(Civil Appeal Nos. 9975-9976 of 2024) Parties : Appellant: A.B. Govardhan / Respondent: P. Ragothaman  Advocates on Record  : Mr. Narendra Kumar Counsel for the Appellant Mr. V. Prabhakar Counsel for the Respondent Hon’ble Judges/Bench :

Issues: Can Vaibhav Motors be considered the owner of the offender vehicle, despite being a mere dealer of Hindustan Motors? Is Vaibhav Motors, along with Hindustan Motors, jointly responsible for compensating the victims of the

Name of the case: Ameya Arun Kulkarni Vs Isha Ameya Kulkarni[FCA No. 18 of 2024]  Parties: Appellant (Org. Respondent): Amey Arun KulkarniRespondent (Org. Petitioner): Isha Ameya Kulkarni Hon’ble Judges/Bench:  Justice Vibha Kankanwadi and Justice SG

ISSUE: The primary legal issue in this case is whether the applicant/wife is entitled to temporary custody of her minor female child, who was below five years of age at the relevant time, under Section

ISSUE:  The issue in this case is whether the wife, Ruchi Majoo, is entitled to maintenance from her husband, Sanjeev Majoo. RULE: Wives who are unable to support themselves may receive maintenance payments under Section

ISSUE:The primary issue in the case of Nachiket P Shirgaonkar versus Pandit Automotive is whether Pandit Automotive breached the contract by not delivering the vehicle as per the agreed terms, and if Nachiket P Shirgaonkar