third party when cheque of insured is bounced. Where the policy of insurance is issued by an authorized insurer on receipt of cheque towards payment of premium and such cheque is returned dishonoured, the liability of authorized insurer to indemnify third parties in respect of the liability which that policy Rakesh Shekhawathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17830031877729972398noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3916150140935425697.post-8880279038756869222012-04-06T22:51:00.000+05:302012-04-06T22:51:57.550+05:30Rameshkumar Agarwal Vs. Rajmala Exports Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order 6 Rule 17- While deciding the application for amendment ordinarily the Court must not refuse bona fide, legitimate, honest and necessary amendments and should never permit mala fide and dishonest amendments. The purpose and object of Order VI Rule 17 of the Code is to allow either party to alter or amend his pleadings in such manner and on such terms as may be Rakesh Shekhawathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17830031877729972398noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3916150140935425697.post-71504654552202193182012-02-21T00:18:00.000+05:302012-02-21T00:18:44.912+05:30Ashok Kumar Vs. District Magistrate, Basti & AnrLimitation Act- Delay Condonation- A party who has slept over his rights is not entitled to the discretionary relief.In the instant case, it is the case of the appellant that his mother was suffering from illness and, therefore, he could not file the appeal within statutory period of limitation against the judgment and order passed by the Writ Court. But, in support of that contention, the Rakesh Shekhawathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17830031877729972398noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3916150140935425697.post-40333731358117647292012-02-19T23:54:00.000+05:302012-02-19T23:54:20.403+05:30Dipak Shubhashchandra Mehta Vs. C.B.I. & ANR.Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Bail Application - The Court granting bail should exercise its discretion in a judicious manner and not as a matter of course. Though at the stage of granting bail, a detailed examination of evidence and elaborate documentation of the merits of the case need not be undertaken, there is a need to indicate in such orders reasons for prima facie concluding why bail Rakesh Shekhawathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17830031877729972398noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3916150140935425697.post-78719762456839817862012-02-19T23:22:00.000+05:302012-02-19T23:22:45.139+05:30Krushnakant B. Parmar Vs. Union of India & Anr.Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964- Absence from duty without any application or prior permission may amount to unauthorised absence, but it does not always mean wilful. There may be different eventualities due to which an employee may abstain from duty, including compelling circumstances beyond his control like illness, accident, hospitalisation, etc., but in such case the employee Rakesh Shekhawathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17830031877729972398noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3916150140935425697.post-4849578761208192552012-02-19T23:01:00.000+05:302012-02-19T23:01:09.372+05:30Rattiram & Ors. Vs. State of M. P. Through Inspector of PoliceCode of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 193– Non Compliance of Section 193 – Cognizance by Session Court. Objection relating to non-compliance of Section 193 of the Code, which eventually has resulted in directly entertaining and taking cognizance by the Special Judge under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, does not vitiate the trial and on theRakesh Shekhawathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17830031877729972398noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3916150140935425697.post-82256117048596753722012-02-03T07:54:00.001+05:302012-02-03T08:03:14.177+05:30Centre for Public Interest Litigation and others vs Union of India and others & Dr. Subramanian Swamy vs Union of India and othersConstitution of India 1950- Article 51A - The power of judicial review should be exercised with great care and circumspection and the Court should not ordinarily interfere with the policy decisions of the Government in financial matters. There cannot be any quarrel with the proposition that the Court cannot substitute its opinion for the one formed by the experts in the particular field and due Rakesh Shekhawathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17830031877729972398noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3916150140935425697.post-79805478939713731472012-02-01T22:19:00.000+05:302012-02-01T22:19:41.094+05:30Dr. Subramanian Swamy vs Dr. Manmohan Singh And Anr.
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - In every case where an application is made to an appropriate authority for grant of prosecution in connection with an offence under P.C. Act it is the bounden duty of such authority to apply its mind urgently to the situation and decide the issue doing so, the authority must make a conscious effort to ensure the rule of lawRakesh Shekhawathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17830031877729972398noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3916150140935425697.post-6401296866984711292012-01-28T22:59:00.001+05:302012-01-28T23:03:35.600+05:30Sudevanand Vs. State Through CBICriminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 391 - The provision is not limited to recall of a witness for further cross-examination with reference to his previous statement. The Appellate Court may feel the necessity to take additional evidence for any number of reasons to arrive at the just decision in the case. The law casts a duty upon the court to arrive at the truth by all lawful means. ImpugnedRakesh Shekhawathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17830031877729972398noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3916150140935425697.post-30066951046917859472012-01-24T22:50:00.000+05:302012-01-24T22:50:05.347+05:30Horil Vs. Keshav & Anr.
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Order XXIII Rule 3-A - Revenue courts are neither equipped nor competent to effectively adjudicate on allegations of fraud that has overtones of criminality and the courts really skilled and experienced to try such issues are the courts constituted under the Code of Civil Procedure. It is also well settled that under section 9 of the Civil Procedure Code, Rakesh Shekhawathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17830031877729972398noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3916150140935425697.post-62551398185055281162012-01-24T22:18:00.000+05:302012-01-24T22:18:14.498+05:30State of U.P. & Ors. Vs. Ambrish Tandon & Anr.
Indian Stamp Act, 1899 - Merely because the property is being used for commercial purpose at the later point of time may not be a relevant criterion for assessing the value for the purpose of stamp duty. The nature of user is relatable to the date of purchase and it is relevant for the purpose of calculation of stamp duty.
Supreme Court of India
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 735 OF 2012 (Rakesh Shekhawathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17830031877729972398noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3916150140935425697.post-40113786068346123792011-12-31T19:40:00.001+05:302011-12-31T19:40:25.783+05:30United India Insurance Co.Ltd. vs Shila Datta
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Ss. 149(1), (2) & (7), 147, 158(6), 163-A, 165, 166 and 17 - Whatever be the reason for insurer being made a party, once it is a party, it can raise all contentions that are available to the owner or driver to resist the claim. Maintainability of a joint appeal by the owner of the vehicle (Insured) and Insurer - the presence of the insurer as a co-appellant Rakesh Shekhawathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17830031877729972398noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3916150140935425697.post-37814365732111381312011-12-31T18:40:00.000+05:302011-12-31T18:52:32.614+05:30Parimal vs Veena @ Bharti
Code of Civil Procedure-
Order 9 Rule 13 - Ex-parte
decree against a defendant has to be set aside if the party satisfies
the Court that summons had not been duly served or he was prevented by
sufficient cause from appearing when the suit was called on for hearing. "Sufficient
Cause" is an expression which has been used in large number of
Statutes. The meaning of the word "sufficientRakesh Shekhawathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17830031877729972398noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3916150140935425697.post-44565045546297740052011-12-02T22:47:00.001+05:302011-12-02T22:56:02.605+05:30K.N. Govindan Kutty Menon Vs. C.D. Shaji
Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 - Section 21 - Every award of the Lok Adalat shall be deemed to be a decree of a civil court and as such it is executable by that Court.
- Lok Adalat can pass decree in criminal cases. The Act does not make out any such distinction between the reference made by a civil court and criminal court. - There is no restriction on the power of the Lok Adalat to Rakesh Shekhawathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17830031877729972398noreply@blogger.com0