{"id":320397,"date":"2024-04-19T17:30:13","date_gmt":"2024-04-19T12:00:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=320397"},"modified":"2024-04-24T18:20:25","modified_gmt":"2024-04-24T12:50:25","slug":"bombay-hc-rejects-ramesh-sippy-inheritance-claim-legal-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/19\/bombay-hc-rejects-ramesh-sippy-inheritance-claim-legal-news\/","title":{"rendered":"Bombay HC denies interim relief to filmmaker Ramesh Sippy in inheritance claim on 27 cinematograph films, 500 shares in Sippy Films &amp; Mumbai flat"},"content":{"rendered":"<div style=\"text-align: justify; line-height: 150%;\">\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\"><span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Bombay High Court:<\/span> Manish Pitale, J., recently rejected an interim application filed by Ramesh Sippy, regarding a property dispute of inheritance rights over various assets including 27 cinematograph films, 500 shares, and a flat in Mumbai.<\/p>\n<p style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Background<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">Famous filmmaker Ramesh Sippy&#8217;s case was that the defendants, i.e. his nephews, nieces, and directors, indicated their intention to oust him from his 1\/5<span style=\"vertical-align: super;\">th<\/span> share in flat 5\/A and also other assets of his deceased parents including 27 cinematograph films and 500 shares of his deceased parents in a company. It was submitted that his deceased parents had died intestate, and his mother obtained Letters of Administration in her favor, claiming to be the beneficiary under the will dated 26-04-2007, executed by his famous filmmaker father G.P. Sippy. He further claimed that he became aware of the aforesaid documents along with the will executed by his mother, in favor of his brother only in 2013.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">He further urged that when, in 2022, he became aware of the affidavit executed by his brother in 2016, relinquishing all his rights under the will, cause of action arose on his part to assert his share in the estate. While relying on <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">Mannalal Khetan<\/span> v. <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">Kedar Nath Khetan<\/span> , it was also alleged that the transfer of shares by his mother had violated Section <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001517277\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">108<\/a> of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-9000055985\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Companies Act, 1956<\/a>, hence the defendants could not assert any rights in respect of the said shares.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">On the contrary, the defendants submitted that Ramesh Sippy had been constantly shifting stands and that the assertion about him becoming aware of the documents only in 2022 was made to escape the consequence of Section 106 of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002726959\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Limitation Act, 1963<\/a>. It was also submitted that Plaintiff could not claim any rights in respect of the 27 cinematograph films since his earlier pleas regarding the flat 5\/B and 5 other films had been rejected by the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n<p style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Judgment<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court noted that in the suit filed by Ramesh Sippy for flat 5\/B, he had asserted that his parents died intestate and also claimed to know of a letter sent by the society in respect of two applications, one by his mother based on the 2007 will of G.P. Sippy and another by the defendant based on his 2003 will. The Court found it difficult to understand why appropriate steps were not taken by Ramesh Sippyfor his claim that his parents died intestate as soon as he got to know of the above-mentioned details. The Court stated that it found substance in the argument that the story about Ramesh Sippy becoming aware of the documents only in 2022 was a labored set of facts to assert a cause of action, and that he had been shifting stands since the previous suits.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court said that the rejection of interim reliefs prayed for by him had been rejected even by the Supreme Court which is another factor indicating that he had failed to make out a <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">prima facie<\/span> case for granting interim relief for flat 5\/A.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">Further, the Court held that, since his brother was the beneficiary of the 27 cinematograph films in dispute, and since he relinquished his rights, they would devolve on the five branches of the Sippy family. The Court also said that his entire assertion about becoming aware of the affidavit in 2022 was to bring the suit within limitation. The Court also stated that Ramesh Sippy only asserted violation of the mandatory requirement of Section <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001517277\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">108<\/a> of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-9000055985\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Companies Act, 1956<\/a> after the transfer forms became available to him along with the reply affidavit of the defendant and that reliance could not be placed upon <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">Mannalal Khetan (supra)<\/span> since it did not indicate that the requirement was mandatory. The Court also refrained from exercising discretion in favor of Ramesh Sippy, in respect of the 500 shares and subsequently, while holding that the application was found to be without any merit, and refused to grant interim relief.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">[<span style=\"font-weight: bold; color: #632423;\">Ramesh Sippy v. Sunhil Ajit Sippy, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/0Zmj3E7u\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">2024 SCC OnLine Bom 1099<\/a>, Order dated 12-04-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n<hr\/>\n<p>Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-left: 18pt;\"><span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">For Plaintiff &#8212;<\/span> Advocate Shanay Shah<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-left: 18pt;\"><span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">For Defendant &#8212;<\/span> Advocate Archit Jayakar, Advocate Pooja Yadav, Advocate Parita Mashruwala<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p style=\"font-style: italic;\">The Court found no substantial evidence to exercise discretion in favor of Ramesh Sippy&#8217;s inheritance claim.