• NATIONAL

SC: Estranged Wife Entitled to House

The Supreme Court has ruled that husband paying monthly maintenance to cover food, clothing and other expenses of estranged wives now include provision for a house akin to the husband's.

A Bench comprising Justices Arijit Pasayat and Mukundakam Sharma, ruling in favour of Komal Amma from Kerala who struggled to find a house for herself after estrangement said, "Maintenance, as we see it, necessarily, must encompass a provision for residence." The bench also added, "Maintenance is given so that the woman can live in the manner, more or less, to which she was accustomed."

In its significant ruling, the bench said, "The concept of maintenance must, therefore, include provision for food and clothing and the like and take into account the basic need of a roof over the head." This helps estranged wives lead a normal life without feeling the pinch.

Therefore, if the couple was living in a posh locality, then after estrangement, the husband is bound to give a sum along with maintenance that would enable her to rent a house in a similar locality.

Delhi High Court issues notice to Lt. Governor and Building Department

The Delhi High Court has issued notices to Lt. governor and secretary of land and building department on a petition, which seeks contempt proceedings against them. Justice SN Dhingra has issued notice on the plea of Dayanand, an aggrieved landowner to whom the authorities had not paid the compensation for the plot despite an earlier notice of the court.

These authorities have failed to pay compensation to farmers whose land was acquired for airport expansion by the Delhi government two decades ago. The court on hearing the contentions issued notices and asked the officials to file their response within eight weeks.

Delhi HC supports Narco Analysis Test against terrorism and heinous crimes

Delhi High Court has upheld its validity stating the narco-analysis test is essential despite the criticism over subjecting accused persons to test. This is important in view of growing terrorism related cases and heinous crimes. The judgment said the test couldn't be used as sole evidence to convict the accused and that it is only meant to assist and aid the investigation.

Explaining the procedures of narco analysis, HC made it clear that the test should be conducted at the instance of a police officer not less than the rank below a sub-inspector. The court also added that a prior permission of the concerned criminal court has to be obtained and the court would grant permission if the investigating agency's request were reasonable in the facts and circumstances of the case.

Courts in Delhi are choked with bounced cheques

The evening courts launched in Delhi dealt with cheque bounce cases, which are the sign of how the judiciary for all its reservations, has been reduced to playing a recovery agent for financial institutions. After the global meltdown, there is no let up in the flood of cheque bounce cases arising mostly from the loans and credit cards, which are issued liberally in the boom years.

The initiative of evening courts is a result of a committee of three high court judges who revealed that cheque dishonour complaints under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act constitute almost two thirds of the entire workload of magistrates in Delhi. Of 7.67 lakh pending criminal cases in Delhi, bounced cheques account for 5.15 lakh.

A reform in the criminal law made in 2002 has made the old civil remedy of filing a suit for recovering the cheque amount pretty much redundant. Violations of Section 138 - the criminal provision - are now punishable not only with imprisonment up to two years but also monetary penalty up to twice the cheque amount, which is then paid to the complainant.

Bombay HC: Refuses to grant stay on Maharashtra Govt. ban on movie Deshdrohi

The Bombay High Court refused to a grant stay imposed by the State government on the ban on the screening of controversial Hindi film Deshdrohi, depicting the divide between Marathi and non-Marathi speaking people in Maharashtra.

While disposing off the petition, the division bench, consisting of Justices S B Mahse and Amjad Sayed, while disposing off the petition moved by producer-actor Kamal Khan challenging the ban, in its order directed the state government to give a fresh hearing to the producer.

Khan contending that the censor board had already cleared the film after censoring certain parts and it has been already released in the other parts of the country. He also added that imposing a ban on it in Maharashtra would be in violation of the freedom of expression, guaranteed by the Constitution.

The Maharashtra government imposed a ban on a suggestion by the Mumbai police, fearing it may affect law and order in the state.

Allahabad HC reprieve, CIC goes on leave

The chief information commissioner (CIC) Justice MA Khan proceeded on leave after joining office barely for an hour thus following the Allahabad High Court stayed suspension order. He admitted that with barely ten left days left for his superannuation he choose "peace over every thing else" as he was due to retire on November 30. He also added that "I do not want to annoy people unnecessarily and give them a chance to point an accusing finger later on, specially as nearly all cases pending before me are against UP government."

Warming up to the theme, the CIC, who had accused the government of witch-hunting after his suspension on July 9, alleged that he had already borne the wrath for having raised queries on the BSP dream project -- the Ambedkar Park.

Justice Khan was placed under suspension on July 9 by governor TV Rajeswar on charges of departmental irregularities and misappropriation.

Bombay High Court asks for detailed report of Shahpur College

The Bombay High Court directed principal secretary, higher and technical education to inspect personally a college in Shahpur and submit a report within a week. The court challenged the state government's decision while hearing a petition to allow a trust to start a college in the area, though that was reportedly it was not ready with the infrastructure or facilities. The court said that, "Prima facie, we are not convinced that there was any material to grant permission to the trust to start a college."

