Latest news with #CivilProcedureCode
The Hindu
7 hours ago
- General
- The Hindu
HC sets aside local court's gag order against media houses
Telangana High Court had set aside a gag order passed by a local court here against some newspapers, TV channels, web portals and media organisations directing them not report any defamatory content against Megha Engineering and Infrastructure Limited company and its management. A bench of Justices T. Vinod Kumar and P. Sree Sudha, allowing a batch of three appeals filed by media organisations, said the trial court's ad-interim ex-parte injunction order was 'unreasoned'. The said order was contrary to the mandate under Civil Procedure Code and hence impermissible, the Division Bench said. While passing such direction without issuing notices to the opposite parties, the court should record reasons as to why such order should be passed. The trial court passed the order but did not specify the time within which the respondents can get it vacated. This had deprived the appellants' right to file counter affidavit, the Bench observed. The two-judge bench observed that gag orders should be scrutinized though they were meant to maintain the integrity of legal proceedings. The courts should ensure that such gag orders did not infringe upon the fundamental rights like the right to free speech. These rights can be curtailed only in accordance with Article 19(2) of the Constitution of India. Citing a Supreme Court verdict, the Division Bench noted that 'freedom of speech and expression was construed to include the freedom to circulate one's views by words of mouth or in writing or through audio-visual instrumentalities. This included the right to propagate one's views through the print media or any other communication channel like radio or television subject to reasonable restrictions. The Bench also noted that the company filed the suits for damages nearly a year after the publication of news. The company also suppressed the fact that it had filed another suit in a court at Khammam seeking similar relief. This amounted to clear abuse of the process of law, the verdict said. Since the gag order was passed without adhering to established legal principles, it cannot be sustained, the Bench said.
Time of India
6 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Andhra Pradesh high court bars police from meddling in land disputes
Vijayawada: Stating that police have no authority to intervene in civil land disputes, Andhra Pradesh high court, in a strong rebuke to Visakhapatnam police, criticised the practice of summoning individuals involved in civil disputes for counselling under the so-called 'pre-litigation council forum (PLCF). Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Justice Y Lakshmana Rao ruled that land disputes fall strictly under the jurisdiction of civil courts, as per Sections 9 and 15 of the Civil Procedure Code, while emphasising that resolution mechanisms such as the state legal services authority, district legal services authorities, and mandal-level bodies are the only authorised platforms to mediate in such cases. The order came after a 74-year-old petitioner challenged Visakhapatnam police's repeated summons to attend PLCF sessions regarding a land case which was already under trial in a civil court. The petitioner, citing ill health and legal overreach, argued that police pressure was unlawful. The court sided with him, condemning the police for attempting to mediate in civil matters and warned that such actions only escalate disputes. The HC further ordered that police should not attempt to resolve civil disputes under any name or platform, including the PLCF. In similar cases, the high court also intervened in Prakasam and Palnadu districts after petitioners complained of police coercion to withdraw ongoing civil cases, including a property dispute and a financial recovery suit. The court directed local police not to pressurise citizens into withdrawing legally filed cases.
New Indian Express
26-05-2025
- Politics
- New Indian Express
Allahabad HC rejects plea to implead Radha Rani in Krishna Janmabhoomi title suit
LUCKNOW: In the Krishna Janmabhoomi - Shahi Eidgah title dispute case, the Allahabad High Court has rejected the Hindu side's plea to implead deity Shriji Radha Rani in the case on the grounds that "Pauranic illustrations are considered hearsay evidence.' The Court said that Shriji Radha Rani was not a necessary or proper party to be impleaded in the case, and if she was included, it would change the basic nature of the title suit. The plea was filed under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Code by advocate Anil Kumar Singh Bishen, who represented Shriji Radha Rani through her 'next friend' Reena N Singh. The applicant had urged the court to make Shriji Radha Rani a joint plaintiff in Original Suit No. 7 of 2023, which was filed by Shri Bhagwan Shrikrishna Lala Virajman and others against the UP Sunni Central Waqf Board and the Shahi Idgah Masjid Committee. The suit pertains to 13.37 acres of land in Mathura, which the plaintiffs claim is Lord Krishna's birthplace. They claim that the Shahi Idgah Masjid was illegally built during the Mughal period by demolishing this holy site. The plaintiffs have presented historical records, reports from the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), and references of Hindu scriptures to support their claim demanding the removal of the structure. In her plea, Shriji Radha Rani's side argued that she was deeply connected with Lord Krishna and was his eternal consort; she also had the rights over the disputed land.
