High Court judgments and orders from across India, with the legal point made clear.
Justice Sachin Datta held that Order XIII-A exists only for suits in the Commercial Division, that the landlord Trust had itself pleaded this is not a commercial matter, that issues were framed years ago, and that a Rs 45 lakh sale-agreement defence raised by the tenants must go to trial.
Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Jaspreet Singh, sitting at Lucknow, held that an arbitral tribunal cannot compound interest when the contract is silent, and used the Gayatri Balasamy guardrails to modify the award against the State of Uttar Pradesh rather than set it aside.
Justice Rana Vikram Singh found that the case diary, including the officer's own 1993 letter admitting he had not examined the bills for want of time, disclosed a prima facie case of collusion, and declined to call the charge groundless under Section 239 CrPC.
Justice Sanjeev S. Kalgaonkar held that a complainant who blamed the demand on the station house officer in one breath and the constable in the next, a six-day delay, no shadow witness and notes the accused was made to pick up left the Lokayukta trap case short of proof.
Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Jaspreet Singh, sitting at Lucknow, dismissed the U.P. Electronics Corporation appeal under Section 37, holding that a claim signed by a partner who died before it was filed did not abate and that an unproven fraud plea cannot unsettle an award.
