(41) SMT. KUSUM Vs. ANAND KUMAR AND OTHERS[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (LUCKNOW BENCH)] 30-04-2025 Insurance Act, 1938 — Section 39 (as amended by Act 5 of 2015) — Nominee Rights vs. Succession Law — The interpretation of amended Section 39(7), which uses the term “beneficially entitled” for specified nominees (parents, spouse, children), is contested regarding whether it grants absolute ownership rights to the nominee, thereby overriding personal succession laws. India Law Library Docid # 2425302
(42) ABHA JAIN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 30-04-2025 Principles of Natural Justice — Supply of Inspection Report with Show Cause Notice — Mining Lease — In proceedings initiated by the Mining Department alleging illegal mining or other violations by a leaseholder, if a show cause notice is based on an ex-parte inspection report, failure to supply a copy of such inspection report along with the show cause notice to the petitioner vitiates the proceedings — This denial prevents the petitioner from filing an effective reply and defending their case, India Law Library Docid # 2425482
(43) KALYAN Vs. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 30-04-2025 Criminal Law — Circumstantial Evidence — Five Golden Principles (Panchsheel) — For a conviction based solely on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must satisfy five golden principles: (1) the circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn must be fully established; (2) the facts so established should be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused and not explainable on any other hypothesis; (3) the circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and tend India Law Library Docid # 2425483
(44) SHYAM NANDAN MEHTA Vs. SANTOSH KUMAR AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 29-04-2025 Service Law — Appointment — Validity — Discrepancy in Category Certificate — No Undue Advantage — An appointment secured on merit cannot be set aside merely due to a discrepancy between the candidate’s actual reservation category (Backward Class - BC) and the category mentioned (Most Backward Class - MBC) in the qualifying Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) certificate, especially when: (i) the candidate applied for and was selected under their correct category (BC); (ii) they secured higher marks t India Law Library Docid # 2425190
(45) PUNIT BERIWALA Vs. THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 29-04-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 482 — Quashing of FIR — Scope of Inquiry — The power to quash an FIR under Section 482 Cr.P.C. must be exercised sparingly and with circumspection — The Court cannot embark upon an inquiry into the reliability or genuineness of the allegations made in the FIR/complaint and must proceed assuming the averments to be true — Investigation should not be thwarted at the initial stage unless no cognizable offence India Law Library Docid # 2425191
(46) RENUKA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 29-04-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 482 — Quashing of FIR/Chargesheet — Scope of Inquiry — Mini Trial — The High Court, while exercising its inherent jurisdiction to quash criminal proceedings, particularly under Sections 498-A, 324, 355, 504, 506 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, cannot embark upon an inquiry into the credibility or reliability of the evidence presented in the FIR/Chargesheet — Comparing allegations in India Law Library Docid # 2425178
(47) VISA COKE LIMITED Vs. M/S MESCO KALINGA STEEL LIMITED[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 29-04-2025 Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — Sections 8 & 9 — Service of Demand Notice — Service of a demand notice under Section 8 upon Key Managerial Personnel (KMP) of the Corporate Debtor, delivered at the Corporate Debtor’s registered office, constitutes valid service on the Corporate Debtor for the purpose of initiating Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under Section 9, provided the notice clearly and substantively demands payment of the operational debt from the India Law Library Docid # 2425180
(48) S.D. JAYAPRAKASH AND OTHERS Vs. THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 29-04-2025 Service Law — Pension — Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 — Rule 17 — Counting of Contractual Service — Persons initially appointed on a contractual basis and subsequently regularised in service without interruption are entitled under Rule 17 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 to count their prior contractual service period for pensionary benefits, provided they exercise the option under Rule 17(1)(b) to either refund the monetary benefits received for the contract India Law Library Docid # 2425181
(49) RUTU MIHIR PANCHAL AND OTHERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 29-04-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Sections 34(1), 47(1)(a)(i), 58(1)(a)(i) — Constitutional Validity — Pecuniary Jurisdiction based on ‘Consideration Paid’ — Sections 34(1), 47(1)(a)(i), and 58(1)(a)(i) of the Act, which determine the pecuniary jurisdiction of the District, State, and National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commissions based on the ‘value of goods or services paid as consideration’ instead of the ‘compensation claimed’ (as under the 1986 Act), are constitutionally valid. India Law Library Docid # 2425182
(50) P. KUMARAKURUBARAN Vs. P. NARAYANAN AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 29-04-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 7 Rule 11(d) — Rejection of Plaint — Limitation — Mixed Question of Law and Fact — Date of Knowledge — Where the plaint specifically pleads facts alleging fraud or unauthorized execution of documents (sale under a limited Power of Attorney) and asserts a date of knowledge of such facts which brings the suit within the limitation period prescribed by Article 59 of the Limitation Act, 1963, the issue of limitation becomes a mixed question of law and fact — Such a India Law Library Docid # 2425183
