{"id":305479,"date":"2023-10-22T18:00:46","date_gmt":"2023-10-22T12:30:46","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=305479"},"modified":"2023-10-22T17:59:19","modified_gmt":"2023-10-22T12:29:19","slug":"high-court-weekly-round-up-october-2023-legal-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/22\/high-court-weekly-round-up-october-2023-legal-news\/","title":{"rendered":"HIGH COURT OCTOBER 2023 WEEKLY ROUNDUP| Stories on Humans of Bombay; Obscenity; Bigg Boss Series Broadcasting; Sarpanch elections and more"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT<\/p>\n

Allahabad HC directs Magistrate to conclude NI Act proceedings expeditiously without going into unnecessary technicality<\/p>\n

In an application filed to direct the Additional Civil Judge\/ Judicial Magistrate to conclude the trial under Section 138 Negotiable Act, within a stipulated period, Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal, J. directed the Additional Civil Judge to conclude the trial of complaint case under Section 138 N.I. Act, expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, strictly in accordance with statutory provision of Sections 143(2) and 143(3) of the N.I. Act. Read more<\/b><\/a><\/p>\n

Explained | Allahabad High Court’s verdict on burden of proving claim for tax concession<\/p>\n

In a sales tax revision filed against the judgment and order dated 26-05-2022 passed by Commercial Tax Tribunal for the assessment year 2013 — 2014, Piyush Agrawal, J. while dismissing the revision, has held that the burden to prove that concession is upon the assessee in original proceedings. However, in reassessment proceedings, the burden shifts upon the department to prove that the assessee had wrongly claimed the concession. Read more<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

BOMBAY HIGH COURT<\/p>\n

Bombay High Court denies appointment of arbitrator for dispute against MSME<\/p>\n

In a bunch of applications filed under Section 11<\/a> of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996<\/a> seeking appointment of arbitrator, Manish Pitale, J. rejected the same on the ground of maintainability since the respondent was a micro, small and medium enterprise (‘MSME’). Read more<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n

Bombay High Court| Wearing short skirts, dancing provocatively or making gestures cannot be per se obscene acts<\/p>\n

In an application filed by the applicant seeking to quashing FIR registered at Umred Police Station, Nagpur Rural for the offences punishable under Sections 294<\/a> and 34<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a>, Sections 110<\/a>, 131-A<\/a>, 33-A, 112<\/a> and 117<\/a> of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951<\/a> and Section 65(e)<\/a> of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949<\/a>, is heard and disposed of finally, a division bench of Valmiki Sa Menezes, and Vijay Joshi, JJ., quashed the FIR held that the ingredients of an offence under Section 294 of IPC, Sections 110, 131-A, 33-A, 112 and 117 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 and Section 65(e)<\/a> of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949<\/a> are not made out. Read more<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n

CALCUTTA HIGH COURT<\/p>\n

Empanelment based on merit prevails over panel expiry plea, Calcutta High Court directs to revisit recruitment process<\/p>\n

In a writ petition challenging an order dated 05-12-2018 issued by the Commissioner of School Education (respondent 2) where the petitioner, a member of the ‘Rajbanshi’ community, was denied appointment to the post of primary school teacher under the Scheduled Caste Exempted category as part of the Recruitment Process of primary school teachers in 2006, a single-judge bench comprising of Rajarshi Bharadwaj,* J., based on the principles of substantial justice, held that the petitioner should not be deprived of appointment on the purported expiration of the panel. Read more<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n

Calcutta High Court quashes conviction under POCSO Act; Calls for Legal Reform and safeguarding rights of adolescents in consensual relationships<\/p>\n

In an appeal against conviction under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012<\/a> (POCSO Act) where the question of criminalization of consensual relationships between older adolescents and the need for legal reform to address the evolving understanding of adolescent sexuality was raised, a Division bench comprising of Partha Sarathi Sen*<\/span> and Chitta Ranjan Dash, JJ., quashed the appellant’s conviction under the POCSO Act and the IPC due to the unique circumstances of the case, including the consensual nature of the relationship and the subsequent birth of a child. Read more<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Eviction suit cannot be stayed amid pending declaratory suit when scope of inquiry in two suits is different: Calcutta High Court<\/p>\n

In an application under Article 227<\/a> of the Constitution of India<\/a>, filed by the petitioner (defendant 2) challenging an order dated 16-08-2023, passed by the Civil Judge, Alipore, in a suit for eviction, a single-judge bench comprising of Hiranmay Bhattacharyya,*<\/span> J., held that that the eviction suit cannot be stayed on the ground of the pendency of the declaratory suit since the scope of inquiry in the two suits is different. Read more<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Writ Court cannot resolve Private\/Contractual Disputes or Questions of Ownership in Land Dispute Cases: Calcutta High Court<\/p>\n

In a writ petition where the primary issue was the ownership of the land, which had been in dispute since 1972, a single bench comprising of Bibek Chaudhuri,*<\/span> J., held that this dispute should be resolved by a civil court, not a writ court. The Court affirmed that while illegal, irrational, or malafide actions of the State or its instrumentalities are open to judicial review, a writ court should not be used to resolve private disputes, contractual issues, or questions of ownership. Read more<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Court has wide discretion to interpret ‘What is cruelty’, literally and contextually: Calcutta High Court upholds divorce on ground of ‘Cruelty’<\/p>\n

