(101) KAILASH CHANDRA Vs. MUKESH KUMAR AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 07-10-2025 Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 — Section 6(2) and 6(3) — Fixation of standard rent — Concurrent findings of fact — Court's power to fix standard rent based on location, condition, amenities, and market rate — Appellant paying nominal rent for decades despite commercial development of area — Evidence of market rates in similar properties supports higher rent — Courts below considered India Law Library Docid # 2433990
(102) MALURAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 07-10-2025 Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 430 — Suspension of Sentence — Applicants convicted for various offences including 148, 324/149, 325/149, 326/149, 450/149, and 307/149 of IPC — Applicants sought suspension of sentence pending appeal — Court considered nature of injuries, weapons used, criminal antecedents, and duration of trial — Applications of some applicants rejected based India Law Library Docid # 2433991
(103) NAZIM AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF UTTARAKHAND[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-10-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 154, 11 — First Information Report (FIR) — Omission of names — Significant omission of names of accused in FIR, despite complainant's familiarity with them, raises serious doubt about subsequent implication and suggests possibility of false implication — In cases based solely on circumstantial evidence, every circumstance must withstand rigorous scrutiny. India Law Library Docid # 2433540
(104) P. RADHAKRISHNAN AND ANOTHER Vs. COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-10-2025 Constitution of India, 1950 — Writ Petition — Scope of enquiry — High Court exceeding the scope of writ petition by issuing directions for fixing license fee and conducting an inquiry by the Chief Vigilance Officer, without putting the appellants on notice. Such directions rendered the appellants worse off in their own writ petition, India Law Library Docid # 2433541
(105) VINISHMA TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-10-2025 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 14 and 19(1)(g) — Doctrine of Level Playing Field — Tender Conditions — Suppliers based outside the State excluded by a condition requiring past experience of supplying to Chhattisgarh government agencies — Supreme Court held this to be arbitrary and discriminatory, violating the right to equality and freedom of trade — The condition created an artificial barrier, India Law Library Docid # 2433542
(106) VINISHMA TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-10-2025 Constitution of India, 1950 — Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) — Tender Conditions — Past Performance Restriction — A tender condition restricting bidders to those who supplied goods to the specific State Government in the past three years is arbitrary and discriminatory, violating the principles of equality and freedom of trade. Such a restriction creates an artificial barrier, excludes competent bidders, and curtails fundamental rights without just cause. India Law Library Docid # 2433557
(107) BHERU SINGH Vs. SMT. SEEMABAI[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 06-10-2025 M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 — Section 23-A and 23-J — Eviction application by widow landlord — Widow status and death of husband not challenged — Landlord falls under Section 23-J(iii) — Eviction for bona fide requirement is permissible. India Law Library Docid # 2433846
(108) SMT. BABITA MOR Vs. CENTRAL MADHYA PRADESH GRAMIN BANK[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 06-10-2025 Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 — Section 4(6)(b)(ii) — Forfeiture of gratuity for offence involving moral turpitude — Requires conviction by a competent court — Dismissal from service based on departmental proceedings alone is insufficient to forfeit gratuity under this section unless a criminal offence involving moral turpitude is proven in a court of law. India Law Library Docid # 2433847
(109) RADHESHYAM Vs. DEVKUMAR[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 06-10-2025 Registration Act, 1908 — Section 49 and Section 17(2)(vi) — Effect of non-registration of documents — Requirement of registration of decree — Decree passed by court does not require compulsory registration as per Section 17(2)(vi) of the Registration Act, 1908, except in cases of compromise decrees involving property not subject matter of the suit or creating new rights — In the present case, an ex-parte India Law Library Docid # 2433848
(110) DILESH RAJ BORANA Vs. M/S. UDHOG MANDIR[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 06-10-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 7 Rule 11 — Rejection of Plaint — Jurisdiction — Where essential ingredients for jurisdiction are not met, the plaint can be rejected. In trademark infringement cases, Section 134(2) of the Trademarks Act, 1999 allows suits to be filed where the plaintiff resides or carries on business, even if the cause of action did not arise there. India Law Library Docid # 2433986
