The Delhi High Court dismissed a husband’s matrimonial appeal, ruling he could not penalize his wife for delayed defence filing after failing to deposit litigation expenses on time, observing that a party cannot create disadvantage for the respondent and later claim benefit from it.
Supreme Court ended a decade-long dispute it called a “matrimonial battle of Mahabharata”, quashing 80 cases and ordering Rs.5 crore alimony after noting the lawyer-husband misused legal expertise to hinder his wife’s maintenance and custody proceedings for years.
The Baramulla Consumer Commission held Physics Wallah guilty of service deficiency for denying NEET course access despite payment, ordering refund of Rs 35,000, Rs 50,000 compensation for academic loss, and Rs 10,000 litigation costs to the affected student
The Delhi High Court has invited bar association representatives for a meeting on January 30 to discuss increasing the pecuniary jurisdiction of district courts. Lawyers have long demanded the move to reduce delays, cut litigation costs, and ensure faster justice.
A Bengaluru court fined Tonique for charging a customer for a carry bag that had the store’s branding. The court called the act “unprofessional and unfair,” stating that customers should not be made to pay for unsolicited advertising. Tonique was also directed to pay Rs. 5,000 as compensation to the customer.
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum in Thiruvallur found a Scan Centre in Chennai liable for medical negligence in administering an overdose of anesthesia during an MRI scan, resulting in the patient’s cardiac arrest and brain death. The court ordered the Scan Centre to compensate the deceased patient’s family with Rs 15 lakh and Rs 10,000 for litigation expenses.
Monday(on 22nd April),The West Bengal State Consumer Commission fined a retailer Rs.30,000 for selling counterfeit whey protein on Flipkart and ordered a Rs.6,524 refund to the buyer. The retailer failed to contest the claim, and evidence clearly established the sale of a counterfeit product. This ruling emphasizes the importance of prioritizing product authenticity and consumer rights in e-commerce.