In an appeal against the divorce and custody proceedings, a division bench comprising of Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury*<\/span> and Soumen Sen, JJ., held the husband’s behavior, such as withdrawing from the company of his wife, living separately in the same house, and subjecting her to physical and mental abuse, amounted to cruelty and therefore, case of divorce is proved. Regarding custody of the child, the Court held that the husband is not a fit person to have custody due to his non-payment of maintenance and lack of cooperation. Read more<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n

W.B. Panchayat Election 2023 | Calcutta High Court issues ‘Rule NISI’ under Rule 19 of Calcutta High Court Contempt of Court Rules, 1975<\/p>\n

In a writ petition revolving around allegations of non-compliance with Court orders by the State Election Commission related to the deployment of central forces for election security in West Bengal, leading to concerns about the integrity of the election process in West Bengal, a division bench comprising of T.S. Sivagnanam,*<\/span> CJ., and Uday Kumar, J., issued Rule NISI under Rule 19 of the Calcutta High Court Contempt of Court Rules, 1975. Read more<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

No public interest involved in distributorship decision amidst land ownership dispute; Calcutta High Court upholds LPG distributorship grant<\/p>\n

In a writ petition related to a dispute over the distribution of Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) distributorship under the Rajib Gandhi Gramin LPG Vitrak (RGGLV) Scheme on a portion of the joint property for which partition suit is pending, a single-judge bench comprising of Bibek Chaudhuri,*<\/span> J., held that when a decision involves a commercial transaction, it is primarily guided by commercial considerations, including price, quality, ability to deliver goods or services, and past experience. The Court further held that no public interest or public law element was involved in the distributorship decision made by IOCL, therefore, the same cannot be held as arbitrary or irrational. The Court upheld the private respondent’s LPG distributorship from IOCL. Read more<\/b><\/a><\/p>\n

Arbitrator’s failure to decide on Interest Claim amounts to a “Decision”, Calcutta High Court allows challenge under Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act<\/p>\n

In an application seeking clarification on whether the arbitrator’s refusal or disinclination to decide on the applicant’s claim for interest under the MSMED Act amounts to a “decision” and whether the petitioner has the right to challenge this decision in a petition filed under Section 34<\/a> of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996<\/a>, a single-judge bench comprising of Moushumi Bhattacharya,*<\/span> J., held that the refusal or failure of the arbitrator to decide on issue of interest amounted to a “decision”. The Court observed that the issue of interest is integral to the award and cannot be separated from it and appellant’s challenge to the award, based on the arbitrator’s failure to rule on the interest issue, is deemed legitimate. Read more<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

‘Jurisdiction under Article 227 is vast, should be exercised sparingly’; Calcutta High Court upholds lower court’s order to condone delay<\/p>\n

While dismissing the application filed under Article 227<\/a> of the Constitution of India<\/a>, challenging a judgment and order passed by the Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Alipore, a dingle-judge bench comprising of Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee,* J., found no illegality, irrationality, or procedural impropriety in the lower court order’s to condone the delay and set aside the order of abatement. The Court emphasized that the rules of limitation were not meant to destroy the rights of parties and that the word “sufficient cause” under Section 5 of the Limitation Act should receive a liberal construction to advance substantial justice. Read more<\/b><\/a><\/p>\n

Lack of property title renders Suit for specific performance unenforceable: Calcutta High Court<\/p>\n

In an appeal revolving around a dispute regarding a specific performance of a contract for a property transaction, a single-judge bench comprising of Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury, *<\/span> J., held that the suit for specific performance was filed outside the period of limitation according to Article 54 of the Limitation Act, 1963<\/a>. Moreover, the respondents have no title to transfer the property as per a prior compromise decree, rendering the specific performance of the contract unenforceable. Read more<\/b><\/a><\/p>\n

CHATTISGARH HIGH COURT<\/p>\n

Recording phone conversations without consent violates right to privacy under Article 21<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>: Chhattisgarh High Court<\/p>\n

In a case wherein, the petitioner-wife had challenged the order dated 21-10-2021, whereby the application filed by the respondent-husband under Section 311<\/a> of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> (‘CrPC’) was allowed, Rakesh Mohan Pandey, J., opined that the husband had recorded wife’s conversation without her knowledge and behind her back, which amounted to violation of her right to privacy and the right guaranteed under Article 21<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>. The Court opined that the Family Court, Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh (‘Family Court’) had committed an error of law in allowing an application and thus, set aside the order passed by the Family Court on 21-10-2021. Read more<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/p>\n

Delhi High Court grants eight-days interim bail to POCSO accused for participating in his brother’s last rites<\/p>\n

In a case wherein, the applicant filed the bail application, Amit Sharma, J., granted the interim bail with certain conditions for a period of eight days from the date of his release. The Court stated that the bail was subject to his furnishing personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with surety of the like amount, to the Trial Court’s satisfaction and disposed of the application. Read more<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Delhi High Court refuses relief to HULM Entertainment’s online fantasy sports App EXCHANGE22 in copyright infringement dispute<\/p>\n

