HIGH COURT JANUARY 2025 WEEKLY ROUNDUP | Khadi’s Device Mark; Police Protection for Live-In Couples; Wonderchef’s Reputation; and more
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.
limitation
MP High Court orders status quo on Nawab of Bhopal’s Property declared as ‘Enemy Property’; directs Pataudi family to approach appellant authority
The controversy stems from the government’s declaration of the Nawab of Bhopal’s properties as enemy property as the Nawab’s elder daughter, Princess Abida Sultan, moved to Pakistan in 1950.
Under Section 11(6) A&C Act, Referral Court must limit its enquiry to the question of limitation period only: SC
Referral courts, at the stage of deciding an application for appointment of arbitrator, must not conduct an intricate evidentiary enquiry into the question whether the claims raised by the applicant are time barred.”
Doctrine of lis pendens commences at the stage of “institution” of suit and not at the stage when notice is issued: SC
The Court recalled a previous judgment dated 25-8-2022 on the ground that the errors apparent on the face of the record in that decision went to the root of the reasoning on both the issues of limitation and specific performance.
Can a stranger to a suit, dispossessed of immovable property by decree-holder, seek redelivery? Supreme Court answers
Order XXI Rule 99, CPC is lucid that where any person other than the judgment debtor is dispossessed of immovable property by the holder of a decree for the possession of such property, he may make an application to the Court complaining of such dispossession.
Or. 14 R. 2 of CPC does not confer jurisdiction on the Court to decide a mixed question of fact and law, unless the facts are clear from the plaint itself: Sikkim HC
The Court decided under the aegis of Or.14, R.2 of the CPC that where a question of law is dependent on the determination of a question of fact, then such question of fact cannot be decided as a preliminary issue by the Trial Court.
“Within 30 days’’ starts from date when result is announced by returning officer: Allahabad HC clarifies law related to limitation for election petition
“Election law should be interpreted strictly, particularly, with regard to the prescribed period of limitation for the purposes of entertaining the election petition inasmuch as there is no provision qua applicability of the Limitation Act.”
Can the issue of limitation be decided in a petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act? Delhi High Court answers
“The Court’s jurisdiction at the pre-reference stage is only to determine the prime facie existence of an arbitration agreement and the final adjudication, even on the question of limitation, is to be left to the arbitral tribunal, being the parties’ chosen forum.”
Time to Fill the Legislative Vacuum for Limitation Under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
by Justice (Retd.) Hemant Gupta*
SC clears Chairman & Secretary of Sunshine Educational and Development Society of cheating and conspiracy in false information for AICTE approval case
Supreme Court said that AICTE itself never claimed that it was dishonestly induced to grant such approvals and that essential link is altogether missing, whereby any such criminal charge of cheating can be sustained against the accused persons.
Bombay HC allows acid attack victims to seek compensation beyond limitation period provided in Maharashtra Victim Compensation Scheme
Bombay High Court directed the acid attack victims to make an appropriate application within a period of four weeks from the date of this judgment.
Calcutta High Court directs payment of interest on revised gratuity in spite delay as such relief doesn’t affect third parties’ right
Calcutta High Court stated that the petitioner justified the considerable delay in filing the writ petition by asserting that there is no statutory period of limitation, and neither party has suffered due to this delay.
‘3 years is a long period for filing application for appointing arbitrator’; SC suggests Parliament to bring amendment prescribing specific limitation period
Supreme Court, while allowing the present petition, appointed Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Former Judge of the Supreme Court of India, to act as the sole arbitrator.
Inside Supreme Court’s decision on principles of Adverse Possession and Limitation in property disputes
“A person claiming adverse possession should show, as to on what date he got the possession; the nature of his possession; whether the factum of possession was known to the other party; how long his possession has continued; and that his possession was open and undisturbed.”
Calcutta High Court upholds Appellate Court’s order on pre-emption rights and limitation
Calcutta High Court held that issue of limitation being a question of fact ought to have been raised before trial court and evidence ought to have been adduced.
Delhi High Court dismisses PIL seeking to formulate a policy for expeditious disposal of appeals within time limit under Section 250(6A) of IT Act 1961
As per an additional affidavit submitted, the CBDT has provided the way, in the past and future, pending appeals are to be dealt with and disposed of expeditiously as well as a road map to dispose of pending appeals.
COVID-19 Limitation Period Suspension included outer limit of period to condone delay: Supreme Court
The appellants mainly averred that the further period of 90 days had not expired on the date of imposition of lockdown as on 23-03-2020.
Madhya Pradesh High Court allows fresh adjudication on limitation issue in Arbitration appeal
Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the Trial Court failed to properly adjudicate the issue related to calculation of limitation period.
Explained| SAT order directing SEBI to refund Rs. 25 crore penalty deposited by Reliance for violating SAST Regulations
There is no such thing under the SAST Regulations that acquisition and holding of shares without making a public announcement is a violation.
Does Section 14(3) of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 completely bar institution of suit within 5 years? SC answers
Supreme Court held that not putting a quietus to the prolonged dispute at hand, spanning 38 years, on something as simple as tenancy issue, would be a travesty of justice.