Bombay High Court Rejects $31 Million Appeal by Insurance Cos. Against Airport Ground Handling Firm
The Bombay High Court dismissed an appeal worth 31 million dollars filed by several insurance companies against an airport ground handling firm in a landmark judgment. The insurance cos filed for damages through the appeal after the commercial court ruled in favor of the ground handling firm. The Division Bench of the High Court agreed with the judgment pronounced by the commercial court. It held that it was not a case coming under the heads of commercial dispute, under the provisions of the Act on the Commercial Courts, 2015.The case was an appeal directed by the insurance companies to file a claim against the ground handling firm. In the claim filed against the ground handling firm, it had been alleged that due to negligence, it has caused such financial losses that the insurance companies prayed for damages in the amount of $31 million. The companies had insured those goods and services to be handled by the firm and insisted that the firm handled equipment improperly, which led to losses and therefore constituted their cause of liability to pay out on those insurance claims. This led the companies to recover loss from the ground handling company. But when the case first came to court, the commercial judge dismissed the suit. The said commercial court held that the dispute did not fall within the definition of "commercial dispute" contained in the Commercial Courts Act of 2015. The Act defines what falls within or what constitutes a commercial dispute, normally involving any disagreement concerning trade, commerce, or business contract. The court held that the dispute was more closely linked to an insurance claim and liability matter rather than a direct commercial or contractual dispute between businesses. Unhappy with the decision, the insurance companies appealed before the Bombay High Court, reasoning that the commercial court was wrong in dismissing the case and that the matter was essentially a commercial dispute. They said it involved sufficient money, as well as the nature of the relationship between the parties for it to be treated as a commercial dispute. The Division Bench of the Bombay High Court refused to accept the submissions made by the insurance companies. The High Court agreed with the decision of the commercial court while handling the subject matter and held that the nature of the claim was not purely commercial within the meaning of the Act. It was held that the issue was an insurance claim and reimbursement which falls outside the purview of normal things that would be considered under the 2015 Act as constituting a commercial dispute. With this view, judgment of the court has far-reaching implications in that it sustains narrow view what is considered to fall under the description of a commercial dispute for the purposes of the Commercial Courts Act so that by definition, this act cannot be misapplied to insurance claims and other non-commercial legal matters. A ruling of such importance is that it emphasizes the point that the provisions of courts dedicated to commercial affairs, like commercial courts, can be invoked only after proper understanding and legal deliberation. From the judgment, the insurance companies cannot pursue their $31 million claim further under the Commercial Courts Act; however, they can consider other legal options.
Gujarat Collector Defends Demolition of Islamic Structures Before Supreme Court
The Gujarat government recently defended the demolition of Islamic structures in the state to the Supreme Court, reiterating that the demolitions did not contradict the Supreme Court's earlier judgments or amounts to a deliberate attack on the particular community, under the guise of evacuating encroachments, but still happened to be unlawfuUnluckily for the authorities involved, this demolition was against an earlier order issued by the Supreme Court whereby their orders had stopped the demolitions of the properties of people considered to be engaged in criminal activities without following due process. The court passed this order while preventing arbitrary actions of local authorities against people who were part of protesting and or civil unrest, especially when demolitions were being used as a punitive measure without proper legal recourse. The Gujarat Collector, however clarified in the court that the structures were illegal encrochnments on public land and did not stand in any valid legal light. The Collector underlined that the activity was part of a much larger process whereby encroachments were to be removed across the state, sect aside. The government had argued that proper notices were issued before demolitions and due process was maintained. In the supporting affidavit presented, it has been contended that the structures pulled down do not have any authorization, and therefore the pulling them down does not violate any of the Supreme Court's orders. The state had pleaded that the structures needed to be cleared for reasons of public safety and to restore order since they obstruct public spaces such as roads and pathways. Furthermore, the Collector dismissed allegations that the demolitions were targeted or carried out with communal bias, stating they were part of a legal and routine exercise to clear encroachments in all parts of the state. The government further advanced the argument that religious discrimination could never be the ground of the claim of the petitioners since similar steps had been taken against illegal encroachment belonging to other communities too. Again, it appeals to the Supreme Court to dismiss the petitions with a contention that the actions were in the bounds of legality and carried out without discrimination. The Supreme Court will consider the submissions and then pass judgment on whether demolitions violated its earlier directives. It is an important case because there is indeed cause for concern that legal processes are now being misused to target certain communities while, at the same time, raising real questions of balance between maintaining public order and citizens' rights. Probably, the judgment of the court will have greater implications on how state authorities deal with the encroachment problem and the powers they will exercise in executing these acts.
