Judgments
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 VERSUS M/S CINESTAAN ENTERTAINMENT PVT. LTD.
PREM PAL SINGH VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS
PRERNA EK DISHA FOUNDATION VERSUS THE CHAIRMAN SPECIAL TASK FORCE AND ORS
VINOD KUMAR AND ORS VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ORS
WHOLESALE TRADING SERVICES P LTD. VERSUS THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT OF INDIA
M/s.Mold Tek Packing Pvt. Ltd. Vs. S.D.Containers
Law laid down - Section 22 (4) of the Designs Act, 2000 – Civil Suit – Civil Suit is directed to be decided by Indore Bench of High Court by judgment of Supreme Court dated December 01, 2020. The parties have taken diametrically opposite view as to which bench can try the said civil suit. The plaintiff urged that civil suit needs to be decided by a commercial appellate division constituted u/S.5 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 whereas other side Full Judgment
M/s. HCL Technologies Limited Vs. Madhya Pradesh Computerization of Police Society (MPCOPS)
Law Laid Down:- Appointment of Arbitrator u/S 11(5) and (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Arbitration Clause 1.23 (Dispute Resolution) and sub-clause (a) whereof stipulating to first exhaust the inhouse mechanism of dispute resolution – Governance Procedure in Clause 2.5.3 of the Agreement does not provide issuing disputed notice in a particular format - Applicant invoked Clause 1.23 of the Agreement proposing the name of arbitrator to resolve the dispute – Non-applicant failed to respond to the request Full Judgment
Yashwardhan Raghuwanshi Vs. District & Sessions Judge and another
Law Laid Down:- As seen from the language employed in the definition clause of “Court” in Section 2(1)(e) of the Arbitration Act and Conciliation Act,1996, the Legislature intended to confer power in respect of the disputes involving arbitration on the highest judicial Court of the District so as to minimize the supervisory role of the Courts in the arbitral process and, therefore, purposely excluded any Civil Court of a grade inferior to such Principal Civil Court, or any Court of Small Full Judgment
Balram Malviya Versus The State of M.P. and others
Kuldeep Choudhary @ Kuldeep Yadav & another Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Law laid down - Section 32(1) of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - If nature of injuries found on the person of deceased were not grievous in nature and were not sufficient to cause death, oral dying declaration/statement given by him does not fall within the ambit and scope of “dying declaration” envisaged in Section 32(1) of the Act. The Court needs to examine carefully whether injuries on the person are sufficient to cause death and this depends on the factual matrix Full Judgment