Khaleej Times
20-05-2025
- Business
- Khaleej Times
UAE: How to check for a travel ban due to credit card debt
Question: I have multiple bank cases due to failure to repay my credit card payments after I lost my job. I managed to clear payments on some of the credit cards. But I forgot to keep a record of them. I must travel to my home country urgently, but I don't know whether any legal cases are still pending. How can I find out about the travel ban, and can I travel abroad if there are cases against me? Answer: A credit card holder who fails to pay three consecutive monthly or six non-consecutive bills may be considered in default. This is under Article 4 (4) of the Personal Loan Agreement format of Loan Agreements Formats Approved by the Central Bank of UAE, which states: "The loan elapses and all the instalments, interests and any other fees and expenses become due and payable immediately without having to give any notification or any court ruling and without prejudice to any other rights of the bank according to this agreement or by the law - in the event that the borrower failed to pay three consecutive instalments or six non-consecutive instalments of the monthly instalments without approval of the bank." In the UAE, a competent court can impose a travel ban when a creditor submits a request demonstrating the existence of a serious, due, and specific financial obligation of the outstanding amount of more than Dh10,000. The court may require the creditor to provide a financial guarantee to cover any potential harm to the debtor if the ban is later found to be unjustified. This is by Article 324 of Federal Decree-Law No. 42 of 2022, promulgating the Civil Procedure Code. Furthermore, a travel ban issued against a debtor remains in effect until the debt is settled. However, the court may lift the ban if the reason for it no longer exists, the creditor agrees in writing, and the debtor provides a sufficient bank guarantee or approved guarantor or deposits the full debt amount with the court. It may also be lifted if the creditor fails to file a case within 8 days or start enforcement within 30 days of a final judgment, if no enforcement action has been taken for three years, or if authorities confirm the debtor's stay in the UAE is illegal and they are to be deported. This is in accordance with Article 325 of the UAE Civil Code, "The travel ban order shall remain in force until the expiration, for whatever reason, of the debtor's obligation towards their creditor who has obtained the order. Nevertheless, the competent judge may order that the aforesaid ban shall lapse in the following cases: If any of the conditions necessary for the making of the travel ban order lapse; If the Creditor agrees in writing that the order may be revoked; If the debtor submits a sufficient bank guarantee, or a solvent guarantor accepted by the Judge, and the bail report that includes the guarantor's undertaking is accompanied by the judgment or order issued to oblige the debtor with an Execution Writ before them, with what this judgment decrees; If the debtor lodges with the Court's Treasury a sum of money equivalent to the debt and the expenses, earmarked for the satisfaction of the right of the creditor on whose application the order was made, and such sum shall be deemed to be under attachment by operation of law in favour of the creditor; If the creditor fails to submit to the Judge material to demonstrate that the action for the debt has been brought within (8) eight days from the making of the travel ban order, or if they have not commenced enforcement of a final judgment made in their favour within (30) thirty days from such judgment becoming final; If (3) three years have elapsed since the last valid procedure of executing the final judgment on the debt, the travel ban order was issued to satisfy it, without the creditor applying to the Execution Judge with a request to continue the procedures for executing such judgment; or If a request is received from the competent authorities stating that the stay of the person banned from travelling in the State has become illegal and they shall be deported, and it is not proven that they have assets in the State that can be subjected to execution." In the UAE, failure to repay credit card debt may result in civil proceedings, depending on the terms of the credit arrangement and whether post-dated cheques or signed undertakings were involved. If a bank initiates legal action, it could lead to a civil court case. If you have settled some of your credit card accounts but did not retain records of payment, and are uncertain whether any legal actions are still pending, it may be advisable to verify your legal status/travel ban before planning to leave the UAE. This can be done through online platforms like the Dubai Police Smart App or by visiting a local police station. Additionally, you may check with the Dubai Court if any cases have been filed against you. Alternatively, you may appoint legal counsel in the UAE to act for you. Ashish Mehta is the founder and Managing Partner of Ashish Mehta & Associates. He is qualified to practise law in Dubai, the United Kingdom and India. Full details of his firm on: Readers may e-mail their questions to: news@ or send them to Legal View, Khaleej Times, PO Box 11243, Dubai.
Time of India
19-05-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
‘Can't interfere': Trans person's plea on UAE entry denial junked
Mumbai: Observing that issuing a visa is a sovereign function and cannot be considered a deficiency in service under Consumer Protection Act, a consumer commission recently dismissed a complaint filed by a transgender person against the consulate general of UAE in Mumbai after they were denied entry into Dubai. It held that even with a valid visa issued by the UAE, the final decision on entry rests with the immigration authorities of the destination country. "Even though the visa service includes fees, a direct claim or complaint cannot be filed against the embassy under Consumer Protection Act... But since [the consulate] is a sovereign authority of another country, it is our opinion that this complaint cannot be maintained before this commission under Consumer Protection Act," the commission said, adding that the Act's scope is limited to Indian territory. Pointing out that embassies are protected by sovereign immunity, it said filing a direct complaint against a foreign embassy is not easily permissible and often requires consent of the Indian govt under Civil Procedure Code, which is rarely granted. In a Feb 13, 2024, complaint, Vikhroli-based Salim alias Salma Umar Khan Sakharkar, chairperson of Kinnar Maa Ek Samajik Sanstha Trust, said they were stopped at Dubai immigration and told that transgender persons are not allowed to enter the city on Feb 1 that year. They said they paid Rs 5.2 lakh for a five-day trip with two companions, which included visa processing by the UAE consulate in Mumbai, and argued that denial of entry after the consulate approved their visa constituted unfair and defective service. They sought a public apology from the consulate, a full refund of the tour cost and the return flight ticket, Rs 20 lakh in compensation for mental harassment, and Rs 10,000 for litigation costs. The commission acknowledged that the consulate approved the visa after the complainant paid the necessary fees, but said denial of entry is at the discretion of Dubai immigration officials upon arrival. It said the complainant did not qualify as a consumer of the UAE consulate in this context, and the Dubai immigration authorities' act in denying entry did not constitute a deficiency in service by the consulate under Consumer Protection Act. It said had the consulate issued a visa despite having rules against issuing one to transgender persons, then it could be seen as incorrect information or negligence. The UAE consulate in Mumbai did not appear before the commission despite being sent a notice.
