#welfare legislation

Bombay High Court rules that compensation for loss of private practice income or salary during leave under the Motor Vehicles Act requires strict proof. The court set aside Rs. 10.26 lakh from the award, emphasizing that welfare legislation does not presume income loss without evidence, impacting claimants' burden in accident compensation cases.

Allahabad High Court clarifies that the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, only empowers authorities to invalidate property transfers made under fraudulent conditions under Section 23. All other title disputes must be resolved through civil courts, restricting the Act's scope to welfare-related fraud, not general property rights.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has ruled that claimants may amend their motor accident compensation petition from a fault-based claim under Section 166 to a no-fault claim under Section 163-A even after evidence closure and during final arguments. This reinforces the welfare-oriented purpose of the Motor Vehicles Act, ensuring victims’ families are not penalized for technical pleading errors at the last stage of litigation.

The Allahabad High Court has ruled that marital status cannot disqualify a daughter from inheriting a Fair Price Shop on compassionate grounds under the U.P. Order, 2016. This reinforces the Supreme Court’s directive that welfare schemes must not discriminate against women based on marriage, ensuring equitable access to livelihood support for all dependent family members regardless of marital status.

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has ruled that daily wage service must be fully counted toward the five-year qualifying period for gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, affirming that regularization does not erase prior service. This sets a critical precedent for informal and contractual workers across India, ensuring their entire tenure - even if initially on daily wages - is protected under statutory welfare rights.

Delhi High Court rules that an insurer remains liable under the Employees' Compensation Act if an additional premium was paid for cleaner/driver coverage, even without a formal employment contract. The court held that the employer’s admission of the deceased’s role and premium payment triggered the insurer’s indemnity obligation, ensuring compensation for workplace fatalities.

Madhya Pradesh High Court reaffirms that appeals under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2003, can only be filed by senior citizens or parents, not by aggrieved descendants. The ruling quashes an appeal filed by non-senior citizens, reinforcing the statutory intent to protect the rights of elderly claimants exclusively.

The Allahabad High Court has reaffirmed that proceedings under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 cannot be quashed under BNSS Section 528 unless there is clear gross illegality or abuse of process. This upholds the welfare-oriented intent of the law and ensures survivors are not denied recourse through procedural manipulation by accused parties.

The Bombay High Court upheld compensation for a driver injured in an accident, ruling that oral evidence and the employer’s own admission can establish an employment relationship under the Workmen’s Compensation Act - even without pay slips or written contracts, and despite the parties being related. This clarifies that welfare legislation prioritizes substantive employment realities over formal documentation, protecting vulnerable workers in informal arrangements.

CAT Jammu ruled that the statutory limit of Child Care Leave under Rule 41-A of the J&K Civil Services Leave Rules applies to the two eldest surviving children, treating twins as a single unit. The decision underscores that welfare legislation must be interpreted strictly, leaving no room for judicial relaxation even in cases of multiple births.

Bombay HC rules that the Maharashtra Project Affected Persons Rehabilitation Act, 1999, does not apply retrospectively, and a 33-year delay in claiming land allotment constitutes laches, barring relief. The judgment underscores that welfare legislation cannot override procedural timelines, impacting project-affected persons seeking rehabilitation benefits.

Delhi High Court rules that compensation under the Employee's Compensation Act must reflect the cumulative impact of pre-existing disabilities and accident-induced injuries on earning capacity. The court remanded the case for recalculation at 50% disability, directing immediate release of deposited amounts to the workman.

Bombay High Court rules that legal heirs of a deceased claimant under the Employees’ Compensation Act may pursue pending compensation claims, even if they are not statutory dependents. The judgment underscores the Act’s welfare objective, ensuring vested claims do not extinguish upon the claimant’s death, offering critical relief to families of deceased workers.

Madhya Pradesh High Court holds that bail under Section 12 of JJ Act, 2015 must be the default for juveniles unless compelling reasons exist to deny it, reinforcing child-centric jurisprudence.

Bombay High Court holds that promoters must convey title to individual housing societies within four months of registration, irrespective of apex body formation under MOFA.