Latest news with #CivilProcedureCode
Hindustan Times
13-06-2025
- Hindustan Times
HC rejects Firoz Nadiadwala's plea to dismiss ₹24-crore suit over film financing dispute
MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court on Monday rejected a plea by filmmaker Firoz A Nadiadwala seeking dismissal of a ₹24-crore commercial suit filed against him on grounds that he was never formally served a writ of summons. Justice Abhay Ahuja, who heard the matter, observed that since Nadiadwala had already appointed lawyers and was represented by senior counsel during earlier proceedings, formal service of summons was not required under the law. The case stems from a financing agreement dated July 16, 2015, between Nadiadwala and businessman Anil Dhanraj Jethani, who had agreed to fund a film production. Jethani later filed a suit on August 19, 2015, to recover ₹24 crore, alleging non-payment of dues. On September 1, 2015, the high court passed a consent order permitting Jethani to withdraw ₹12.5 crore deposited by another defendant. The remaining amount was to be paid by Nadiadwala before the release of his upcoming film Welcome to the Jungle, which was initially scheduled for December 28, 2024, but has since been delayed. Following the enactment of the Commercial Courts Act in October 2015, the suit was reclassified as a commercial case. Nadiadwala later moved an application arguing that he had never been served a summons, and therefore, all subsequent orders—including the consent order—were invalid and contrary to the Civil Procedure Code. His counsel further pointed out that Jethani had not taken any steps to issue or serve a writ of summons for over seven years and contended that the financing agreement remained unsigned by one party, raising questions about its enforceability. Countering the claim, Jethani's senior counsel argued that once a defendant enters an appearance during interlocutory proceedings or files a vakalatnama, formal service of summons is no longer necessary. He accused Nadiadwala of acting in bad faith and attempting to evade a binding commitment made to the court. The court noted that Nadiadwala had received copies of the plaint and exhibits on August 20, 2015, and that his legal team had participated in hearings on August 24 and 28 that year. It held that his participation established his awareness of the proceedings and dismissed his application accordingly.
NDTV
10-06-2025
- Politics
- NDTV
Trinamool MP Saket Gokhale's Public Apology In Defamation Case By Laxmi Puri
New Delhi: Trinamool Congress MP Saket Gokhale, as directed by the Delhi High Court, has issued an unconditional apology to former diplomat Laxmi Puri, wife of Union Minister Hardeep Singh Puri, over defamatory posts. The High Court had directed Mr Gokhale to pay Rs 50 lakh as damages to the former diplomat for alleged defamation and publish an apology. Mr Gokhale wrote on the social media platform X that on June 13 and 23, 2021, he had accused Ms Puri of buying property abroad without proof, for which he apologises. A single bench of the Delhi High Court had directed Mr Gokhale to issue a public apology and pay a compensation of Rs 50 lakh to Laxmi Puri. The court had also barred Mr Gokhale from making any further defamatory remarks and warned of civil detention for disobeying the orders. Mr Gokhale issued this public apology after the court found he had not complied with the July 2024 decision and the deadline given in May 2025. In the last hearing, Mr Gokhale had told the court that he would publish an apology as directed by the single judge. Lakshmi Puri has filed a contempt petition against Saket Gokhale for not complying with the July 1 order, which is pending before another bench. During the hearing of the case, senior advocate Amit Sibal, appearing for Saket Gokhale, had said that the comments made on Twitter come under justified and democratic criticism. He had said that Mr Goakhle did not even name the defendant in the tweets nor did he accuse of any corruption. Earlier, the High Court had rejected the review petition filed by Saket Gokhale. Mr Gokhale had requested the court to withdraw the order of paying Rs 50 lakh as compensation and apologising against him. Earlier, Lakshmi Puri had rejected Mr Gokhale's proposal in which he had offered not to pay the compensation citing financial difficulties. Recently, the Delhi High Court, in a setback to Saket Gokhale, ordered to confiscate his salary. The court had said that no proper explanation was given for not depositing the decretal amount. Warrants of attachment should be issued as per Section 60 (I) Civil Procedure Code (CPC) regarding the salary, which is said to be Rs 1.9 lakh per month. The court had directed that the salary will remain confiscated until the amount of Rs 50 lakh is deposited in the court. The lawyer appearing on behalf of Laxmi Puri had said that by decree the judgment debtor has been directed to publish an apology and pay Rs 50 lakh by August 27, 2024. Senior advocate Maninder Singh, appearing for Laxmi Puri, had said that we will file an application under Order 21 Rule 41 (3), which states that if the affidavit is not filed as per the court's instructions, then there is a jail sentence of three months. The court observed Section 60 of the Civil Procedure Code for attachment of Mr Gokhale's salary. The court had said that we can attach up to two-thirds of the salary as per the CIC. On July 1 last year, the court had asked Mr Gokhale to apologise on social media within four weeks and pay Ms Puri Rs 50 lakh as compensation. When that order was not implemented, Ms Puri filed a petition demanding implementation of the order.