(111) M/S. ZONEX INDUSTRIES Vs. KUNAL CHOUDHARY AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 06-10-2025 Trademarks Act, 1999 — Section 124 — Stay of proceedings where validity of trademark registration is questioned — Where rectification proceedings for a trademark are pending before the competent forum, a suit for infringement of that trademark must be stayed until the rectification proceedings are finally decided — This includes ancillary issues like punitive damages and rendition of accounts. India Law Library Docid # 2433987
(112) JYOTI RAJPUROHIT AND OTHERS Vs. RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT, JODHPUR, THROUGH ITS REGISTRAR GENERAL AND ANOTHER[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 06-10-2025 Administrative Law — Judicial Review — Scope of Interference — Courts generally should not re-examine expert committee reports on examination matters, especially when dealing with academic subjects like Hindi grammar, as judges are not experts. India Law Library Docid # 2433988
(113) SUMAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 06-10-2025 Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 430 — Suspension of Sentence — Conviction based on recovery of medicine wrapper and utensil from kitchen — Held insufficient for conviction without further incriminating evidence — Prosecution must prove case beyond reasonable doubt. India Law Library Docid # 2433989
(114) LALU RAM DANGI Vs. MADAN LAL SINGHVI AND OTHER[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 06-10-2025 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 — Dishonour of cheque — Compounding of offence — Parties have settled the matter and the entire outstanding amount has been paid — Revision petition allowed on the basis of compromise. India Law Library Docid # 2433996
(115) LALU RAM DANGI Vs. MADAN LAL SINGHVI[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 06-10-2025 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 — Dishonour of cheque — Compounding of offence — Parties have settled the matter and compensation has been paid — High Court allowed the revision and quashed conviction and sentence subject to payment of cost as per Supreme Court guidelines. India Law Library Docid # 2434050
(116) KESU RAM AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 03-10-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 366, 120B, 376 — Abduction with intent to compel marriage or illicit intercourse; Criminal Conspiracy — Rape — Appeal against conviction — Evidence on record, particularly the prosecutrix's testimony, indicates she went willingly and had contracted 'Nata' marriage, a customary practice — Her prolonged silence and absence of complaint during travel and stay for four months demolish the case of abduction — Conviction under Section 366 read with India Law Library Docid # 2434047
(117) RAVIKANT BISHNOI Vs. MUTHOOT FINANCE LIMITED AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 03-10-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 7 Rule 11(d) — Rejection of plaint — Bar of limitation — Application for rejection of plaint on grounds of limitation should be allowed only if the claim appears hopelessly barred by limitation upon a plain reading of the plaint — If the plaint reveals a continuous or recurring cause of action, or mixed questions of law and fact regarding limitation, the application should be India Law Library Docid # 2434048
(118) LAXMAN DAS Vs. STATE[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 03-10-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302 — Conviction from Section 302 to Section 304 Part II IPC — Conversion of conviction and sentence — Accused, a person of short temper and unstable mind, inflicted a single blow with a sharp-edged tool on his sleeping son, leading to death — No previous enmity or premeditation established — Incident occurred in a heat of passion without intention to cause death. In such India Law Library Docid # 2434049
(119) BALDEV SINGH Vs. SMT. BALBIR KAUR AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 01-10-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Sections 47 and 151, Order 21 Rules 58, 59, 66, 89, 90 — Execution of Decree — Objections to Sale — When objections filed under Section 47 CPC relating to the liability or saleability of property are raised before an auction sale of immovable property, the Executing Court must pass an order either postponing the sale pending adjudication of objections or allowing the sale but India Law Library Docid # 2433884
(120) DR. RAJ KRISHAN GUPTA Vs. PARAMJIT SINGH[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 01-10-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 8 Rule 1 — Written Statement — Filing — Delay — In non-commercial suits, the timeline for filing a written statement under Order 8 Rule 1 CPC is directory, not mandatory, and courts retain discretion to condone delays. India Law Library Docid # 2433885