Two applications were filed one under Order XXXIX Rules 1<\/a> and 2<\/a> Civil Procedure Code<\/a> (CPC) filed by the plaintiffs and the other under Order XXXIX Rule 4 CPC preferred by defendant 1, seeking vacation of ex-parte ad interim injunction granted vide order dated 13-04-2022, restraining the defendants inter alia from making available for downloads or in any manner unauthorizedly using plaintiffs’ copyrighted work through MYFAB11 App or any other similar App using the impugned application or computer programme so as to result in infringement of plaintiffs’ copyrighted works. Jyoti Singh, J., held that there is no copyright infringement by the defendants and the ex parte injunction order dated 13-04-2022 was vacated. Read more<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Delhi High Court directs its administration to ensure that Commercial Courts are made fully functional whenever infrastructure and Officers are available<\/p>\n

A Public Interest litigation (‘PIL’) was filed for issuance of an appropriate writ, order, or direction, directing the respondents to set up Commercial Courts in Delhi, in furtherance of the decision taken by the Cabinet of the Government of Delhi for creation of 22 Commercial Courts and 42 additional posts of judges in Delhi. The Division Bench of Satish Chandra Sharma, C.J., and Sanjeev Narula, J., directed that the Delhi High Court (‘High Court’) shall ensure that all the Commercial Courts were made fully functional as and when the infrastructure was available and Officers were available to be appointed to the post of District Judge, Commercial Courts. Read more<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Party given an option to choose from list of five arbitrators, shows panel is not broad based: Delhi High Court<\/p>\n

The petitioner filed a petition under Section 11<\/a> of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996<\/a> (‘Act’) seeking appointment of an arbitrator\/arbitral tribunal for adjudication of disputes, which had originated between the petitioner and the respondent in a lease agreement. Rekha Palli, J.*<\/span>, allowed the petition and held that the petitioner’s prayer for appointing an independent impartial tribunal to adjudicate the disputes between the parties was accepted. Read more<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Delhi High Court directs selling unfilled cans with infringed RED BULL marks till 31-01-2024; Directs damages of Rs. 13 lakhs<\/p>\n

A suit was filed by Red Bull AG (plaintiff) seeking a direction for the disposal of unfilled cans considering the injunction granted against the defendant for the adoption of an identical silver and blue colour combination for identical energy drinks. Prathiba M Singh, J., directed to dispose of the unfilled cans till 31-01-2024, and any goods that are not disposed of by 31-01-2024, shall be destroyed by the defendants. Read more<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

DPS, Sahibabad and Ghaziabad can use DPS marks only for an academic year 2023-2024; New name to be adopted from academic session 2025<\/p>\n

A suit was filed by Delhi Public School Society (plaintiff) seeking permanent injunction restraining misuse of the plaintiff’s name ‘DELHI PUBLIC SCHOOL’, mark ‘DPS’ along with their logos (collectively known as DPS Marks). Prathiba M Singh, J., held that the defendant school shall not use the mark ‘DPS’, logo, and name or any of the trademarks of the plaintiff after the current academic year that is ending on 31-03-2024. Read more<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Delhi High Court grants permanent injunction to Modicare Limited for its ‘WELL’ mark<\/p>\n

In a case wherein, the plaintiff had filed an application seeking summary judgment under Order 13-A of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908<\/a> (‘CPC’), Prathiba M. Singh, J.*<\/span>, opined that the present case was a fit case for the grant of summary judgment as per Order 13A of the CPC and permanently restrained the defendants from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale any cosmetics, wellness or nutraceuticals products under the formative ‘WELL’ marks. The Court further clarified that the present order did not recognize monopoly or exclusivity for the plaintiff’s ‘WELL’ marks and directed the online listings of the defendant’s product to be taken down from the defendants’ and any third-party websites. If the defendants did not take them down within two weeks, the plaintiff was free to write all online platforms to seek delisting of these infringing products. Read more<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Delhi High Court restrains ‘Biggbos.live’ website from unauthorized broadcasting of reality show ‘Bigg Boss’ on plea by Viacom18<\/p>\n

Plaintiff, Viacom18 Media (P) Ltd., a leading broadcaster had filed the present suit seeking protection of rights including reproduction rights in the programme ‘Bigg Boss’ in all formats, against Defendants 1 to 5, who were streaming and downloading websites. Prathiba M. Singh, J., restrained Defendants 1 to 5 from broadcasting, telecasting, streaming, retransmitting, and hosting any episodes of the Bigg Boss programme, which had already been telecasted or which were likely to be telecasted in future. Read more<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Wife not entitled to interim maintenance u\/s 24<\/a> of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955<\/a> when both spouses qualified and earning equally: Delhi High Court<\/p>\n

The Division Bench of Suresh Kumar Kait and Neena Bansal Krishna, JJ.*<\/span>, opined that where both the spouses were equally qualified and earning equally, interim maintenance could not be granted to the wife under Section 24<\/a> of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955<\/a> (‘the Act’). The Court concurred with the Family Court’s decision and opined that after considering the respective income and expenditure of the parties, the Family Court had rightly denied any maintenance to the wife. However, considering the income of the parties and appreciating that the child’s responsibility had to be shared by both the parents, the Court reduced the interim maintenance for the child from Rs. 40,000 to Rs. 25,000. Read more<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Situation like a theft being committed in a police station; Delhi High Court grants injunction against Indian companies to use logo similar to Japan Patent Office<\/p>\n

