rajdakshalegal

Service Law. An employee is expected to give a correct information as to his qualification. A candidate having suppressed the material information and/or giving false information cannot claim right to continuance in service. Supreme Court 3:11:2020.

Chief Manager, Punjab National Bank & anr vs Anit Kumar Das. Civil Appeal 3602 of 2020 (arising out of SLP (C) No. 8343 of 2020) decided on 3 November 2020. Judgment Link: https://main.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2020/8647/8647_2020_35_1504_24560_Judgement_03-Nov-2020.pdf HELD: 8. Even on the ground that respondent – original writ petitioner deliberately, wilfully and intentionally suppressed the fact that he was a graduate, the High Court has erred in directing the appellant Bank to allow the respondent – original writ petitioner to discharge his duties as a Peon. In the application/biodata, the respondent original writ petitioner did not mention that he was a graduate. Very cleverly he suppressed the material fact …

Continue reading “Service Law. An employee is expected to give a correct information as to his qualification. A candidate having suppressed the material information and/or giving false information cannot claim right to continuance in service. Supreme Court 3:11:2020.”

Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959. Appointment of an administrator under Section 28-A(5) does not violate the “autonomous” functioning of a co-operative society. Section does not infringe Article 19(1)(c) of the of the Constitution of India. Karnataka High Court. 16:10:2020

Gurunath Reddy vs The State of Karnataka and others. Writ Petition 226145/2020 & Connected matters decided on 16 October 2020. Judgment Link: http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/346429/1/WP226145-20-16-10-2020.pdf HELD: Paragraph 23. This Court is mindful of the following principles of law which are now metamorphosed while examining the Constitutional validity of any law or a provision/s of such law. (a) …

Continue reading “Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959. Appointment of an administrator under Section 28-A(5) does not violate the “autonomous” functioning of a co-operative society. Section does not infringe Article 19(1)(c) of the of the Constitution of India. Karnataka High Court. 16:10:2020”

Federalism being a basic structure, the States cannot be treated as vassals of the Center. UGC Regulations. Central Government is bound to consult the State Government for grant of ‘Deemed University’ status and for allied aspects. Karnataka High Court. 3:11:2020.

Moogambigai Charitable and Educational Trust and Others. vs Union of India and others. Writ Petition 7482/2020 & 9236/2020 decided on 3 November 2020. Judgment Link: http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/346425/1/WP7482-20-03-11-2020.pdf Relevant Paragraphs: Page 38. (I) As to Center-State relationship in a federal structure and mutual deference between them: The people of this country through their Constitution have secured to …

Continue reading “Federalism being a basic structure, the States cannot be treated as vassals of the Center. UGC Regulations. Central Government is bound to consult the State Government for grant of ‘Deemed University’ status and for allied aspects. Karnataka High Court. 3:11:2020.”

Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996. Dispute in relation to a claim for specific performance of the lease agreement is arbitrable. Scope of Section 11(6-A) discussed. Karnataka High Court. 13:10:2020

Royal Orchid Hotels Limited vs Rock Reality Private Limited. Civil Miscellaneous Petition 288/2018 decided on 13 October 2020. Judgment Link: http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/346423/1/CMP288-18-13-10-2020.pdf Relevant paragraphs: 7(i) (iii) What is the scope of adjudication involved in the instant petition in the light of the provisions contained in Section 11(6-A) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996? (iii) Whether the …

Continue reading “Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996. Dispute in relation to a claim for specific performance of the lease agreement is arbitrable. Scope of Section 11(6-A) discussed. Karnataka High Court. 13:10:2020”

Matrimonial disputes. Mere casual reference of the names of the family members in a matrimonial dispute without allegation of active involvement in the matter would not justify taking cognizance against them. Karnataka High Court. 23:10:2020

Meena R Poojary and others vs State of Karnataka and another. Criminal Petition 4993/2015 decided on 23 October 2020. Judgment Link: http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/346168/1/CRLP4995-15-23-10-2020.pdf Relevant Paragraphs: 7. …It is necessary to consider whether the allegations made in the private complaint attract the offence under Section 498A and other offences alleged against them. In a decision reported in …

Continue reading “Matrimonial disputes. Mere casual reference of the names of the family members in a matrimonial dispute without allegation of active involvement in the matter would not justify taking cognizance against them. Karnataka High Court. 23:10:2020”

Consumer Disputes. Remedies available to the consumers under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 are in addition to the one under Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. Complaint is maintainable under CP Act though the project is registered under the RERA Act. Supreme Court 2:11:2020.