Madras High Court Holds That Mere Possession of Proceeds of Crime Is Sufficient to Invoke PMLA
The Madras High Court held it significant that merThe question of the case centered on an accused who had money sourced from some alleged illegal undertakings. In this case, the accused attempted to refute the claim that they were engaged in projecting the proceeds as clean, which would always characterize money laundering. Their defense rested upon the argument that they only possessed the money but had not covered the illegal source of its origin, which should not therefore be termed money laundering. Further, the Madras High Court dismissed such an argument and went into a good length of explanation of Section 3 PMLA that defines money laundering. The Court pointed out that the language of the statute is sufficiently broad enough to include not only the act of "laundering" of money but also mere possession of proceeds of crime. According to the Court, in fact possession itself is the punishable offence regardless of whether the person tried to legitimize such tainted assets. The court clarified that section 3 of PMLA criminalises not only the act of projecting the proceeds of crime as untainted property but also possession, use, concealing, or acquiring such proceeds. It is a clear judgment that the possession of proceeds of crime raises an irrebuttable presumption of guilt under the PMLA, and the burden shifts on the accused to prove the legitimacy of his possession. This building broadens the scope of the PMLA-it does not require an individual to have been attempting to clean dirty money for the crime of money laundering to apply. By holding that possession alone is sufficient, the Court clarified that any individual who happens to be in possession of the proceeds of crime, even if they are not attempting directly to conceal its tainted source, are vulnerable to being convicted of money laundering. The Court held that the PMLA is an all-comprehensive legislation to deal with the menace of money laundering in its various manifestations. The intent behind the law appears to be to ensure that anyone associated, directly or indirectly, with criminal activity can be dealt with and brought within its orbit as it lends itself to providing for illegal financial transactions. Thus, maintaining proceeds of crime per se would be considered a constitutive part of money laundering because it enables and supports more illegal activities.e possession of proceeds of crime is enough to invoke provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. Clarifying that under Section 3 of PMLA, both possessing the proceeds of crime and projecting or claiming it to be untainted property could independently qualify as money laundering activities, it delivered the verdict.
Delhi High Court Seeks Response from Police over Sonam Wangchuk's Plea to Hold Dharna at Jantar Mantar
The Delhi High Court has been recently seeking a response from the Delhi Police over the plea by Sonam Wangchuk, a renowned environmentalist and engineer, who demanded permission to stage a dharna at Jantar Mantar. Other protesters have been lobbying for the implementation of the Sixth Schedule for Ladakh as it seeks constitutional special protections for the Union Territory.Led by Wangchuk and other activists, the marchers have walked from Leh to Delhi arguing that Ladakh has peculiar cultural and environmental concerns. He has stated how the lack of such measures may irreversibly damage the fragile Ladakhi environment and traditional way of life, especially in the face of intensifying developmental pressures. The Sixth Schedule has been in effect currently in four northeastern states-Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura, and Mizoram-which has offered the regions certain legislative and administrative autonomy to preserve and sustain their distinctive customs and practices. Wangchuk and his fellow activists argue that Ladakh, with such a large tribal population and precarious ecological balance, warrants similar protection as would ensure sustainable development and safeguard indigenous culture in this region. Wangchuk requested to protest peacefully at the Jantar Mantar, a protest venue in the heart of New Delhi, was a response to the permission denied by Delhi Police. Jantar Mantar has been one of those venues for peaceful protest as well as the denial raises large questions about the right to peaceful assembly as it is protected by the Indian Constitution. Responding to this, Wangchuk moved the Delhi High Court for judicial intervention to permit his protest. Delhi High Court while hearing told the Delhi Police to present its response to Wangchuk's plea for permission to carry out the protest. The issue of public safety should not be overlooked, nor should the right to peaceful protest while being reminded by the Court that the right to assemble and raise grievances under Article 19(1)(b) of the Constitution is treated as a fundamental right even though some restrictions can be imposed in the interest of public order. Wangchuk's march and his call for Ladakh to be added to the Sixth Schedule has been quite in the headlines, all across the country. The movement more pointedly raised issues regarding the impact of long term strain of tourism and industrialization and infrastructural development on the ecosystem and the very identity of Ladakhi people. Much will, of course depend on the High Court verdict regarding the dharna at Jantar Mantar, not only for Wangchuk's cause but for the greater issue of balancing environmental and cultural preservation with development issues in Ladakh.