A suit was filed by Japan Patent Office (plaintiff) seeking an injunction against the defendants in a rather piquant situation where the plaintiff’s ‘JPO’ logo has been allegedly appropriated by the defendants who are using an identical logo for manufacture and sale of tools and kits. Prathiba M Singh, J., restrained the defendants and all others acting for or on their behalf from using the impugned JPO mark, JPO logo, as well as the impugned word mark ‘JPO PLATINUM’, or any other mark identical or like the JPO mark and logo, in respect of any products or services with immediate effect. Read more<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n

Delhi High Court stays eviction order passed against Rajya Sabha MP Raghav Chadha<\/p>\n

An appeal was filed challenging the order dated 05-10-2023 passed on a review application filed under Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC, seeking review of order dated 18-04-2023 by which the Trial Court had, on an application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 Civil Procedure Code, granted to the appellant ad-interim protection against being dispossessed from Bungalow No. AB-5, Pandara Road, New Delhi, without due process of law. Anup Jairam Bhambhani, J., stayed the impugned order and directed the appellant to re-present the plaint before the Trial Court within 03 days of the pronouncement of the present judgment and also directed the Trial Court to proceed with the matter by first deciding the application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 CPC, which stands restored before it and thereafter to proceed with the suit, in accordance with the law. Read more<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

[S. 376 IPC] Delhi High Court| Discharging an accused based on the outcome of the polygraph test at the stage of charge is erroneous<\/p>\n

A revision petition was filed by the petitioner under Sections 397, 401 read with Section 482<\/a> of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> (‘CrPC’) assailing the order on charge dated 15-02-2023 passed by Additional Sessions Judge and seeking framing of charges for offences punishable under Sections 376<\/a>, 323<\/a>, 354<\/a>, 354-B<\/a>, 506<\/a> and 34<\/a> of Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (‘IPC’) in case arising out of FIR No. 43\/2019, registered at Police Station Paschim Vihar East, Delhi for offences punishable under Sections 323, 354, 354-B, 509, 506 and 34 of IPC. Swarana Kanta Sharma, J., sets aside the impugned order to the extent whereby respondent 2 was discharged under Section 376 of IPC and respondents 4 and 5 were discharged under Section 323 and 34 of IPC.<\/span> Read more<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Delhi High Court refuses to stay the registration for the mark ‘SCHEZWAN CHUTNEY’<\/p>\n

In a case wherein, the rectification petition was filed by the petitioner, Vimal Agro Products Private Limited under Section 57<\/a> of the Trade Marks Act, 1999<\/a> (‘the TM Act’) for cancellation of trade mark ‘SCHEZWAN CHUTNEY’, Prathiba M. Singh, J., opined that the Division Bench of this Court had prima facie observed that the mark had acquired secondary significance and moreover, the issue of jurisdiction would also have to be considered first, as the petitioner in its application under Section 124 of the TM Act had clearly pleaded that the Bombay High Court had the jurisdiction. Thus, the Court stated that it was not inclined to stay the impugned trade mark registration for the mark ‘SCHEZWAN CHUTNEY’.<\/span> Read more<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

‘Failed to implement 4% reservation criteria for persons with benchmark disability’; Delhi HC sets aside 2018 recruitment advertisement published by Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan<\/p>\n

The petitioner, National Federation of the Blind (‘federation’) was aggrieved by non-implementation of statutory reservation for Persons with Disabilities (‘PwDs’), particularly for blind persons, in recruitment process by respondent, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (‘Sangathan’). The petitioner seeks implementation of statutory and constitutional mandate regarding reservations for persons with visual disabilities. The Division Bench of Satish Chandra Sharma, C.J.*<\/span>, and Sanjeev Narula, J., held that respondent has failed to implement minimum 4% reservation criteria as per Section 34<\/a> of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016<\/a> (‘the Act’) in Advertisement No. 14 (‘impugned advertisement’) published by respondent for recruitment and thus, the same was set aside. The Court further held that the impugned advertisement distinguished persons with disabilities from others and had put a restriction on their potential to participate in the recruitment process to their full ability and as per Section 33 of the Act, the primary function of identification of posts was of appropriate government, thus, there was no power with respondent or its committee to revisit and cut short the list notified by the government. Read more<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n

Non-possession of valid Permit entitles Insurance Company to recover compensation paid, from the owner of vehicle: Delhi High Court<\/p>\n

In a case wherein an appeal had been filed challenging the Award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rohini, Delhi (‘Tribunal’), wherein the liberty was granted by the Tribunal to Respondent 1, to recover compensation paid by Respondents 2 to 5, from the appellant, Navin Chawla, J.*<\/span>, held that non-possession of a valid and effective Permit shall entitle the Insurance Company to seek a right to recover the compensation paid to the claimants from the owner of the offending vehicle and such a right would also be available to the Insurance Company where the offending vehicle was being operated at the time of the accident at a place for which it did not have a valid Permit. Read more<\/b><\/a><\/p>\n

Humans of Bombay cannot claim copyright on images, photographs or videos; Delhi High Court refuses injunction against People of India<\/p>\n

