Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The High Court strictly noted that such a conduct is unbecoming for a person belonging to legal profession and also reprimanded the Tribunal for withholding the compensation from the petitioner due to a fee dispute between a layer and their client.
The High Court while upholding the quantum of compensation, agreed with the observation of the Trial Court that at the age of 55 years, the wife had lost her prospects vis-à-vis her personal life after being subjected to domestic violence from 1994-2008.
“Severance of employer — employee relationship can never be said to be an easy choice, for it not only results in the employee losing his livelihood, but also affects those who depend on him for their survival. And if the employer is the Indian Army, the loss is even greater, since it has the effect of suddenly displacing a soldier from the regimented lifestyle of the military”
What promised to be a comfort bowl of hot soup and bread, turned out to be an unhygienic mess for the complainant and his family travelling in Executive Class coach of New Delhi to Chandigarh Shatabdi Express.
by Vasanth Rajasekaran* and Harshvardhan Korada**
Cite as: 2024 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 22
“There can be no second opinion that preservation of human life is of paramount consideration. This is so on account of the fact that once life is lost, the status quo ante cannot be restored as resurrection is beyond the capacity of man.”
“The Tribunal must tread carefully to avoid the oversight of propriety, the practice of ex-parte orders and the imposition of damages amounting to crores of rupees.”
“When a person approaches the court and gets a declaration of law in his favour, it is expected that the State shall extend the same benefit to all the similarly situated persons without forcing those persons to approach the court of law.”
“The law of limitation in India identifies the need for limiting litigation by striking a balance between the interests of the state and the litigant. So, when the beneficiaries, for a cause of action, are minors, it cannot be said that they are sleeping over their rights.”
Calcutta High Court noted that the previous judgments and record of rights post-vesting supports petitioners’ claim for compensation.
The High Court also held that the claimant is entitled to only 80% of the total compensation amount determined and is also not entitled for compensation towards loss of future earnings due to disability.
The Calcutta High Court recognised the issue involved in the present matter transcendence beyond a mere legal dispute, as it involved the petitioner’s fundamental rights.
The complainant had booked a flight from Chennai to Jodhpur via Mumbai; however, his flight from Chennai to Mumbai was re-routed via Hyderabad without any prior information from the airlines.
“The torment on the victim has the potentiality to corrode the poise and equanimity of any civilized society. It has been rightly said that whereas a murderer destroys the physical frame of a victim, a rapist degrades and defiles the soul of a helpless female.”
“Where women are honoured, divinity blossoms there and where women are dishonoured, all actions no matter how noble remain unfruitful.”
“To conceive, to give birth and take care of a child is not only the fundamental right of the woman but also a pious role to be performed by her for existence of society. Keeping in view arduous nature of this duty, she must be provided facilities to which she is entitled.”
The High Court observed that Rule 214 of Assam Police Manual has rendered itself archaic and needs to be amended in accordance with the laws laid down by the Supreme Court.
Calcutta High Court held that the Municipality’s possession without proper acquisition procedures is deemed illegal, and the State is directed to initiate proceedings and pay compensation.
“The registered owner cannot absolve himself of the liability by contending that he has transferred the offending vehicle to a third person prior to the date of the accident.”
The Calcutta High Court observed that the benchmark for determining negligence in professional cases is the ‘reasonable standard’, fixed by the law of averages.