Saturday, 13 February 2016

Whether Migration Certificate can be issued in favour of candidate who leaves Post Graduate Course halfway until Bond penalty is paid?

The   specific   grievance   of   the   petitioner   is
regarding   the   non ­issuance   of   the   Migration
Certificate to her. The case of the petitioner is that
the concerned respondents ought to issue the Migration

Certificate without insisting for the payment of the
Bond penalty. This stand, in the view of this Court,
is highly untenable, as the respondents are precluded
from   doing   so   by   the   Government   Resolution   dated
22.10.1996.   This   Government   Resolution   specifically
states   that   the   Migration   Certificate   would   not   be
issued in favour of a candidate who leaves the Post
Graduate   Course   halfway,   until   the   Bond   penalty   is
paid.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6013 of 2015


CORAM: HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA
KUMARI
Dated : 28/09/2015
Citation;AIR 2016 (NOC)142 GUJ
Print Page

Whether Actor is liable for failure to display Statutory warning on Alcohol Consumption in Film?

From such an aspect, this Court is of the view that

the actor of the film, whether he has done the lead role or

not, cannot be brought within the purview of the term

`whoever causes to exhibit any cinema' under Section 55 I

(2) of the Abkari Act.     Matters being so, the prosecution

proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.No.1869 of 2014

of   the     Judicial   First Class    Magistrate's Court-III,

Thiruvananthapuram, based on Annexure-A Final Report,


are liable to be quashed.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                                     PRESENT:

             THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.KEMAL PASHA

            WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016

                                           Crl.MC.No. 7342 of 2015 

            PRITHVIRAJ
            S/O. SUKUMARAN, CHANDRAKAMAL, 
Vs

            STATE OF KERALA
            


Print Page

Whether second wife in bigamous marriage can claim pension in case of death of her husband?

 It was argued by the learned counsel for the respondent that a
second wife was deceived by deceased husband and she begotten a
daughter from the deceased and therefore, it is necessary for the
Court to take a gender protectionist view and grant her pension. This
argument of the learned counsel for the respondent is one sided and
may appear convincing superficially, but it does not stand to reason
after close scrutiny.   The Courts have empathy for a woman who is
deceived by a man, however, she may take recourse under the other
enactments for redressal.  So far as husband is a Government servant

and matter is covered under the rules, then the Curt cannot take
other view than permissible in law. The Division Bench in the case of
Chanda Hinglas Bharati has made a reference to similar argument
and has rightly observed that “showing sympathy to a woman like the
petitioner would result in depriving a legitimate wife of her right to
receive full family pension.  This is the gender positive view towards
the legally wedded wife.  The case of second wife may be unfortunate
but I am of the view that Court cannot pass verdict in her favour.
While doing justice, injustice should not be caused to a person having
a rightful claim. 
 Thus, I fully rely on the ratio laid down in the case of Chanda
Hinglas Bharati and hold that marriage contracted with second lady
in subsistence of first marriage or spouse is living, then second lady
from   the   Hindu/Christians   cannot   claim   as   a   widow   entitled   to
pension   subject   to   personal   law   or   as   stated   in   Rule   26   of
Maharashtra Civil Services (Conduct) Rules.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
FIRST APPEAL NO.577 OF 2015
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1770 OF 2015
Draupada @ Draupadi Jaydeo Pawar
and Others ...  Appellants
vs.
Indubai d/o. Kashinath Shivram Chavan
and Another ...  Respondents

CORAM : MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.

 PRONOUNCED ON  : 10th FEBRUARY, 2016

Print Page

Procedure to be followed by plaintiff in suit for specific performance of contract if deft is suffering from mental illness

The Court finds that instead of instituting a suit for specific performance of
the agreement, the plaintiff preferred to intervene in the MHA proceedings.
However, it abandoned its interim application on 23.04.2001. Perusal of the
orders passed in the said proceedings reveals that on at least 10 occasions,
the counsel representing the plaintiff was not present and on 6 occasions,
he/she did not press the interim application.
28.The Court also finds merit the argument of the defendants that while
instituting the suit, the plaintiff never preferred an application under Order
XXXIX, CPC since the same would have resulted in the plaintiff
paying/depositing the balance sale consideration or at least a substantial part
of it. It is settled law that the plaintiff must, at all times, be ready and willing
to pay the sale consideration to be entitled to the discretionary relief of
specific performance
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
 Date of decision: 01.09.2015
CS(OS) 335/2005
SEWA INTERNATIONAL ..... Plaintiff

versus
KALAWATI MATHRANI & ORS. ..... Defendants

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI
Citation;AIR 2016 (NOC)163 Delhi

Print Page