A suit was filed by Humans of Bombay (plaintiff) seeking an injunction against People of India (defendants) restraining the infringement of copyright of content consisting of photographs, literary works forming the basis of the stories, videos and creative expression, which includes the manner of presenting the said stories. Prathiba M Singh., J., held that no copyright can be claimed either by Humans of Bombay or People of India insofar as the images, photographs or videos submitted by the individuals or subjects from own private collections are concerned. Read more<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Delhi High Court upholds ASI’s selection procedure for obtaining new licence to work as photographers in protected monuments<\/p>\n

In a case wherein a writ petition was filed seeking issuance of appropriate directions from this Court for quashing and setting aside Clause 2.7 of “The Policy for Archaeological Survey of India (‘ASI’) Photographers to perform within Centrally Protected Monuments” (‘ASI Photographers Policy’) notified by ASI, the Division Bench of Manmohan and Mini Pushkarna*<\/span>, JJ., held that there was a reasonable classification that had been made by ASI for revalidation of licences of the photographers who had licence prior to 2012 and grant of licence to the photographers who were the new entrants after 2012 who had no prior licence in photography from ASI. Thus, there was no fault with the policy of ASI which was reasonable and fair. The Court further held that obtaining licence by following the due selection procedure laid down by ASI did not in any manner violate the right of the petitioners under Article 19(1)(g)<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>. Read more<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n

[Good day v. Good time] Delhi High Court grants interim injunction in favour of Britannia Industries, restrains sale of Good Time cookies<\/p>\n

In a case wherein, the plaintiff, Britannia Industries Limited had filed an application under Order 39 Rules 1<\/a> and 2<\/a> of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908<\/a>, Prathiba M. Singh, J.* restrained the defendants till the next date of hearing, from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale butter cookies or any other products in the infringing packaging under the name ‘GOOD TIME or GOOD TIME BUTTER COOKIES’ or any other mark which was identical or deceptively similar to the plaintiff’s mark ‘GOOD DAY or GOOD DAY BUTTER COOKIES’.<\/span> Read more<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Maintenance proceedings under Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956<\/a> are not suits, ad valorem court fee not liable to be paid: Delhi High Court<\/p>\n

In a case wherein, the appeal was filed against the order dated 22-02-2020, whereby the Family Court had directed Appellant 2 to pay the ad-valorem court fee on the amount claimed by her, the Division Bench of Sanjeev Sachdeva*<\/span> and Vikas Mahajan, JJ., opined that the proceedings under Section 18<\/a> and 20<\/a> of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956<\/a> (‘HAMA’) were not suits and ad valorem court fee was not liable to be paid, and accordingly set aside the order dated 22-02-2020. Read more<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

‘Various measures already taken by State to address interests of orphaned children due to COVID’; Delhi High Court dismiss petition<\/p>\n

In a PIL filed by the petitioner seeking directions to be issued to Union of India to safeguard the interests of children who were orphaned during the COVID-19 pandemic and grant appropriate compensation to the family members of those persons who passed away during COVID-19 on account of denial of access to adequate healthcare facilities, a division bench of Satish Chandra Sharma, CJ., and Sanjeev Narula, J., refused to pass any new orders on perusal of the affidavits placed by the State and held that various steps have been taken by the relevant stakeholders from time to time in furtherance of the cause espoused by the petitioner in the present PIL. Read more<\/b><\/a><\/p>\n

GUJARAT HIGH COURT<\/p>\n

‘False promises made, huge scam committed’; Gujarat HC refuses to quash criminal proceedings against Mehul Choksi and Gitanjali Group Director<\/p>\n

While hearing a batch of criminal applications filed by Mehul Chinubhai Choksi and another accused, Director of Gitanjali Group, seeking to set aside and quash the First Information Report (‘FIR’) against him for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 and 34 of the Penal Code, 1860, Sandeep N. Bhatt, J. dismissed the application for being devoid of merits. Read more<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT<\/p>\n

S. 50, PMLA Act | Karnataka HC cancels Look-out Notice issued indefinitely on ground of suspicion alone; terms it as an abuse of process of law and object of LOC<\/p>\n

While deciding the instant petition wherein prayer was made to call for records pertaining to the Look Out Circular (LOC) issued by the Bureau of Immigrations (BOI) against the petitioner at the request made by the Enforcement Directorate, the Bench of Hemant Chandangoudar, J.*<\/span>, declared the LOC unenforceable opining that the continuation of the LOC against the petitioner indefinitely on the ground of suspicion alone will be an abuse of process of law and also the object of LOC. The Court pointed out that Section 50 of PMLA is a crucial provision and states that a person, who is being summoned for investigation must be provided with a written notice specifying the nature and the reasons for it. While the said provision does not explicitly use the term “probable cause”, it emphasizes the importance of providing valid reasons and grounds for summoning an individual. The summoning of a person repeatedly without probable cause or reasonable ground and only on the ground of suspicion alone is not in accordance with the principles of due causes and fairness. Read more<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Karnataka HC sets aside bail order on ground of denying informant the right to participate in proceedings<\/p>\n

