Digi - Legal Insights

Plaintiff is entitled to seek relief related to possession, common amenities and damages and suit raises triable issues that cannot be dismissed prematurely.

Controller did not conduct technical analysis of competing patents, merely stating that D1 was not an appropriate document as defined by Section 25(2)(c) without justification hence, Patent Application No. 2553/MUM/2010) is remanded back for fresh consideration before different Controller.

Plaintiff is entitled to interim relief due to significant financial losses and that Defendant No.1s counterclaim lacks substance and credibility, with no basis for damages attributed to Plaintiffs actions.

Defendant acknowledges their relationship with Plaintiff and Court finds that trial Court cannot make decision based solely on plaintiffs pleadings hence; it is just to allow Defendant to submit a written statement.

Non-compliance with mandatory requirement under Section 12-A of Act would not warrant rejection of plaint at the threshold.

Executing Court has found doubts regarding existence of exceptions under Section 13 of CPC leading to thorough examination of objections and framing of issues for evidence.

Authority assessed stamp duty for each distinct transaction separately, reinforcing necessity for multiple mortgage deeds as mandated by law hence, impugned order levying deficit stamp duty of Rs 40,00,000/- along with penalty of Rs 32,00,000/-. held proper.

Licence fee is a privilege fee for legitimate production of country liquor hence, impugned order is quashed and State must refund or credit Lokranjan for any excess payments made, along with applicable interest on such refunds.

Tribunals approach is criticized as overly pedantic and delays should be accommodated with costs hence, impugned order set aside and application shall stand allowed and written statement filed along with it shall be taken on record.

Petitioner registered birth certificates after being elected as Sarpanch in January 2021, likely to avoid disqualification, as school records have presumed value and clearly indicate children were born after cut-off date of 12.09.2001 hence, no reason to interfere with order passed by authorities.

Plaintiffs argue that cause of action is clearly outlined in plaint and limitation should not be based solely on registration date of sale deeds thus, accepting opposite argument would be harsh regarding law of limitation.

Order lacks compelling reasons to dissolve Gram Panchayat and Chief Executive Officers report supports that dissolution is unwarranted, as no circumstances indicate any operational failure.

Intervenors, seeking to assert independent rights over property in question, are not entitled to join as Defendants in existing suit and must seek their claims in a separate action, which is currently pending.

Rejection order regarding name correction cannot stand based on precedents established in Janabai, which recognizes such corrections as “obvious mistakes."

Need for correction is justified due to Petitioners service in C.R.P.F., where accurate records are necessary for pension benefits.

Sons have established a case warranting intervention to quash Impugned Order due to jurisdictional fact against Father, which remains unchallenged.

Petitioner is entitled to receive information free of charge hence, impugned order was quashed and PIO was mandated to furnish requested information within one week.

Executing Court was criticized for not providing detailed reasons for its decisions and application of Order 21 Rule 99 of CPC by Respondents was deemed an abuse of legal process hence, substantial questions of law posed were found in favor of Appellants, making impugned order unsustainable.

Regulation 6(g) of Regulations aims to ensure that medical colleges remain accessible and do not become monopolized by wealth, a goal consistent with N.M.C. Acts objectives hence, Regulation 6(g) is deemed valid and no declaration of its invalidity or any consequential relief can be granted.

Petitioner Janhavi, who is daughter of present Petitioner, has filed an additional affidavit confirming their relationship during pendency of SLP hence, Respondent-Scrutiny Committee is directed to issue validity certificate to Petitioner as belonging to Hindu Thakar Scheduled Tribe.