Time of India
07-06-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Bengaluru stampede: Compensation raised to Rs 25 Lakh; KSCA secretary, treasurer resign
Bengaluru stampede: Compensation raised to Rs 25 Lakh; KSCA secretary, treasurer resign NEW DELHI: Karnataka chief minister Siddaramaiah has announced an increase in compensation for the families of those who died in the tragic stampede outside the M Chinnaswamy Stadium to Rs 25 lakh each, up from the earlier Rs 10 lakh. The incident on June 4, during Royal Challengers Bengaluru's (RCB) IPL victory celebration, claimed 11 lives and injured 56 others. The decision comes as part of the government's broader response to the tragedy, which has triggered public outrage over mismanagement and a lack of crowd control at the high-profile event. Retired HC judge to lead inquiry The Karnataka government has constituted a one-man inquiry commission under retired High Court judge John Michael Cunha to investigate the circumstances leading to the stampede. The commission will identify lapses, omissions, and those responsible, and recommend measures to prevent similar incidents in the future. As per the government's directive, the panel is expected to submit its report within 30 days. An official notification dated June 5 confirmed that the commission will function under the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952, with full powers to summon witnesses and examine evidence under the Civil Procedure Code. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Colorado: Gov Will Cover Your Cost To Install Solar If You Live In These Zips SunValue Learn More Undo KSCA officials resign In the wake of the tragedy, two top officials of the Karnataka State Cricket Association (KSCA), secretary A Shankar and treasurer ES Jairam, resigned from their posts on Saturday, taking "moral responsibility" for the stampede. KSCA president Raghuram Bhat said the resignations were accepted during an emergency managing committee meeting. "We are ready to cooperate fully with the government and the high court. We have nothing to hide," Bhat told reporters. He added that the KSCA would provide all necessary support to the ongoing investigation and emphasised that transparency would be maintained throughout the process. The stampede occurred outside the stadium on the evening of June 4 as thousands gathered for the RCB team's celebratory event after winning their maiden IPL title. The crowd swelled beyond control, triggering a deadly rush that led to multiple fatalities and injuries.
The Hindu
03-06-2025
- General
- The Hindu
HC sets aside local court's gag order against media houses
Telangana High Court had set aside a gag order passed by a local court here against some newspapers, TV channels, web portals and media organisations directing them not report any defamatory content against Megha Engineering and Infrastructure Limited company and its management. A bench of Justices T. Vinod Kumar and P. Sree Sudha, allowing a batch of three appeals filed by media organisations, said the trial court's ad-interim ex-parte injunction order was 'unreasoned'. The said order was contrary to the mandate under Civil Procedure Code and hence impermissible, the Division Bench said. While passing such direction without issuing notices to the opposite parties, the court should record reasons as to why such order should be passed. The trial court passed the order but did not specify the time within which the respondents can get it vacated. This had deprived the appellants' right to file counter affidavit, the Bench observed. The two-judge bench observed that gag orders should be scrutinized though they were meant to maintain the integrity of legal proceedings. The courts should ensure that such gag orders did not infringe upon the fundamental rights like the right to free speech. These rights can be curtailed only in accordance with Article 19(2) of the Constitution of India. Citing a Supreme Court verdict, the Division Bench noted that 'freedom of speech and expression was construed to include the freedom to circulate one's views by words of mouth or in writing or through audio-visual instrumentalities. This included the right to propagate one's views through the print media or any other communication channel like radio or television subject to reasonable restrictions. The Bench also noted that the company filed the suits for damages nearly a year after the publication of news. The company also suppressed the fact that it had filed another suit in a court at Khammam seeking similar relief. This amounted to clear abuse of the process of law, the verdict said. Since the gag order was passed without adhering to established legal principles, it cannot be sustained, the Bench said.
Time of India
28-05-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Andhra Pradesh high court bars police from meddling in land disputes
Vijayawada: Stating that police have no authority to intervene in civil land disputes, Andhra Pradesh high court, in a strong rebuke to Visakhapatnam police, criticised the practice of summoning individuals involved in civil disputes for counselling under the so-called 'pre-litigation council forum (PLCF). Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Justice Y Lakshmana Rao ruled that land disputes fall strictly under the jurisdiction of civil courts, as per Sections 9 and 15 of the Civil Procedure Code, while emphasising that resolution mechanisms such as the state legal services authority, district legal services authorities, and mandal-level bodies are the only authorised platforms to mediate in such cases. The order came after a 74-year-old petitioner challenged Visakhapatnam police's repeated summons to attend PLCF sessions regarding a land case which was already under trial in a civil court. The petitioner, citing ill health and legal overreach, argued that police pressure was unlawful. The court sided with him, condemning the police for attempting to mediate in civil matters and warned that such actions only escalate disputes. The HC further ordered that police should not attempt to resolve civil disputes under any name or platform, including the PLCF. In similar cases, the high court also intervened in Prakasam and Palnadu districts after petitioners complained of police coercion to withdraw ongoing civil cases, including a property dispute and a financial recovery suit. The court directed local police not to pressurise citizens into withdrawing legally filed cases.
