1. Ramesh Chand Rai v. State of U.P., 06-07-2018
Penal Code, 1860 - Ss. 302 - Arms Act, 1959 - Ss. 3/25 - Motive - Prosecution has failed to adduce two persons as witnesses - Effect of.
2. Pyare Lal v. State of U.P., 05-07-2018
Schedule Castes and Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Ss. 3(2)(5) - There is no evidence to outrage the modesty of the prosecutrix belonging to the member of the Schedule Caste community - in the absence of any such evidence, the conviction by the trial court under the provisions of Section 3(2)(5) of the said Act is unsustainable.
3. Shiv Kumar v. State of U.P., 04-07-2018
Penal Code, 1860 - S.307 - Minor contradictions cannot be taken to be ground to reject the testimony of the prosecutions witnesses of facts.
4. Mudit Verma v. Ram Kumar, 04-07-2018
Civil P.C. 1908 - O.7 R.11(d) - Plaint is liable to be rejected on both the grounds, i.e., being barred by law of limitation and on plain reading of the plaint itself, as well as on ground that the plaint is filed by playing fraud upon the Court by making concealment of relevant facts from the Court.
5. Ram Kumar v. Shoola Devi, 02-07-2018
Succession Act, 1925 - A revision is not maintainable either under Section 384(3) or Section 388(3) or Section 388(4) of the Act.
6. Brij Kishor Versus Rajesh Kumar Gupta, 02-07-2018
Land Law - Normally, Section 331 of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act is attracted in such cases where a declaration of right or status of a tenure holder is necessarily needed. A recorded tenure holder or a person having possession over the land in question being Bhumidhar cannot be denied the relief by civil court on the ground of non-maintainability of suit in view of Section 331 of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act.
7. Hamdard (Wakf) Laboratories v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, 02-07-2018
Tax Law - Commodity in question i.e. "Sharbat Rooh Afza" is neither a fruit drink nor a fruit juice nor a processed fruit rather it is a "Non Fruit Syrup / Sharabat" being a concentrated sugar syrup which is not specified in Schedule-I, II, III & IV of the Act. Therefore, it is an unclassified item falling under the residuary entry of Schedule-V of the Act.
8. Gorakhpur Texpark Private Ltd. v. State of U.P., 02-07-2018
Industrial Area Development Act, 1976 (U.P.) - S.7 - the CEO has power by virtue of Section 12 of ACT, 1976 to delegate his power to other officers of the authority.