While considering the instant petition wherein the informant had prayed before the Court to cancel the bail granted to the respondent no. 2 by the Trial Court for offences punishable under Sections 354-D<\/a>, 376(3)<\/a>, 376(2)(n)<\/a>, 450<\/a>, 366<\/a>, 506<\/a>, 420<\/a> of Penal Code, 1860<\/a> and Sections 4<\/a>, 6<\/a> & 12<\/a> of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012<\/a> (POCSO), the Bench of S. Vishwajith Shetty, J.*<\/span>, found that the informant was not notified about the bail application filed by respondent no.2 under Section 439 of CrPC, and therefore, there is factually a denial of right to the informant to participate in the proceedings which is recognized under Section 439(1A) of CrPC. Hence the impugned order was held to be unsustainable in law. The Court further issued directions to ensure effective implementation of POCSO Act and amendments introduced in the CrPC in 2018 vis-à-vis notifying the informants or victims about submissions or filing of regular and anticipatory bail applications and other connected issues. Read more<\/b><\/a><\/p>\n

“Parameters for approval to investigate a public servant are not as stringent as the parameters for granting sanction to prosecute a public servant”: Karnataka<\/p>\n

While considering the instant petition wherein an approval accorded by the State Government for conducting an investigation against the petitioner under Section 17-A<\/a> of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988<\/a>, was challenged before the Court; the Bench of N.S Sanjay Gowda, J*<\/span>., dismissed the petition stating that the parameters that are to be applied for according approval to investigate a public servant are not as stringent as the parameters which provide for granting sanction to prosecute a public servant. It was further stated that the integrity of a public servant is required to be beyond suspicion as in the proverbial adage that “Caesar’s wife must be above suspicion”. Thus, if the aspersions cast on the integrity of a public servant and the Investigating Officer harbours a view that an investigation is necessary, it would be in the interests of both the Government and the public servant that such a nagging suspicion is obliterated. In order to achieve this objective, the Government should be given the greatest degree of latitude to accord approval for conducting investigation. Read more<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

KERALA HIGH COURT<\/p>\n

“We could read the mind of a desperate wife, who was deserted by her husband”: Kerala High Court denies cruelty by wife against husband<\/p>\n

In a matrimonial appeal filed by a husband challenging a decree for restitution of conjugal rights obtained by his wife and rejection of his prayer for divorce, the Division Bench of Anil K. Narendran and Sophy Thomas*<\/span>, JJ. refused to interfere with the impugned judgments supporting the wife’s contentions. Read more<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

MADRAS HIGH COURT<\/p>\n

Read why Madras HC directed State to reconsider the screening time of Vijay starrer movie ‘Leo’<\/p>\n

In a writ petition filed by the producer of the film seeking mandamus for permitting screening of 5 special shows of the film ‘LEO’ starring Joseph Vijay Chandrasekha, at 07.00 a.m. from 19-10-2023 to 24-10-2023 and permitting screening of an additional special show of the film on 19-10-2023, which is the dates of release, at 4.00 a.m., Anita Sumanth, J. has directed the State to permit the screening of the upcoming ‘LEO’ movie from 07:00 am instead of 09:00 am. Read more<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

[Cash-for-job Scam] Madras High Court refuses to grant bail to V. Senthil Balaji on medical grounds<\/p>\n

In a bail plea filed by V. Senthil Balaji, Minister for Electricity, Prohibition & Excise, Tamil Nadu in connection with cash-for-job scam, G Jayachandran, J. dismissed the application filed by Senthil Balaji seeking bail on medical grounds and said that his health report does not appear to be a medical condition which could be taken care only if he is released on bail. Further, his past conduct, his present position as Minister without Portfolio and the abscondence of his brother Ashok Kumar, coupled with the attack on the Income Tax Officials, all cumulatively leads to an irresistible conclusion that he can directly and indirectly influence or cause deterrence to witnesses, if released on bail. Read more<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n

ORISSA HIGH COURT<\/p>\n

Odisha Gram Panchayats Act | Contestant for Sarpanch elections should not have more than two children on date of filing of nomination: Orissa High Court<\/p>\n

In an application under Article 226<\/a> and 227<\/a> of the Constitution of India<\/a>, the applicant was seeking to set aside the Sarpanch election of opposite party for being disqualified on grounds of having more than two children, B.P. Routray, J. dismissed the petition as the opposite party had only two children on the date of filing of the nomination.<\/span> Read more<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT<\/p>\n

‘Punishment order passed in quasi-judicial proceedings must contain reasons’: Rajasthan HC sets aside non-speaking punishment orders<\/p>\n

In a case wherein, the petitioner had challenged the orders dated 17-02-2011 and 08-11-2011, Anoop<\/span> Kumar Dhand, J.*<\/span> opined that the impugned orders dated 17-02-2011 and 08-11-2011 passed by the Disciplinary and Appellate authority, respectively, revealed that these orders were totally non-speaking orders and accordingly, aside the impugned orders and granted liberty to the respondents to hold fresh enquiry against the petitioner in accordance with the law. Read more<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n

‘Right to fair investigation and trial is fundamental right of victim as well’: Rajasthan High Court quashes order transferring the investigation without reason<\/p>\n