On the other part, the State Government had granted permission to the Jeevandeep Shaikshanik Sanstha (JSS) in June 2008, to start a college offering Arts, Science and Commerce streams in Kharadi in Shahpur.

The petition, filed by Maharashtra Shaikshanik Va Arogya Vidyanagari, alleged favouritism as JSS had not fulfilled any of the mandatory criteria. JSS did not own the land on which the college was to come up. Also, no details were furnished as to whether JSS had permission from the local authorities to construct a college.

Govt claims final say in KG gas pricing

The Union government filed a fresh affidavit in the Bombay High Court, which is hearing a dispute over supply of gas from Krishna Godavari (KG) basin, stating that any sale price less than $ 4.2 per mmBtu is not compatible with decisions taken by a ministerial panel. The price of gas is the most contentious issue in the court battle between Mukesh Ambani-controlled Reliance Industries (RIL) and Anil Ambani's Reliance Natural Resources (RNRL). The Bombay High Court had asked the Government of India counsel to file a fresh affidavit making a categorical statement on the pricing of gas and explaining why gas pricing is binding on all.

Imposition of penalties under fiscal statute

The Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs Dharamendra Textile Processor has held that proving of bonafide by the taxpayer is not a pre-requisite in case of levy of penalty under a fiscal statute, since the same constitutes a civil liability. The Court held that under section 271 (1) of the IT Act, the tax department may direct the person in default for imposition of penalty which is a civil liability.

Lodhas contest Birlas' plea for new chairman

The Company Law Board (CLB) heard a petition seeking appointment of an independent chairman to run Birla Corporation following the death of R S Lodha. In its petition, Rameshwara Jute Mills, an MP Birla group company, has prayed that the board of directors of the Birla Corporation and other M P Birla group companies should be superseded by independent people, as after the death of R S Lodha, there was no one to represent the company.

SC settles doubt on venue of bounced cheque trial

The SC in the case of Shamshad Begum vs B Mohammed ruled that a court where any of the transactions regarding an invalid cheque took place could try the offence under the Negotiable Instruments Act. In this case, the contract between the parties was entered into in Bangalore but they later moved to Mangalore. When the cheque bounced for want of funds in the bank, the drawee moved the court in Mangalore. The drawer challenged it arguing that since the contract was signed in Bangalore and the bank also was situated there, the Mangalore court had no jurisdiction. The SC rejected the contention. It said that there are five components in the offence: drawing of the cheque, presentation of the cheque to the bank, bouncing, giving notice and failure to pay within 15 days. If any of these occur in any place, the court in that place can take up the trial.

Karnataka Forest Corporation told to refund amounts to bidders

The SC has dismissed the appeal of the Karnataka State Forest Industries Corporation against the high court order asking it to refund the amounts due to two firms which were successful bidders in a tender for lifting granite blocks. The firms had paid part of the amounts due to the corporation, but since they were not issued necessary permits, they did not perform the rest of the contract. The corporation refused to refund the amount and threatened to confiscate the amounts paid.

Kerala HC order on complaint under Drugs and Cosmetics Act set aside

The SC set aside the Kerala HC order quashing the complaint against a medical company, which allegedly manufactured allopathic drugs, but sold them as health supplements or Ayurvedic medicines without licence. A complaint was filed under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act that the firm was manufacturing, selling and storing DXN Ganocelium and DXN Rishi and (RG) capsules, which are drugs within the definition of Section 3(b) of the Act, without a manufacturing licence. The company claimed that the Drug Departments of Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry had issued licences to it. The SC stated that the high court could not have quashed the complaint even before the trial was complete.

• INTERNATIONAL

QCs defend Justice Eady as accused of privacy law rulings

Queen's Counsel has made an unprecedented defense of the judge, who is accused by newspaper chiefs of single-handedly creating a privacy law.

The four top defamation silks reject claims that Mr Justice Eady is on a one-man mission to introduce a privacy law by the backdoor. Paul Dacre, editor of the Daily Mail, who is supported by The Sun, attacked as, "cannot stand unanswered, not least because the judge is unable to respond publicly to such criticism".

The four QCs point out that Mr Justice Eady's rulings are subject to review by higher courts. They insist that he was doing no more than applying the law but also rebut the notion that he wants to suppress media freedom of expression.

Appeal against 'competition test' by Tesco for planning approval

Tesco has begin a legal challenge to proposed planning rules that would prevent it opening stories in towns and cities. It has a dominant share of the market there.

The so-called "competition test", one of the key recommendations to emerge from a two-year Competition Commission investigation into Britain's £120 billion grocery market, has pitted Britain's biggest retailer against rivals Asda, Marks & Spencer and Waitrose.

In the coming three-day hearing, Tesco will argue that the test is unlawful and was beyond the Commission's powers to recommend before the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT).