Some Steps You Must Take To Get The Best Legal Service
To benefit yourself choose us as we are here to guide you according to your problem and suggest the best possible outcome.
Cost- effective
Initial analysis of the Project by our legal expert reduces the cost of the legal dispute.
Pan India Availability
Your time and harassment will be reduced because we serve in almost all district courts.
Conciliation
We promote conciliation over litigation as a means of resolving legal problems.
Privacy
Our commitment to maintaining client information secure stems from our belief that privacy is a fundamental human right.
Experienced Counsel
Our associate lawyers have a strong educational background as well as relevant experience.
Time-Flexible/Management
We value our clients' time and call them to appear in court when required.
Pre-evaluation of case
An in-depth project analysis and a pros and cons report will help the client understand the true worth of the case.
In the digital era today, having access to legal expertise online has become the choice of every being. There is an option to hire legal advisors, advocates or lawyers online for legal consultation in Delhi or NCR, be it individuals or businesses, anyone can easily get legal suggestions for their complex legal matters from the comfort of their homes or workplace. Online legal consultation in India has opened up various opportunities for the clients like getting advice whenever required, problem-solving with efficiency, and cost-effective or pocket friendly solutions accustomed as per your specific needs. Whether seeking help for drafting a deed or contracts, having to resolve disputes, or get rid of compliance issues, online legal consultation services offer a practical and reliable solution which maintains privacy of the client while addressing their legal concerns.
While the phrases "legal advisor" and "legal consultant" are often used to denote the same thing in the eye of a common man, they have quiet huge distinction between them. A legal advisor usually provides assistance for guidance and support to individuals or businesses even organizations on various legal matters, such as giving insights into potential risks involved like acts which might be forbidden by law, requirements for compliance, and strategic decision-making, for example who should be the power of attorney in absence of the head of the family or business. On the other hand, a legal consultant may offer support that is backed by specialized expertise on particular projects or cases, they provide expert opinions, analysis, and recommend the right thing to do in order to achieve the desired results within a defined scope of work which will be aligned by the laws. Both legal advisor and legal consultant play crucial roles in providing valuable legal assistance, legal consultant is the bigger circle where he could be legal advisor along with being a consultant, on the contrary it is not the same for legal advisor.
Legal services are quite important for a smooth functioning of the justice system as it safeguards the rights, ensures justice, and upholds the rule of law in a civilized society. From drafting of deeds to resolving disputes outside the court room and advocating for justice and what is fair, legal services covers a wide spectrum of things which aims at protecting individual and collective interests of the society. Access to legal services is not only essential for an individual but it is the fundamental right of a person which is given by our constitution under article 21 and as per the DPSP (Directive Principles of State Policy), no one can be denied of the legal representation of he is unable to find a lawyer to represent himself. By giving legal services or even advice, lawyers and advocates contribute to promoting justice, fairness and maintaining stability in a civilized society.
There are multiple-benefits of hiring a lawyer or having an advocate by your side it not only gives you a strong legal representation in the court room but also outside the court, it gives tremendous support, expertise, and advocacy customer made for an individual’s needs. First of all, lawyers are specialized in the field in which you require legal assistance and have experience in various other legal domains, which help to give you a strategic win and advice for any future acts. Secondly, lawyers will represent in not only inside the court but also outside by being a mediator or a conciliator, and putting forward your contentions and wishes. Additionally, lawyers offer assistance and support throughout the whole legal proceedings, drafting legal documents such a deeds or contracts, while ensuring compliance with applicable laws. Overall, hiring a lawyer will not only benefit you while being in a dispute but also provide you a peace of mind for having a support backed up for you.
Online legal consultation means connecting to an advocate or a legal expert through phone or whatsapp or any medium in relation to internet where you can get the consultancy without visiting the office of the advocate physically. In other words, it is connecting and getting the answers of all your legal queries from highly qualified lawyer and advocate specialized in your legal area of interest. For online legal consultation go to the website of LawChef or reach us through our contact details that is mentioned in the website as well as in our social media like Instagram, Linkedin and facebook page.
