slcdailylaw
  • Home
  • Topic Search
  • Advanced Search
  • Citation Search
  • Bookmarks
  • Login
  1. Home
  2. Latest Cases
(1) HIMACHAL PRADESH
Arbitral award, Burden of Proof

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996—Sections 34 & 37; Contract Act, 1872—Section 28—Scope of Interference, Patent Illegality, and Evidentiary Requirements—Judicial Review of Arbitral Awards: High Courts under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act cannot re-appreciate evidence or sit as courts of appeal over arbitral awards—Interference is limited to cases where the award is patently illegal, contravenes fundamental policy of Indian law, public interest, justice, or morality, or shocks the conscience of the court—Patent illegality occurs when an illegality goes to the root of the matter, as in unsustainable claims without proper evidence. (Paras A-C) Evidentiary Standards and Burden of Proof: Claims for head office expenses, lease money, or overheads must be substantiated with specific pleadings, c...

(2) HIMACHAL PRADESH
Quashing of proceeding

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016—Sections 14, 96, 101; Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Sections 138, 141; Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Sections 482, 397 A. Moratorium and Criminal Proceedings: The moratorium under IBC, designed to provide breathing space for a corporate debtor, does not extend to criminal proceedings under Section 138 of the NI Act. Criminal liability for dishonour of cheques remains personal and distinct from civil debt recovery, ensuring accountability and preserving trust in commercial transactions—Allowing invocation of the moratorium to evade prosecution would defeat the purpose of the NI Act. (Paras A, C, E, F) B. Quashing of Proceedings—Delay and Laches: High Courts should exercise inherent powers under Section 482 sparingly, particularly when petitions are filed after inor...

(3) HIMACHAL PRADESH

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988—Section 173—Appeal against Award of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal—Compensation for Death—Undertaking by Deceased: An undertaking given by a deceased person on their own behalf does not prevent their family members from claiming compensation for death in a motor accident—Any such undertaking purportedly on behalf of dependents is not valid. (Para 17) ...

(4) HIMACHAL PRADESH
Secondary evidence

Evidence Act, 1872—Section 65—Secondary Evidence A. Conditions for Secondary Evidence: The conditions for adducing secondary evidence under Section 65 are mandatory and not discretionary—Trial Court erred in allowing secondary evidence without satisfying the requirements of Section 65. (Paras 15, 20, 21) B. Section 65(a)—Original in Possession of Opposing Party: Mere allegation that a document was misplaced by the defendant from the Sub-Registrar’s office does not automatically establish that the original is in the defendant’s possession. (Para 16) C. Section 65(b)—Contents Admitted in Writing: Defendant’s written denial of the existence of the Will means that the requirement of admission under Section 65(b) is not satisfied. (Para 17) D. Section 65(c)—Original Lost or Dest...

(5) HIMACHAL PRADESH

A. Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006—Section 18(1) and 18(2)—Reference to Facilitation Council—Limitation—The Facilitation Council cannot reject a reference filed under Section 18(1) on the ground of limitation—Conciliation proceedings under Section 18(2) are not adjudicatory and do not require strict adherence to limitation periods. (Paras 12, 13, 15) B. Section 18(2) vs. 18(3)—Conciliation and Arbitration—Limitation Act provisions apply to arbitration under Section 18(3) but not to conciliation under Section 18(2)—Conciliation is a negotiation and settlement process, not adjudication, and time-barred claims can still be considered. (Para 14) C. Role of Facilitation Council—The Council is a statutory body under the Act and cannot exercise powers of a Civi...

Disposed of
(6) HIMACHAL PRADESH
Service Law

A. Service Law—Regularisation—Claim for Work Charge Status—Eligibility—Petitioner, engaged as daily wager Beldar in 1995 and regularized in 2007, claimed work charge status from 2003 based on 8 years of continuous service—Mandays chart confirmed service of over 240 days per year from 1995 to 2003—Petitioner held entitled to work charge status from 01.01.2003 in line with Supreme Court rulings in Surajmani and Ashwani Kumar. (Paras 5(i), 6, 10, 12) B. Service Law—Work Charge Status—Abolition of Establishment—Accrued Rights—Argument that abolition of work charge establishment in August 2005 bars benefits rejected—Right to work charge status accrues upon completion of 8 years of service (2003 in this case); subsequent abolition cannot affect accrued rights. (Para 5(iv)) ...

Disposed of
(7) HIMACHAL PRADESH

A. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988—Sections 140 & 2(30)—No-Fault Liability for Interim Compensation—Driver vs. Registered Owner—Section 140 imposes joint and several liability on the registered owner of a vehicle for interim compensation in cases of death or permanent disablement—The driver cannot be held jointly and severally liable under this provision; only the owner as defined in Section 2(30) is liable. (Paras 7, 11) B. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988—Section 2(30)—Definition of 'Owner'—The person in whose name the vehicle stands registered is the owner for the purposes of the Act—Even if the vehicle is purportedly transferred, liability remains with the registered owner until the transfer is recorded with the registering authority—This ensures certainty for accident victim...

(8) HIMACHAL PRADESH

A. Limitation Act, 1963—Section 5—Extension of Limitation—Appeal under Section 14 of H.P. Land Revenue Act—Period of limitation from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022, as extended by Supreme Court during COVID-19 pandemic, applies for computing filing period. Appeal filed within this extended period cannot be treated as time-barred; lower appellate authority erred in dismissal on limitation ground. (Paras 2, 7) B. H.P. Land Revenue Act, 1954—Section 14—Appeal—Dismissal on Limitation—Prejudice—While rejecting an appeal as time-barred, the court or authority should refrain from commenting on merits of the case, as it may prejudice the appellant. (Para 8) ...

(9) HIMACHAL PRADESH
Writ petition

A. Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987—Sections 6 & 9—Constitution of State and District Legal Services Authorities—Disciplinary Proceedings—Delegation of Power—Challenge to initiation of disciplinary proceedings by District & Sessions Judge against Senior Assistant on ground that appointing authority was SLSA. (Paras 1–3) B. Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987—Delegation of Powers—Executive Chairman, SLSA, validly delegated power to Chairman, DLSA (District Judge) to initiate disciplinary action—Delegation approved and confirmed by Member Secretary, SLSA; held justified. (Paras 4–6) C. Central Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1965—Rule 14—Disciplinary Proceedings—Initiation—Power to “draw up” or &ldq...

Disposed of
(10) HIMACHAL PRADESH
Criminal Revision

A. Probation of Offenders Act, 1958—Section 4—Release on Probation—Factors—Nature of offence, circumstances, expediency, suitability, and appropriateness for reformatory justice are relevant—Supreme Court decisions exclude offences like Section 304-A IPC from benevolent provisions. (Paras 11–12) B. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC)—Section 357—Compensation to Victim—Integral to just sentencing—Court must record reasons if compensation cannot be granted. (Para 13) C. Penal Code, 1860 (IPC)—Sections 279, 337, 338, 201—Sentence—Convict is first offender, sole breadwinner, permanent abode, facing trial for long period—Offences not punishable with death or life imprisonment—Probation Officer recommends probation; expedient to release on probation...

slcdailylaw

Tomar Publication

561, Sec-2, Jagriti Vihar, Meerut-250004

0121 3561932, +91 9458 5523 61

tomarpublication999@gmail.com

Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy

© SLC Daily law all right reserved.