In a case wherein, an order dated 13-06-2023, whereby the investigation was transferred to the Crime Branch was challenged, Birendra Kumar<\/span>, J., opined that no reason was assigned in the impugned order, except the direction of the Director General of Police (‘DGP’) to transfer the investigation. The Court opined that the right to fair investigation and fair trial was a fundamental right of the victim as well and quashed the impugned order dated 13-06-2023. Further, the Court directed that the investigation of the six registered FIRs to be handed over to Additional DCP (West), Jaipur under the supervision of Commissioner of Police, Jaipur. Read more<\/b><\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67517,"featured_media":305481,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[46069,45673],"tags":[2822,62059,2569,2689,2543,62154,61294,62155,2523,2567,37146,2575,62156,62157],"class_list":["post-305479","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-high-court-round-up","category-columns-for-roundup","tag-Allahabad_High_Court","tag-bigg-boss","tag-Bombay_High_Court","tag-Calcutta_High_Court","tag-Delhi_High_Court","tag-high-court-weekly-round-up-october-2023","tag-humans-of-bombay","tag-jurisdiction-of-writ-court","tag-Kerala_High_Court","tag-Madras_High_Court","tag-orissa-high-court","tag-Rajasthan_High_Court","tag-sarpanch-elections","tag-tax-concession"],"yoast_head":"\nHigh Court Weekly Round Up October 2023 | SCC Blog<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"High Court Weekly Round Up October 2023 with stories on Writ Court\u2019s jurisdiction; Bigg Boss; Sarpanch elections and more\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/22\/high-court-weekly-round-up-october-2023-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"HIGH COURT OCTOBER 2023 WEEKLY ROUNDUP| Stories on Humans of Bombay; Obscenity; Bigg Boss Series Broadcasting; Sarpanch elections and more\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"High Court Weekly Round Up October 2023 with stories on Writ Court\u2019s jurisdiction; Bigg Boss; Sarpanch elections and more\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/22\/high-court-weekly-round-up-october-2023-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2023-10-22T12:30:46+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/High-Court-weekly-Round-Up-5.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"HIGH COURT OCTOBER 2023 WEEKLY ROUNDUP| Stories on Humans of Bombay; Obscenity; Bigg Boss Series Broadcasting; Sarpanch elections and more\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/22\/high-court-weekly-round-up-october-2023-legal-news\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/22\/high-court-weekly-round-up-october-2023-legal-news\/\",\"name\":\"High Court Weekly Round Up October 2023 | SCC Blog\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/22\/high-court-weekly-round-up-october-2023-legal-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/22\/high-court-weekly-round-up-october-2023-legal-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/High-Court-weekly-Round-Up-5.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2023-10-22T12:30:46+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84913f82186a8dea042dc300d5751624\"},\"description\":\"High Court Weekly Round Up October 2023 with stories on Writ Court\u2019s jurisdiction; Bigg Boss; Sarpanch elections and more\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/22\/high-court-weekly-round-up-october-2023-legal-news\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/22\/high-court-weekly-round-up-october-2023-legal-news\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/22\/high-court-weekly-round-up-october-2023-legal-news\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/High-Court-weekly-Round-Up-5.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/High-Court-weekly-Round-Up-5.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"High Court weekly Round Up-5\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/22\/high-court-weekly-round-up-october-2023-legal-news\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"HIGH COURT OCTOBER 2023 WEEKLY ROUNDUP| Stories on Humans of Bombay; Obscenity; Bigg Boss Series Broadcasting; Sarpanch elections and more\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84913f82186a8dea042dc300d5751624\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/d822f35f9fcd11386aa47345cde7945e45a64da7205eebe9784f21d0cd223603?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/d822f35f9fcd11386aa47345cde7945e45a64da7205eebe9784f21d0cd223603?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-online-editor\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"High Court Weekly Round Up October 2023 | SCC Blog","description":"High Court Weekly Round Up October 2023 with stories on Writ Court\u2019s jurisdiction; Bigg Boss; Sarpanch elections and more","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/22\/high-court-weekly-round-up-october-2023-legal-news\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"HIGH COURT OCTOBER 2023 WEEKLY ROUNDUP| Stories on Humans of Bombay; Obscenity; Bigg Boss Series Broadcasting; Sarpanch elections and more","og_description":"High Court Weekly Round Up October 2023 with stories on Writ Court\u2019s jurisdiction; Bigg Boss; Sarpanch elections and more","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/22\/high-court-weekly-round-up-october-2023-legal-news\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2023-10-22T12:30:46+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/High-Court-weekly-Round-Up-5.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"HIGH COURT OCTOBER 2023 WEEKLY ROUNDUP| Stories on Humans of Bombay; Obscenity; Bigg Boss Series Broadcasting; Sarpanch elections and more","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/22\/high-court-weekly-round-up-october-2023-legal-news\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/22\/high-court-weekly-round-up-october-2023-legal-news\/","name":"High Court Weekly Round Up October 2023 | SCC Blog","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/22\/high-court-weekly-round-up-october-2023-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/22\/high-court-weekly-round-up-october-2023-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/High-Court-weekly-Round-Up-5.webp","datePublished":"2023-10-22T12:30:46+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84913f82186a8dea042dc300d5751624"},"description":"High Court Weekly Round Up October 2023 with stories on Writ Court\u2019s jurisdiction; Bigg Boss; Sarpanch elections and more","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/22\/high-court-weekly-round-up-october-2023-legal-news\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/22\/high-court-weekly-round-up-october-2023-legal-news\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/22\/high-court-weekly-round-up-october-2023-legal-news\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/High-Court-weekly-Round-Up-5.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/High-Court-weekly-Round-Up-5.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"High Court weekly Round Up-5"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/22\/high-court-weekly-round-up-october-2023-legal-news\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"HIGH COURT OCTOBER 2023 WEEKLY ROUNDUP| Stories on Humans of Bombay; Obscenity; Bigg Boss Series Broadcasting; Sarpanch elections and more"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84913f82186a8dea042dc300d5751624","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/d822f35f9fcd11386aa47345cde7945e45a64da7205eebe9784f21d0cd223603?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/d822f35f9fcd11386aa47345cde7945e45a64da7205eebe9784f21d0cd223603?