Defeatist Crude Settlement: Bombay High Court Permits Relief To Motilal Oswal In Dhanera Diamonds Case

The Bombay High Court constrained Dhanera Diamonds from estranging or discarding its assets for six weeks in an appeal lodged by Motilal Oswal Financial Services to recuperate its dues from the commodity trader. Motilal Oswal had agitated court to secure Rs 80.74 crore from Dhanera Diamonds against the settlement obligations for trades in crude oil contracts, mapped to Nymex futures, which closed on a negative mark on April 20 because of a glut—meaning sellers had to pay buyers to take the commodity off their hands. The brokerage constituted arbitration proceedings and sought interim relief from the court to prevent Dhanera from discarding off assets. The court enquired the commodity trader to reveal its assets through an affidavit. A single-judge bench comprising Justice SC Gupte notified that there is a prima facie case for citing the case for arbitration. As such, the court must permit protection to the brokerage till an arbitral tribunal is comprised by the MCX .

The court ordered the brokerage to access the arbitration tribunal constituted by MCX within six weeks. The counsel for Dhanera Diamonds disputed that negative price of crude oil futures was not even heard of. No question would arise as the closing price was determined on the grounds of Nymex future prices after the closing hours of commodity trading in India. Therefore, the brokerage must make an assertion against the commodity exchange, Dhanera Diamonds debated. These altercations must be made before the arbitral tribunal that will transfer to the merits of the case, as the high court contended in the order. A separate writ petition filed by Motilal Oswal and a commercial suit filed by Dhanera Diamonds is also unsettled before the Bombay High Court. Senior Counsel Birendra Saraf presented on behalf of the brokerage and V Sridharan represented Dhanera Diamonds.


Bombay HC grants interim relief to Arnab Goswami

The Bombay HC granted an interim relief to Arnab Gowswami, by staying the two FIRs filed by Mumbai police against him over alleged communalization of the incidents of Palghar lynching and the gathering of migrant workers at Bandra station. The bench observed”: “prima facie no case was made out against him”. And, ordered not to take coercive action against him.

The court while hearing the petition filed by Mr. Goswami seeking to ‘quash the FIRs’ which were logged against him. Earlier, a senior council Harish Salve submitted that as per Supreme Court order logging of an FIR in different states for the same incident were not sustainable and Hence FIR should be quashed. He has been booked under Sections of IPC such as 153 (wantonly giving provocation with intent to cause riot) 153A (promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language) 153B (imputations, assertions, prejudicial to national integration) 295A (malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting it’s religion), 298 (uttering words with deliberate intent to wound the religious feelings of any person, 500 (punishment for defamation), 504( intentionally insults, and thereby gives provocation to any person, intending it to be likely that such provocation will cause him to break the public peace), 506 (punishment for criminal intimidation) 120B (punishment for criminal conspiracy) and 117 (abetting commission of offence by the public generally). 

Source: The Hindu

By- Durga Bhatt

Bombay HC refused to grant relief to Republic TV chief Arnab Goswami; Directed to appear before Mumbai Police

The Bombay HC refused to grant relief to Republic TV Editor-In-Chief Arnab Goswami while hearing a petition filed by him seeking quashing of two FIRs filed in Nagpur and Mumbai against him and the channel.

Arnab sought exemption from appearing before the police for interrogation which was denied; but the Court has granted Goswami protection from arrest.

Arnab Goswami was booked under Sections 153, 153 A, 153 B, 295 A, 298, 500, 504, 505(2), 506, 120 B and 117 of IPC.
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal appeared for the State of Maharashtra. He insisted on Arnab appearing before the police. But Salve stated that his client should be exempted from appearing before Pydhonie police station with regard to the second FIR as the said police station lies in a containment zone.

The Court directed Arnab to appear before NM Joshi police station tomorrow and granted him interim protection from arrest. The next date of hearing in the matter is June 12.

Bombay HC issues a prophylactic Measures for litigants and Advocates making it mandatory to install Arogya Setu App.

The Bombay HC issued a precautionary outline SOP (Standard Operative Procedure) making it mandatory to all the advocates, staff members associates and litigants to download Arogya Setu app. Hand sanitizers shall also be installed in the Court premises.

The Courts are set to start functioning with 15% staff in shift rotation accordingly. Only the matters with high priority, bail applications filed prior to lockdown, cases fixed for Judgment, interlocutory applications and such vital matters will be heard.

Furthermore persons suffering from fever, sore throat, breathing problems or the other symptoms of Covid 19 are asked to self -restrain themselves from visiting to the Court. Wearing masks, maintaining gaps of 2metres are to be maintained by the people while entering the Court. Face shields and acrylic sheets can also be used if it requires.

(By – Sanyogita)

Bombay High Court : An interim order passed to allow airlines to keep middle seats occupied.

On May 31, the DGCA instructed the airlines to allot seats in flights in such a manner that the middle seat between two passengers was kept vacant. 

The  Bombay High Court has allowed domestic airlines to fill up middle seats in aircraft in strict compliance with the Directorate General of Civil Aviation’s (DGCA) May 31 order and other applicable rules.

The court had asked the committee, set up to review public health care protocols for air travel amid the COVID-19 pandemic, if coronavirus can be transmitted by mere touch of a person who is a carrier. The committee, in its note submitted to the court on Friday, said COVID-19 virus can be transmitted by touch only under certain circumstances like when an infected person’s droplets from nose or mouth (coughing or sneezing) come in contact with a surface or clothes and another person comes in contact with the surface and then touches his or her nose, eyes or mouth.

The committee said if passengers wear protective gear, mask and face shield provided by airlines, then it would decrease the risk of spread of the coronavirus.

(By – Anupama)

Bombay hc to enhance number of benches to adjudicate matters with extreme respect towards the social distancing norms

(By – Satyajit Pattanaik)

(Imparting justice should go hand in hand with pandemic precautions) 

Considering the primacy of judicial function  over all other issues during the Pandemic due to the outbreak of Covid-19, the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay through its notice on 3rd May has notified to increase the number of benches and shifts for hearing urgent cases through video conferencing across all the said benches in order to reduce the physical presence of the lawyers, litigants and court staff in the court’s arena.

Justice Dipankar Datta, the Chief Justice of Bombay High Court has nominated a number  of Judges of Bombay High Court to hear  judicial matters of urgent nature and  the admission of matters at the Principal Seat of the said court through video conferencing. Besides, it was also notified that, if the list of matters is not exhausted, the remaining matters would stand over to the next working day of the court and the Court taking admission matters will take only 30 matters on Court working day. If more than 30 praecipes are received then the matters of remaining praecipes will be listed on next Court working day.

The court has also notified a separate special procedure to be adopted for hearing of admission matters and the same has been published separately on the official website of the  Bombay High Court.