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":314919,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[37825,31990,67754,47646,67752,67753,17331],"class_list":["post-320397","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-bombay-hc","tag-films","tag-inheritance-claim-by-ramesh-sippy","tag-interim-application","tag-justice-manish-pitale","tag-ramesh-sippy","tag-will"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Bombay HC rejects Ramesh Sippy\u2019s inheritance claim | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Bombay HC rejected Ramesh Sippy\u2019s inheritance claim to 27 cinematograph films, shares, and flat in Mumbai\" \/>\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\/2024\/04\/19\/bombay-hc-rejects-ramesh-sippy-inheritance-claim-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Bombay HC denies interim relief to filmmaker Ramesh Sippy in inheritance claim on 27 cinematograph films, 500 shares in Sippy Films &amp; Mumbai flat\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Bombay HC rejected Ramesh Sippy\u2019s inheritance claim to 27 cinematograph films, shares, and flat in Mumbai\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/19\/bombay-hc-rejects-ramesh-sippy-inheritance-claim-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=\"2024-04-19T12:00:13+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2024-04-24T12:50:25+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"591\" \/>\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=\"Bombay HC denies interim relief to filmmaker Ramesh Sippy in inheritance claim on 27 cinematograph films, 500 shares in Sippy Films &amp; Mumbai flat\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/19\/bombay-hc-rejects-ramesh-sippy-inheritance-claim-legal-news\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/19\/bombay-hc-rejects-ramesh-sippy-inheritance-claim-legal-news\/\",\"name\":\"Bombay HC rejects Ramesh Sippy\u2019s inheritance claim | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/19\/bombay-hc-rejects-ramesh-sippy-inheritance-claim-legal-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/19\/bombay-hc-rejects-ramesh-sippy-inheritance-claim-legal-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-04-19T12:00:13+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-04-24T12:50:25+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"Bombay HC rejected Ramesh Sippy\u2019s inheritance claim to 27 cinematograph films, shares, and flat in Mumbai\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/19\/bombay-hc-rejects-ramesh-sippy-inheritance-claim-legal-news\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/19\/bombay-hc-rejects-ramesh-sippy-inheritance-claim-legal-news\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/19\/bombay-hc-rejects-ramesh-sippy-inheritance-claim-legal-news\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp\",\"width\":887,\"height\":591,\"caption\":\"Bombay High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/19\/bombay-hc-rejects-ramesh-sippy-inheritance-claim-legal-news\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Bombay HC denies interim relief to filmmaker Ramesh Sippy in inheritance claim on 27 cinematograph films, 500 shares in Sippy Films &amp; Mumbai flat\"}]},{\"@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\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Bombay HC rejects Ramesh Sippy\u2019s inheritance claim | SCC Times","description":"Bombay HC rejected Ramesh Sippy\u2019s inheritance claim to 27 cinematograph films, shares, and flat in Mumbai","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\/2024\/04\/19\/bombay-hc-rejects-ramesh-sippy-inheritance-claim-legal-news\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Bombay HC denies interim relief to filmmaker Ramesh Sippy in inheritance claim on 27 cinematograph films, 500 shares in Sippy Films & Mumbai flat","og_description":"Bombay HC rejected Ramesh Sippy\u2019s inheritance claim to 27 cinematograph films, shares, and flat in Mumbai","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/19\/bombay-hc-rejects-ramesh-sippy-inheritance-claim-legal-news\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2024-04-19T12:00:13+00:00","article_modified_time":"2024-04-24T12:50:25+00:00","og_image":[{"width":887,"height":591,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Bombay HC denies interim relief to filmmaker Ramesh Sippy in inheritance claim on 27 cinematograph films, 500 shares in Sippy Films &amp; Mumbai flat","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/19\/bombay-hc-rejects-ramesh-sippy-inheritance-claim-legal-news\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/19\/bombay-hc-rejects-ramesh-sippy-inheritance-claim-legal-news\/","name":"Bombay HC rejects Ramesh Sippy\u2019s inheritance claim | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/19\/bombay-hc-rejects-ramesh-sippy-inheritance-claim-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/19\/bombay-hc-rejects-ramesh-sippy-inheritance-claim-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp","datePublished":"2024-04-19T12:00:13+00:00","dateModified":"2024-04-24T12:50:25+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"Bombay HC rejected Ramesh Sippy\u2019s inheritance claim to 27 cinematograph films, shares, and flat in Mumbai","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/19\/bombay-hc-rejects-ramesh-sippy-inheritance-claim-legal-news\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/19\/bombay-hc-rejects-ramesh-sippy-inheritance-claim-legal-news\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/19\/bombay-hc-rejects-ramesh-sippy-inheritance-claim-legal-news\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp","width":887,"height":591,"caption":"Bombay High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/19\/bombay-hc-rejects-ramesh-sippy-inheritance-claim-legal-news\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Bombay HC denies interim relief to filmmaker Ramesh Sippy in inheritance claim on 27 cinematograph films, 500 shares in Sippy Films &amp; Mumbai flat"}]},{"@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\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":291158,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/05\/03\/bombay-hc-upholds-iprs-claim-under-copyright-act-2012-amendment-against-fm-radiobroadcasters\/","url_meta":{"origin":320397,"position":0},"title":"[IPRS v. Pvt. FM Radio Broadcasters] Bombay High Court upheld royalty rights to authors of original works in cinematograph films","author":"Ridhi","date":"May 3, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay High Court discussed various provisions of the original Copyright Act, 1957, its 2012 amendment, Parliamentary report and relevant cases dealt by Supreme Court and High Courts relevant to the instant claim.