Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
Allahabad High Court said that as the compensation has already been assessed by the authorities to the tune of Rs. 1,33,05,600/-, thus no question arises for interfering for awarding higher compensation
Bombay High Court observed that it is the farmer’s legal right to get compensation and for a person who is vested with a legal right, the demand for justice goes hand in hand.
In absence of any explanation suggesting that the wife was incapable of working again, the Court stated that she is legally bound to meet her own expenses and should only seek supportive maintenance from her husband.
The Court only expressed its prima facie view and final orders in the writ appeal on merits will be passed after hearing the parties in full, uninfluenced by any of the observations made in this order. Therefore, the Senior Advocate was not prevented from placing his contentions to sustain the order of the Single Judge at the time of final hearing.
Jharkhand High Court commented that the State Police’s lackadaisical attitude to arrest anyone and put him in custody made the petitioner suffer humiliation, who was having a bright career and completed SSC exam.
“It is for the Doctors to take a decision and continue the treatment by following the medical protocol. Contrarily, High Court cannot interfere with the opinions of the medical expert by acting as an expert body which is not desirable, and it will lead to excess exercise of powers of judicial review conferred under Article 226 of the Constitution”
Delhi High Court observed that Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board v. R. Rajappa, 1978 (3) SCR 207 acts as a North star for the courts to reach the conclusion regarding the applicability of the Industrial Dispute Act to an organization by laying down elaborate guidelines with respect to the definition of ‘industry’ under Section 2(j) of the Industrial Dispute Act.
An arbitral tribunal is also considered a court for the purposes of adjudication of claims before it and is often subject to the requirement of providing reasons while granting a party any relief, not for the purposes of adjudicating the validity of an order but for the satisfaction, understanding and notional justice for all the parties involved.
Madras High Court said that the RBI guidelines are issued not as a formality, but the entities subjected to the RBI regulations should comply with the conditions of the master circular in its true letter and spirit
The Commission held that CIAL’s inadequate rain coverage while boarding flight caused a great deal of agony to the complainant as he got drenched in the rain and suffered fever for 3 days.
The Commission found Apple India to be liable for selling defective goods under the provisions of Consumer Protection Act, 2019
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts in April 2023
![district consumer disputes redressal commission [dcdrc], kamrup](https://www.scconline.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/district-consumer-disputes-redressal-commission-dcdrc-kamrup-440x293.webp)
The Commission found that the management of Galleria Cinemas was negligent for not ensuring proper hygienic conditions for their viewers.
Madras High Court said that the people of the country who co-operate by offering themselves voluntarily for sterilization reasonably expect that after undergoing the operation, they would be able to avoid further pregnancy and consequent birth of additional child.
The Commission observed that Malayalis have sentimental attachment towards ‘Thiruonam Sadya’; therefore, waiting for a long time and eventually not getting the ‘Sadya’ can be quite frustrating.
“The prime concern and endeavour of law should be to secure justice on the basis of truth, which ought to be unearthed through a committed and competent investigating agency.” observes the Court.
The Court observed that for determination of compensation, the Consumer Forum must examine the time value for money, an in-depth analysis of all the facts and materials surrounding factors, including uncertainties of market are to be considered.
National Green Tribunal said that the State has to take precautions to prevent such incidents in future, apart from paying compensation with liberty to recover the same from the entity.
If the business entity involved in hazardous activities fails to pay compensation, the State is liable to pay for the failure to ensure safety. Citizens are entitled to safety from hazards of business activities having potential for incidents which may cause death and injuries.
NGT said that though basic liability is of violator of law, where law violator is not made to pay compensation, the State is liable to pay compensation as per its duty as a welfare State