SUPREME COURT

• CRIMINAL

Jaswant Vs State of Rajasthan (Decided on 13.05.2009) MANU/SC/0800/2009

Criminal - Appellants face trial under sections 302, 147, 302/149, 324, 326 and 323 IPC for committing murder - Whether a trial of a sessions case could have commenced and completed although no cognizance of it could have been taken against the appellants is the question that arises for consideration herein.

So long as the investigation is not completed or evidences are not brought on record, the learned Sessions Judge could not have exercised his jurisdiction either under Section 193 of the Code of Civil Procedure or Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The impugned order framing charges against the appellants for the reasons mentioned hereinbefore, therefore, is liable to be set aside. Court directed accordingly. However, keeping in view the fact that the appellants have already appeared and are no longer absconding, direct the investigating officer to submit a final form on the basis of the materials collected during investigation.

Subramaniam Vs State of Tamil Nadu MANU/SC/0795/2009

Criminal - Deceased found dead in matrimonial home - FIR lodged alleging cruelty and torture on part of appellant -Whether FIR loged after recording the statements of the witnesses is admissible

The police must have received some information. Why the other information was suppressed by the prosecution has not been explained. In a situation of this nature particularly if an FIR was lodged after recording the statements of the witnesses, another FIR would not be admissible in evidence and ordinarily an investigation cannot be started without recording the FIR - Whether FIR lodged after recording the statements of the witnesses is sustainable

• LABOUR & INDUSTRIAL

Narendra Kumar Vs Regional Manager, Punjab National Bank (Decided on 13.05.2009) MANU/SC/0788/2009

Labour & Industrial - Appellant's services were terminated by the respondent bank - Appellant raises an dispute for reinstatement with consequential monetary and service benefits - Labour Court allows the claim in part and orders a compensation - Petition filed in High Court at instance of the appellant dismissed in limine.

Ordinarily, Court would not have interfered with the concurrent findings of the labour court and the High Court. At the same time, they can't be obdurate to the hard realities of life. In matters of this nature, a humane and pragmatic approach to the various factors, including the steep escalation in prices in the commodity market, the cost of living, the cost of education of children etc. Therefore, keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, in our view, it would be in the interest of justice, to enhance the compensation from Rupees Fifty Thousand (50,000/-) to One Lakh (1,00,000/-) only. Before parting with the case, we make it clear that this order shall not be treated as a precedent in any other case.

HIGH COURT

• INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS

DELHI HIGH COURT

Louis Vuitton Malletier Vs Abdul Salim (Decided on 06.5.2009) MANU/DE/0415/2009

Suit filed for protection of trademark - seeks order against the defendant - Injunction is also claimed restraining the defendants from selling counterfeit goods of the plaintiff bearing the aforesaid trademarks/logo/monogram.

The marks of the plaintiff are undoubtedly well known, transcending borders and known/recognized by all who are connoisseur of such goods. The defendants No. 1 & 2 are proved to be illegally importing counterfeit goods of the plaintiff and infringing the registered trademarks/logo/monogram of the plaintiff. The actions of the defendants No. 1 & 2 are also found to have caused damage to the plaintiff. The defendants by remaining ex parte cannot avoid liability in damages. However the plaintiff having not proved the length of time for which the defendants No. 1 & 2 have been carrying on the said business of selling counterfeit goods of the plaintiff and the volume of the said trade of the defendants No. 1 & 2, nominal damages in the sum of Rs. 2 lacs are awarded to the plaintiff. A decree for damages in the said amount is passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants No. 1 & 2 jointly and severally. Decree sheet be drawn up.

• CRIMINAL

DELHI HIGH COURT

Gokal Vs State (Decided on 12.05.2009) MANU/DE/0511/2009

Appellant convicted of murdering the deceased - Trial Court holds him guilty - Appeal filed in High Court

Held that the appellant has not been able to demolish the testimony of Dr. R. Dayal PW-10, that the deceased had informed him that the appellant had set her on fire after pouring kerosene oil on her body. The evidence of Shashi PW-1, that she had seen the appellant coming down from the floor where the room in which the deceased was found burnt was situated soon after the occurrence is indicative of the fact that the appellant was attempting to leave the place of occurrence so as to ensure that no suspicion would fall upon him; a conduct which is an incriminating fact.

• FAMILY

BOMBAY HIGH COURT

Arlene Lourdes Ramona Cardoz Vs Mr. Remiz Cardozo (Decided on 08.05.2009) MANU/MH/0282/2009

Petitioner challenges the order of taking custody of the child from her and handing it over to the Respondent.

It was held that the child is 10 years old. He has been interviewed by the Court. He was demonstrated a fair amount of intelligence, understand and maturity. He has accepted the relationship and the present position of both his parents. This is not one case in which the child has suffered any trauma at the hands of either parent. He deserves to have the care, attention, upbringing and affection from both parents, who are also interviewed by the Court, and who appear to be educated, cultured and understanding persons.

• SERVICE

GUJARAT HIGH COURT

Chatrabhuj Trivedi Vs State of Gujarat (Decided on 05.05.2009) MANU/GJ/0187/2009

Petitioner files petition for appointment to the post of Lecturer in law - Whether Ordinance 164-A framed under the Saurashtra University Act, 1965, would enable a candidate to round off fraction of marks obtained in a written competitive examination for bringing him in the field of choice for appointment to the post of Lecturer in law.

Candidate belonging to General/Other Backward Classes (OBC) who have secured at least 55% marks (without grace or rounding off in Master's Degree examination in Humanities (including languages) and Social Sciences, Forensic Science, Environmental Science, Computer Science and Applications, Electronic Sciences etc. are eligible to appear for this examination. The above facts would indicate that University Grants Commission Act and the Regulations framed thereunder do not approve the principle of giving grace marks or rounding off marks so as to make a candidate eligible for applying for various teaching posts. That being the factual and legal position, in our view, Ordinance 164-A cannot over-ride the University Grants Commission Regulations and qualification prescribed for various teaching positions, unless provision for adding grace marks or the criteria of rounding off marks is permitted by the University Grants Commission.