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Bombay High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-581.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-581.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-581.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-581.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":294267,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/09\/bombay-hc-refuses-interim-injunction-shemaroo-entertainment-copyright-case\/","url_meta":{"origin":320397,"position":1},"title":"[Copyright Infringement] Bombay High Court refuses to grant interim injunction to Shemaroo Entertainment","author":"Ridhi","date":"June 9, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay High Court perused the assignment deed pertaining to the film \u2018Amba\u2019 and opined that \u2018the said work\u2019 indicates plaintiff's failure in making out a prima facie case of only audio rights being assigned to the defendant.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"bombay high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/bombay-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\/05\/bombay-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/bombay-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/bombay-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":273759,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/15\/bailpetition-kalyanisingh-allowed-regularbail-centralbureauofinvestigation-lacks-thorough-investigation\/","url_meta":{"origin":320397,"position":2},"title":"Punjab &#038; Haryana High Court grants bail to Kalyani Singh in Sippy Sidhu&#8217;s murder case; CBI lacked thorough investigation","author":"Editor","date":"September 15, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Punjab & Haryana High Court: While allowing the instant bail petition preferred by Kalyani Singh against the FIR dated 13-4-2016 under Sections 302, 120-B, 201 of Penal Code, 1860 and under Sections 25, 27 and 54 of the Arms Act, 1959, Sureshwar Thakur, J., grants a regular bail to the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Punjab and Haryana High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/punjab_and_haryana_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/punjab_and_haryana_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/punjab_and_haryana_high_court.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/punjab_and_haryana_high_court.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/punjab_and_haryana_high_court.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":320928,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/28\/high-court-weekly-roundup-april-2024-legal-news-3\/","url_meta":{"origin":320397,"position":3},"title":"HIGH COURT APRIL 2024 WEEKLY ROUNDUP| Stories on Ramesh Sippy Inheritance Claim; Cash for Job Scam; Yamuna River Environmental Crisis; MP Judicial Service Rules and more","author":"Editor","date":"April 28, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;High Court Round Up&quot;","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 weekly Roundup","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/round-26-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/round-26-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/round-26-1.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/round-26-1.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":293450,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/05\/30\/know-your-judge-justice-rd-dhanuka-chief-justice-bombayhighcourt-retires-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":320397,"position":4},"title":"46th Chief Justice of Bombay High Court, Justice Ramesh Deokinandan Dhanuka, retires after a very brief tenure of 3 days","author":"Sucheta","date":"May 30, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Justice R.D. Dhanuka, whose appointment as the Chief Justice of Bombay High Court was notified on 26-05-2023, retires today after a very short tenure of 3 days!","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Know thy Judge&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Know thy Judge","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/judges-information\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"justice ramesh deokinandan dhanuka","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/justice-ramesh-deokinandan-dhanuka.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/justice-ramesh-deokinandan-dhanuka.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/justice-ramesh-deokinandan-dhanuka.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/justice-ramesh-deokinandan-dhanuka.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":291576,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/05\/08\/bombay-hc-grants-injunction-to-makers-of-scam-1992-web-series-legal-news-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":320397,"position":5},"title":"Bombay High Court grants temporary injunction to makers of \u2018Scam 1992: The Harshad Mehta Story\u2019","author":"Ridhi","date":"May 8, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"There are sufficient documents placed on record to demonstrate that a strong prima facie case is made out by the plaintiff in its favour regarding copyright infringement of said web series.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Bombay High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-581.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-581.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-581.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-581.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/320397","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\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=320397"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/320397\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/314919"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=320397"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=320397"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=320397"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}