Yes, online lawyers and advocates are highly qualified and well experienced in their fields. They are well versed in the fields that you want to question about. The advocate holds degree of law from the reputed law college in India and are a legal practitioner who are well versed with the legal knowledge.
Right to privacy of identity falls under article 21 which guarantee a person that they can keep their identity private in case they do not want to reveal their personal information. We value your identity privacy and understand the need, If, you tell your lawyer that you do not want to share your identity or go public with your identity and explain the reason behind your privacy, he is bound by law to keep your identity private.
Yes, if you choose to revisit LawChef for another online consultation or even opt for another phone call, you will able be talking to the same lawyer you have talked to with previously with a simple request and LawChef will efficiently schedule a call with that same lawyer again, ensuring continuity and consistency in your legal advice experience, so you would not have to repeat yourself to other lawyers and it will be a smoother transaction.
Nowadays everyone is surfing online and we have created a user-friendly portal for our clients as well as customers, it has made the consultation quite friendly and hassle free due to which Online legal consultants or lawyer for online consultation have surged significantly. Moreover, online consultations from a lawyer will provide a private space for both the client and Advocate for discussing their legal matters comfortably and confidentially, which is crucial in a attorney client relationship.
It is not necessary for a legal advisor to be a lawyer, but it is always advisable to have a Lawyer who is well qualified to be your legal advisor.
The main purpose of consulting with a lawyer, whether through online platforms or by visiting the office or chamber, is to obtain comprehensive answers to one's legal queries and receiving sound legal advice. Legal consultation opens various opportunities for the client to choose what would be the the right advice for their legal issue, consulting a lawyer would help you to understand your rights and obligations prescribed by the law, and it will provide you safety measures for your next business idea and how you could protect it. By engaging yourself in legal consultations you will be benefited in several ways whether conducted online or offline, these consultations will help you set up your business and will also get you through a civil or matrimonial dispute, your lawyer will give you solutions that will be handcrafted specifically for your legal trouble.
There are convenient options available for people who are seeking online legal consultation from advocates on LawChef. You can either visit the official website of LawChef, which is a user-friendly platform specially designed to provide and maintain seamless interactions between experienced lawyers as well as attorneys and yourself. Or you can contact LawChef via their official contact number which is available on the website and on Google as well, the phone call will be complimented by giving the first 10 minutes of advice absolutely free during which you can asked whatever legal queries you have the advocate will answer you, this will be followed by minimal charges once the aforementioned time limit is over.
You can talk to advocates through Lawchef where you can directly connect to well experienced advocates in various legal field via the call or website. In addition to this LawChef is providing first 10 minutes free consultancy on call in order to help its customer/client as clients are valuable to us and after the completion of 10 minutes minimal charges will be applicable.
Ecommerce Vendor Agreement: A Complete Guide for Vendors in India
An Ecommerce vendor agreement is crucial for protecting the rights and responsibilities of vendors and platforms. Discover key components and benefits for success in Delhi and Noida's online marketplace.
Underage Marriage in India: A Legal and Social Analysis
Learn about India’s laws on child marriage, social impacts, and the essential role marriage registration lawyers play in safeguarding minors’ rights
Digital Justice: Understanding the Future of Online Dispute Resolution in India
Discover how ODR is transforming India's legal system by enabling efficient, accessible, and cost-effective dispute resolution for matrimonial and civil cases.
Testimonial
I contacted Lawchef to assist with a somewhat scary situation in which I was being sued personally for something that wasn't our fault. I was concerned we would lose everything, but after only a few sessions, the lawchef team had us under control.
Ankur Singh
The Lawchef team was not only very competent in a child custody dispute, but also very sensitive to the fact that it was turning out to be a stressful event for everyone concerned. team would regularly "check in" with us to make sure we were aware of what was going on.
Surbhi Arora
The Lawchef team is the best I've ever worked with for contract drafting. He was very responsive when I had questions outside of our sessions and has always explained things to me in language I can readily understand.
Subodh Gupta
(Swastik International)
our office:
Office no-1, A-25 Sec- 3 Noida Uttar pradesh 201301
Call us:
Mail us:
Follow us:
Let’s Talk And Get Started
