(21) VARINDERJEET SINGH (WRONGLY MENTIONED AS VARINDER SINGH) Vs. JOGINDER PAL NARULA AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 09-01-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 9 Rule 7 — Application to set aside ex parte proceeding — Scope and Nature of Relief — The relief under Order 9 Rule 7 is discretionary and equitable — The applicant must establish 'good cause' for absence on the date proceeded ex parte — The provision does not confer an unfettered or vested right India Law Library Docid # 2437931
(22) RICHA SHARMA Vs. STATE OF H.P. AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 09-01-2026 Service Law — Bifurcation of Cadre — Withdrawal/Change of Option — Staff Nurse posted at Regional Hospital Una — Decision to bifurcate Nursing Staff Cadre into Medical Education Department and Health and Family Welfare Department — Petitioner initially opted for Medical Education Department but sought withdrawal/change of option immediately thereafter citing compelling personal circumstances: son suffering from mild India Law Library Docid # 2438005
(23) RAKESH KUMAR AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 09-01-2026 Himachal Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1968 — Section 94 — Himachal Pradesh Cooperative Societies Rules, 1971 — Rule 37 and Appendix ‘A’, Rule 4(2) — Redetermination/Carving out of zones for election of Managing Committee — Challenge to Registrar’s order re-determining zones based on serial number of members instead of geographical contiguity — Rule 4(2), Appendix ‘A’ mandates zone constitution based on India Law Library Docid # 2438006
(24) DIKKEN KUMAR THAKUR AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 09-01-2026 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 243E — Duration of Panchayats — Mandate to hold elections before expiry of five-year term — Elections to Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) must be completed before the expiry of their five-year duration — Continuing PRIs beyond the mandated term is unconstitutional and void ab initio — The constitutional requirement is paramount, and exceptions like natural calamities should be India Law Library Docid # 2438007
(25) DIVISIONAL MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. PERIYASAMY AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 09-01-2026 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 173 — Motor Accident Claims — Negligence — Rear-end collision — Petitioners (father and son on motorcycle) alleged rash and negligent riding by Respondent 1 (rider of offending motorcycle) resulting in rear-end collision; Respondent 2 (Insurer) alleged contributory negligence due to abrupt right turn without indicators and failure to wear helmet — Factual matrix and judicial proceedings (FIR, Final Report, Criminal Judgment where Respondent 1 admitted guilt) su India Law Library Docid # 2438070
(26) M.M. BABU Vs. YOUNG MEN CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 09-01-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Execution Proceedings — Obstruction to Execution (Order XXI, Rules 97 and 99) — Maintainability of application under Rule 99 after adjudication under Rule 97 — A person who actively contested and lost an application for removal of obstruction filed by the decree holder under Order XXI Rule 97 CPC, where their independent rights were adjudicated, cannot subsequently file a India Law Library Docid # 2438071
(27) SRINIVASA DOSS Vs. P. KALAIDASAN AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 09-01-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 47 (Question to be determined by the Court executing decree) — Order XX Rule 4(2) (Judgments of other Courts) — Executability of Decree — Ground for Attack — A judgment-debtor cannot challenge the executability of a decree under Section 47 CPC solely on the ground that the judgment does not conform to the requirements of Order XX Rule 4(2) CPC (i.e., lacking a concise statement of the case, points for determination, decisions, and reasons). (Paras 1, 3, India Law Library Docid # 2438072
(28) SATCHITHANANDUM (DIED) THR. LRS. AND OTHERS Vs. KRISHNAMURTHY (DIED) THR. LRS. AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 09-01-2026 Puducherry Cultivating Tenants Protection Act, 1970 — Section 3(4)(b) — Eviction of tenant — Arrears of rent — Revenue Court's discretion to grant time for deposit — The Act's objective is to protect cultivating tenants from eviction; Section 3(4)(b) mandates that when an eviction application is filed based on rent default, the Revenue Court must afford the cultivating tenant a reasonable opportunity (time) to deposit the arrears of rent, inclusive of costs, before passing an eviction order — Fa India Law Library Docid # 2438073
(29) PADASAIB (DIED) THR. LRS. AND OTHERS Vs. SARASWATHI (DIED) THR. LRS. AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 09-01-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 21 Rule 105 and 106 — Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — Applicability of Section 5 of Limitation Act to execution proceedings — The settled legal position is that Section 5 of the Limitation Act is inapplicable to an application filed under Order 21 Rule 106(3) of CPC for restoration of an application dismissed for default under Order 21 Rule 105(2) of CPC. India Law Library Docid # 2438074
(30) A.R. SHRIDHARAN AND OTHERS Vs. TRIPOWER ENTERPRISES (PRIVATE) LIMITED AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 09-01-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 114, Order 47 Rule 1 — Judicial Review — Scope and Limitations — Review jurisdiction is not an appeal in disguise and is strictly confined to the scope of Order 47 Rule 1 — Power of review cannot be assumed unless expressly conferred by statute — Review is for the correction of a mistake, not to substitute a view or to allow a rehearing of the matter on merits — It constitutes an exception to the finality of judicial decisions and is invoked only to pre India Law Library Docid # 2438075