(51) JAIPUR VIDYUT VITARAN NIGAM LIMITED AND OTHERS Vs. RAJASTHAN TEXTILE MILLS ASSOCIATION AND ANOTHER ETC.[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 29-04-2025 Electricity Law — Cross-Subsidy Surcharge (CSS) — Determination — Timing vis-à-vis Tariff Order — Determination of Cross-Subsidy Surcharge (CSS) under the Electricity Act, 2003 and relevant State Regulations (Rajasthan Tariff Regulations, 2014, Reg 90) is not mandatorily required to be simultaneous with the determination of the general tariff — CSS can be determined separately based on the prevailing tariff applicable to the relevant consumer category as per the formula provided in the regulatio India Law Library Docid # 2425184
(52) SHARDHAMMA AND ANOTHER Vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 29-04-2025 Land Laws — Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (PTCL Act) — Section 5 — Limitation — Reasonable Time — Even though Section 5 of the PTCL Act does not prescribe a specific period of limitation for filing an application for restoration of granted land, such an application must be made within a reasonable time — An application filed after an unreasonably long delay (in this case, 23 years after the alienation and 14 years after the A India Law Library Docid # 2425185
(53) KAMAL DEV PRASAD Vs. MAHESH FORGE[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 29-04-2025 Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923 — Section 4(1)(c), Explanation 1; Schedule I, Part II — Loss of Earning Capacity — Multiple Injuries — Functional Disability — When an employee suffers multiple injuries specified in Schedule I, Part II in the same accident (loss of phalanges in multiple fingers of the operational hand), the assessment of loss of earning capacity is not rigidly confined to the mere aggregation of percentages prescribed therein for individual injuries — Considering the Act’s bene India Law Library Docid # 2425186
(54) SRI MALAKAPPA AND OTHERS Vs. THE IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 29-04-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Compensation — Personal Expenses Deduction — Dependency of Husband — In determining the number of dependents for calculating deduction towards personal expenses, even if a husband is able-bodied, it cannot be assumed, in the absence of specific employment details, that he was not at least partially dependent on the income of his deceased wife — Therefore, the family unit size should include the husband alongside the children India Law Library Docid # 2425187
(55) AMARVEER KAUR AND OTHERS Vs. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 29-04-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Compensation — Income Assessment — Unskilled Labourer / Unorganized Sector — Where specific proof of claimed employment (accountant) and salary (Rs. 15,000/-) is rejected for lack of evidence (account books, PF records), the income of the deceased can be assessed notionally — Considering precedents establishing income for unskilled labour (Ramachandrappa) and applying the principle of incremental enhancement recognized in Pranay Sethi, a reasonable India Law Library Docid # 2425188
(56) ARATHY RAMACHANDRAN Vs. BIJAY RAJ MENON[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 29-04-2025 Family Law — Child Custody — Paramount Consideration — Welfare of the Child — In matters of child custody, the paramount and sole consideration must be the welfare and best interests of the child — Parental rights, desires, or the love and affection shown by either parent, while relevant, are secondary to the child's physical, mental, and emotional well-being. India Law Library Docid # 2425189
(57) HIMANSHU SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 29-04-2025 Public Interest Litigation / Constitution of India — Article 32/136 — Homebuyers’ Grievances — Failed Subvention Schemes — Systemic Failure — Alleged Collusion — Investigation — In a large batch of petitions (>170) involving numerous homebuyers (>1200) aggrieved by the failure of ‘subvention schemes’ advertised by builders/developers, where tripartite agreements were entered into with Banks/HFCs, and subsequent defaults by builders led to coercive recovery from homebuyers despite non-completion/ India Law Library Docid # 2425197
(58) FILOMENA SALDANHA THROUGH POWER OF ATTORNEY MR. FRAZIER SALDANHA Vs. SUNIL KOHLI REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY, MR. NAVAL BOWRY, AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 29-04-2025 Civil Procedure — Application for Speaking to Minutes — Scope — An Application for ‘Speaking to the Minutes’ is intended primarily for the correction of accidental slips or omissions, or clerical or typographical errors in judgments or orders — It cannot be utilized as a means to seek substantive modification, clarification that alters the reasoning or substance of the decision, or effectively achieve a review of the order, particularly when it involves incorporating specific details which India Law Library Docid # 2425179
(59) K. VALARMATHI AND OTHERS Vs. KUMARESAN[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 29-04-2025 Constitution of India — Article 227 — Supervisory Jurisdiction — Scope — Rejection of Plaint — The High Court cannot, in the exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution, entertain an original application for rejection of a plaint filed before a subordinate court — The power under Article 227 is supervisory, meant to ensure India Law Library Docid # 2425264
(60) SANTOSH KUMAR Vs. ASSISTANT SECRETARY/ DEPUTY SECRETARY/ SECRETARY, INSURANCE OMBUDSMAN, LUCKNOW AND OTHERS[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 29-04-2025 Insurance Act, 1938 — Section 45 — Repudiation of Policy — An insurer can repudiate a life insurance policy within three years from its inception/revival/rider date on grounds of fraud or material misstatement/suppression — After three years, repudiation is permissible only on the ground of fraud, the burden of proving which lies heavily on the insurer. India Law Library Docid # 2425303