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-online-editor\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/High-Court-weekly-Round-Up-5.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":305440,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/21\/allahabad-high-court-directs-magistrate-conclude-ni-act-proceedings-expeditiously-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":305479,"position":0},"title":"Allahabad HC directs Magistrate to conclude NI Act proceedings expeditiously without going into unnecessary technicality","author":"Apoorva","date":"October 21, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Allahabad High Court noted that the Supreme Court has issued several directions to deal with the pendency of dishonor of cheque cases and for their expeditious disposal","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"allahabad high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/allahabad-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/allahabad-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/allahabad-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/allahabad-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":293729,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/03\/high-court-may-2023-roundup-stories-on-manipur-violence-relief-to-delhi-lg-blinkit-trade-mark-infringement-third-party-funding-withdrawal-of-rs-2000-notes-and-more\/","url_meta":{"origin":305479,"position":1},"title":"HIGH COURT MAY 2023 ROUNDUP| Stories on Manipur Violence; Relief to Delhi LG; Blinkit trade mark infringement; Third Party Funding; Withdrawal of Rs 2000 notes and more","author":"Apoorva","date":"June 3, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts in May 2023","rel":"","context":"In "High Court Round Up"","block_context":{"text":"High Court Round Up","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/high-court-round-up\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"high courts monthly roundup may","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/high-courts-monthly-roundup-may.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/high-courts-monthly-roundup-may.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/high-courts-monthly-roundup-may.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/high-courts-monthly-roundup-may.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":306217,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/02\/high-court-weekly-round-up-september-2023-with-stories-on-live-in-relationship-legal-news-2\/","url_meta":{"origin":305479,"position":2},"title":"HIGH COURT MONTHLY ROUNDUP OCTOBER 2023| 150+ Legal Stories including Humans of Bombay, Legal Presumption of Paternity, Mission Save Constitution, Pathan, Leo Movie, Nykaa & Chaayos Trademark and more","author":"Arunima","date":"November 2, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"A quick legal recap from October 2023 covering all the important judgments carefully briefed that you wouldn\u2019t want to miss from all High Courts around the country.","rel":"","context":"In "High Court Round Up"","block_context":{"text":"High Court Round Up","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/high-court-round-up\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"high court monthly roundup october","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/high-court-monthly-roundup-october.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/high-court-monthly-roundup-october.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/high-court-monthly-roundup-october.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/high-court-monthly-roundup-october.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":291485,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/05\/07\/weekly-legal-roundup-high-courts-in-may-2023-legal-news-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":305479,"position":3},"title":"HIGH COURT MAY 2023 WEEKLY ROUNDUP| Stories on JEE Main 2023 eligibility; Manipur Violence; Chanda Kochhar retirement; Rehabilitation and Redevelopment of Slums and more","author":"Apoorva","date":"May 7, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week","rel":"","context":"In "High Court Round Up"","block_context":{"text":"High Court Round Up","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/high-court-round-up\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"high courts weekly roundup may","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/high-courts-weekly-roundup-may.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/high-courts-weekly-roundup-may.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/high-courts-weekly-roundup-may.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/high-courts-weekly-roundup-may.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":283145,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/04\/high-court-january-2023-revisiting-bundle-of-stories-on-live-in-relationships-motor-accident-claims-trademarks-yashraj-copy-rights-case-toxic-work-culture-medical-termination-of-pregnancy-and-mo\/","url_meta":{"origin":305479,"position":4},"title":"High Court January 2023| Revisiting bundle of stories on Live-in relationships; Motor Accident Claims; Trademarks; Yashraj Copyright’s case; Toxic work culture; Medical termination of pregnancy and more","author":"Editor","date":"February 4, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The High Court Roundup brings a curated list of the top stories of the month to ensure that our readers do not miss out any important updates. This month\u2019s roundup covers the stories Live-in relationships; Motor Accident Claims; medical treatment of HIV positive person; Trademarks; Yashraj Copy Rights case; problem\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "High Court Round Up"","block_context":{"text":"High Court Round Up","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/high-court-round-up\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-271.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":295915,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/07\/04\/high-courts-roundup-june-2023-legal-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":305479,"position":5},"title":"High Courts Roundup June 2023 | Top stories on Adipurush Controversy, Serum Institute defamation, Manish Sisodia bail, and more","author":"Ridhi","date":"July 4, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"This monthly roundup for June 2023 covers important stories from various High Courts in India providing a quick glimpse for legal updates across the country.","rel":"","context":"In "High Court Round Up"","block_context":{"text":"High Court Round Up","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/high-court-round-up\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"high courts roundup june 2023","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/high-courts-roundup-june-2023.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/high-courts-roundup-june-2023.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/high-courts-roundup-june-2023.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/high-courts-roundup-june-2023.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/high-courts-roundup-june-2023.webp?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/305479","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67517"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=305479"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/305479\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/305481"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=305479"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=305479"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=305479"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}