M/s. Imperia Structures Ltd vs Anil Patni and another. Civil Appeal 3581-3590/2020. Decided on 2nd November 2020. Justice Umesh Uday Lalit and Justice Vineet Saran Judgment Link: https://main.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2019/9796/9796_2019_34_1502_24555_Judgement_02-Nov-2020.pdf HELD: On the strength of the law so declared, Section 79 of the RERA Act does not in any way bar the Commission or Forum under the …

Continue reading “Consumer Disputes. Remedies available to the consumers under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 are in addition to the one under Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. Complaint is maintainable under CP Act though the project is registered under the RERA Act. Supreme Court 2:11:2020.”

Writ Petition is maintainable against a private body discharging public duty or positive obligation of public nature. Law on the point discussed. Karnataka High Court.

Securities Exchange Board of India vs Franklin Templeton Trustees Services Pvt Ltd & others . Writ Appeal 399/2020 and connected matters decided on 24 October 2020. Judgment Link: http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/345451/1/WA399-20-24-10-2020.pdf HELD: Para 236. A writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India may be maintainable against a private body discharging public duty or positive …

Continue reading “Writ Petition is maintainable against a private body discharging public duty or positive obligation of public nature. Law on the point discussed. Karnataka High Court.”

Candidate elected as MLA by impersonating another voter. Fraud. Election set aside in Writ by High Court. Confirmed by the Supreme Court.

K. Venkatachalam v. A. Swamickan, (1999) 4 SCC 526 Relevant Paragraphs. 25. In the present case the appellant was not an elector in the electoral roll of Lalgudi Assembly Constituency. He, therefore, could not be elected as a Member from that constituency. How could a person who is not an elector from that constituency represent …

Continue reading “Candidate elected as MLA by impersonating another voter. Fraud. Election set aside in Writ by High Court. Confirmed by the Supreme Court.”

Writ of Quo-Warranto. Pre-requisite for issuance of a writ of quo- warranto is that the person against whom it is sought must hold an “Independent”, “Substantive” public office. Mere holding of a public office is not enough. Karnataka High Court.

Karnataka Kaigarika Pradeshabhivruddi Mandali Parishista Jaati Parishista Pangada Matthu Hindulida Vargagala Noukarara Sangha (Regd) vs State of Karnataka and others. Writ Petition 33055/2019 decided on 8 May 2020. Justice G. Narendar. Judgment Link: http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/330792/1/WP33055-19-08-05-2020.pdf HELD: The pre-requisite for issuance of a writ of quo- warranto is that the person against whom it is sought must …

Continue reading “Writ of Quo-Warranto. Pre-requisite for issuance of a writ of quo- warranto is that the person against whom it is sought must hold an “Independent”, “Substantive” public office. Mere holding of a public office is not enough. Karnataka High Court.”

Criminal Trial. Though confession statement of accused is inadmissible in evidence, if it is made before the Investigating officer during investigation while in custody, the same can be used by Police as information for the purpose of lodging the complaint and registering the case against the accused. Karnataka High Court.

Chandrashekara vs State of Karnataka. Criminal Appeal 1574/2015 decided on 29 October 2020. Justice B. Veerappa and Justice K. Natarajan. Judgment Link: http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/346192/1/CRLA1574-15-23-10-2020.pdf HELD: 34. …..Though the confession statement is inadmissible in evidence if it is made before the Investigating officer during investigation while in custody, but the confession statement made before PW.1 as well as …

Continue reading “Criminal Trial. Though confession statement of accused is inadmissible in evidence, if it is made before the Investigating officer during investigation while in custody, the same can be used by Police as information for the purpose of lodging the complaint and registering the case against the accused. Karnataka High Court.”