Search Results for "Section 279"

816 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 816 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Acquits KSRTC Driver in Road Accident Case Due to Lack of Rash or Negligent Driving Evidence. Conviction under Sections 279 and 304A IPC Set Aside as Prosecution Failed to Prove Culpable Rashness or Negligence Beyond Reasonable Doubt.

The appellant, Mohammad Hanif Jainum Khalifa, was a driver employed by the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC). He was tried and convic...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Review Petition Filed by Customs Department in Customs Act Case — DRI Officers Held as Proper Officers. The Court overruled earlier decisions and upheld Section 28(11) of the Customs Act, 1962 as constitutionally valid, restoring the Department's power to issue show cause notices.

The Supreme Court, in a batch of petitions led by Review Petition No. 400 of 2021, considered the correctness of its earlier judgment in M/s Canon Ind...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Bus Driver in Rash Driving Case Due to Lack of Evidence of Negligence. Conviction under Sections 279 and 304-A IPC set aside as sole eyewitness did not testify that the bus was driven rashly or negligently.

The applicant, Shivaji Damodar Karne, a bus driver employed with BEST, was convicted by the trial court (28th Esplanade Court, Mumbai) in CC No.40/P/9...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Allows Appeal in Motor Accident Claim — Negligence Established Despite Absence of Driver's License. Owner of Vehicle Held Liable for Compensation as Driver Was Not Possessing Valid Driving License at Time of Accident.

The case involves two appeals arising from a motor accident claim. The claimants, legal representatives of deceased Ramachandra Yallurkar, filed a cla...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Revision Petition in Rash Driving Case — Conviction Under Sections 279, 337, 338, 304-A IPC Upheld. Concurrent findings of fact by courts below not interfered with as no perversity or illegality found.

The petitioner, Athaulla, was convicted by the Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC, Gudibande in C.C.No.16/2007 for offences under Sections 279, 337, 338 an...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Tenant's Writ Petition Challenging Concurrent Eviction Orders for Non-Payment of Rent. Tenant Failed to Deposit Arrears Despite Statutory Protection Under Section 12(3)(b) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999.

The petitioner, a tenant of two shop blocks since 1977-1978, was sued for eviction by the respondent landlords for non-payment of rent from 01-08-1997...