(31) K. SHANMUGAVEL MUDALIAR AND OTHERS Vs. COMMISSIONER, HR & CE, (A) ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 09-01-2026 Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act — Hereditary Trusteeship — Appointment of Fit Person/Executive Officer — Challenge to appointment — Where a High Court, in an earlier interim order (dated 25.05.2024), directed the respondents (HR & CE Department) to allow the application of legal heirs for appointment as hereditary trustees and permit the Fit Person to continue only until such order, the HR & CE India Law Library Docid # 2438076
(32) SHANMUGHA ARTS, SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY & RESEARCH ACADEMY (SASTRA) DEEMED UNIVERSITY, THIRUMALAISAMUDRAM AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 09-01-2026 Land Encroachment — Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 — Encroachment on Government land — Public Purpose — Assignment of encroached land — Assignment of encroached land cannot be claimed as an absolute right by encroachers — Acceptance of alternate land proposal is solely at the Government's discretion — Where the land is earmarked for a defined public purpose (Prison/Jail), rejection of the request India Law Library Docid # 2438077
(33) DEEPAK BHANDARI AND OTHERS Vs. OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 08-01-2026 Companies Act, 1956 — Winding Up — Claims of Creditor/Shareholder — Interest Rate on Deposits — Companies (Court) Rules, 1959, Rules 156 and 179 — Creditors challenged Official Liquidator's rejection of claim for 12% annual interest, awarded only 1.5% — Official Liquidator relied on Board Resolution (dated 28.04.1972 for accounting period 01.01.1971 to 31.12.1971) which fixed interest at 1.5% per annum — Rules 156 India Law Library Docid # 2437894
(34) SUMIT BANSAL Vs. M/S MGI DEVELOPERS AND PROMOTERS AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-01-2026 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 — Dishonour of Cheque — Separate Causes of Action — Quashing of Complaint under Section 482 Cr.P.C. — Where multiple cheques are issued in relation to the same underlying liability, but are distinct instruments (drawn on different accounts, presented on different dates, and dishonoured separately), each dishonour gives rise to a separate cause of action under India Law Library Docid # 2437924
(35) C.S. PRASAD Vs. C. SATYAKUMAR AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-01-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Inherent power of High Court to quash criminal proceedings — Principles governing exercise of power — High Court must exercise power sparingly, cautiously, and avoid usurping function of trial court or conducting mini-trial — Only requirement is to examine whether uncontroverted allegations in FIR, taken at face value, disclose commission of any cognizable offence — Reliability, sufficiency, or acceptability of evidence is not for India Law Library Docid # 2437925
(36) STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS Vs. BHAWANA MISHRA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-01-2026 Service Law — Appointment — Ayurvedic Nursing Training Course — Right to Appointment — Candidates admitted to the course in a Government institution do not acquire an automatic right to appointment as Ayurvedic Staff Nurse upon completion of training, especially when there is a significant change in Government policy and the number of candidates available due to the grant of permission to private India Law Library Docid # 2437926
(37) THE JOINT DIRECTOR (RAYALASEEMA), ANTI-CORRUPTION BUREAU, A.P. AND ANOTHER ETC. Vs. DAYAM PEDA RANGA RAO ETC.[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-01-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 2(s) and 2(o) — Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014 — Sections 2(f), 100, 101, 102 — Quashing of FIRs — Jurisdiction of Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) Police Station post-bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh — High Court quashed Anti-Corruption Bureau FIRs on hyper-technical ground of lack of specific notification India Law Library Docid # 2437927
(38) TEJ NARAIN SHARMA Vs. STATE OF DELHI[DELHI HIGH COURT] 08-01-2026 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) — Offence of illegal gratification/criminal misconduct — Mandatory requirement of proof of 'demand' — To establish guilt under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d)(i) and (ii), prosecution must prove both demand and acceptance/obtainment of illegal gratification by the public servant as a fact in issue (sine qua non) — Mere possession and recovery of India Law Library Docid # 2437879
(39) RAMESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 08-01-2026 Service Law — Disciplinary Proceedings — Natural Justice — Disagreement with Inquiry Officer's Report — Punjab Police Rules, 1934 (as applicable to Haryana), Rule 16.24 — Where the Disciplinary Authority (DA) disagrees with the Inquiry Officer's report exonerating the delinquent employee, supplying the inquiry report along with the disagreement note-cum-show cause notice and affording an opportunity to file a reply and a personal hearing constitutes due compliance with principles of natural just India Law Library Docid # 2437935
(40) TANCY BANSAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 08-01-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 (or Section 528 of BNSS, 2023) — Quashing of FIR — Indian Penal Code (IPC) — Section 174-A (Non-appearance in response to proclamation) — Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act) — Section 138 (Cheque Bounce) — Abuse of process of law — FIR under Section 174-A IPC (for being declared a Proclaimed Person/Offender) derived from original criminal complaint under Section 138 NI Act — Original complaint settled and withdrawn India Law Library Docid # 2437938