The decision is likely to be release before the end of the year by the CAT. The Government will await its ruling before deciding whether to implement the test and could be delayed until the end of 2009.

Judge orders Total to make 'generous' offer to Buncefield victims

A judge instructed the oil depot's operator to make a "sensible and generous" offer to hundreds of victims of the Buncefield fire, who moved closer to an initial payout. The residents of Hemel Hempstead sued for compensation after their homes were damaged or destroyed in Britain's biggest peacetime explosion. They asked the court for early payment of damages and a contribution to their legal costs.

Total, the French oil giant that operates the plant, in Hertfordshire, north of London, is facing around £700 million in claims relating to the fire in 2005, which injured forty-three people.

Lexa Hilliard, the lawyer acting for the claimants, told Mr Justice David Steel at the High Court that as Total had already accepted responsibility for the blast it was "quite clear the claimants had been successful". She also added that Total had made offers of interim compensation but they were "parsimonious" and the issue of legal costs remained a "weeping sore" for the claimants.

Suing a Judge is asking for Trouble

A Canadian lawyer Kimberly Townley-Smith loses a case for a 'scurrilous attack' on a panel of judges. Townley-Smith represented Wyrd Sisters, a folk group, in a $40 million lawsuit against Warner Brothers in 2005. The claim failed and being dissatisfied, Townley-Smith pursued three judges involved in the case and sued them for conspiracy, alleging that they had been involved in a sinister "dysfunction" against her client. She demanded $21 million in damages for conspiracy, fraud, misrepresentation, abuse of process and abuse of public office. Townley-Smith accused the judges of skulduggery, lying and fixing the case.

The Ontario Supreme Court dismissed the claim, citing the standard Canadian rule giving judges immunity from being sued for their court decisions. Throwing out the Wyrd Sisters' case, the court ruled that the case was a "scurrilous attack on the administration of justice by a member of the Bar". The judge said that while any advocate is allowed to put the case of their client "fearlessly, resolutely and honourably", Townley-Smith had strayed into "forbidden ground" by improperly advancing her own opinions and having an improper purpose. She also tried to act as both a witness and counsel in the same case.

Lyricist Sheikh and Singer Michael Jackson caught into a legal fight

Sheikh Abdulla bin Hamad al-Khalifa, the second son of the King of Bahrain plan to release the sheikh's self-penned ditty as a charity single to help victims of the 2004 Boxing Day tsunami, to be sung by Michael Jackson. The sheikh is now suing Mr Jackson for the return of £4.7 million, which he claims he gave the pop star to help him to get back on his feet after a financial crisis.

The sheikh claims that he and Mr Jackson agreed the star's vocals were not good enough, but Mr Jackson failed to attend a final recording, scuppering any hopes of a release.

Mr Jackson's defence is that there was no valid agreement and that the sheikh's case is based on "mistake, misrepresentation and undue influence".

On the other hand a High Court in London Mr Justice Sweeney heard that the pair had enjoyed a "close personal relationship".

Solicitors accused over 'dubious deals'

A tribunal court heard a Britain's highest-earning solicitor acted dishonestly and with "conscious impropriety" in dealings with a mining union. This has led to his firm handling of thousands of industrial disease compensation claims. Jim Beresford agreed to a "dubious" deal that "raises the suspicion" that hundreds of thousands of pounds were diverted from the Union of Democratic Mineworkers (UDM) into the hands of a union employee.

Mr Beresford, 58, and Douglas Smith, 51, partners in Beresfords, a South Yorkshire firm of solicitors, are accused of "conduct unbecoming a solicitor" by failing to act in the best interests of their clients, misleading the Government, breaching referral rules and entering into "sham arrangements" with the UDM and Clare Walker, an employee of the union. They appeared before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal to face 11 charges of serious professional misconduct. Both deny any wrongdoing.

Kuwaiti Court asked to Suspend Stock Market Ruling

Kuwait Stock Exchange says the government has asked a court to suspend its ruling that temporarily closed the plummeting exchange. Two brokers had filed the lawsuit to close the exchange on the ground that the government was not doing enough to shore up the markets in the face of the global financial crisis.

Congress delays Global Warming Law

US Congress will not act until 2010 on a bill to limit the heat-trapping gases blamed for global warming despite President-elect Obama's declaration that he will move quickly to deal with climate change, the chairman of the Senate Energy Committee predicted. Instead, he said, Congress is "ready to go" early next year on legislation to boost energy savings in buildings and transportation and to require utilities to produce more electricity from renewable sources like windmills and solar panels.

US top Court Rules for Navy in Whales-Sonar Case

The US Navy can conduct sonar-training exercises off the southern California coast without restrictions designed to protect whales, dolphins and other marine mammals, the Supreme Court ruled in a defeat for environmentalists. Environmental groups brought the lawsuit and said the intense sound waves can harm or even kill 37 species of marine mammals, including sea lions and endangered blue whales, by interfering with their ability to navigate and communicate.