(561) ARVIND KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 24-04-2025 Service Law — Correction of Date of Birth — Casual Labour Card vs. Service Book Entry — When the initial Casual Labour Service Card, issued at the time of joining, records a specific date of birth and age consistent with the minimum entry age, and there is no overwriting or correction in the age column of that card, this entry is significant — If a different date of birth is subsequently and erroneously recorded in the main service book without supporting documentation, and departmental authorit India Law Library Docid # 2425571
(562) SURINDER KUMAR Vs. JAWAHAR LAL[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 24-04-2025 Constitution of India, Article 227 — Limitation Act, 1963, Section 5 — Condonation of Delay — Liberal Approach for Substantial Justice — Interference by High Court — The High Court, exercising its power of superintendence under Article 227 of the Constitution, should be slow to interfere with an order of the lower appellate court condoning delay in filing an appeal, especially when the delay is explained by reasons such as old age, ill health (including heart problems requiring stenting), and th India Law Library Docid # 2425547
(563) HARSH KUMAR Vs. PUNJAB AGRO INDUSTRIES CORPORATION LIMITED[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 24-04-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 7 Rule 11(d) — Rejection of plaint — Suit barred by limitation — Determination — For deciding an application under Order 7 Rule 11(d) CPC for rejection of plaint on the ground that the suit is barred by any law (including limitation), only the averments made in the plaint are to be seen and considered — The court must construe the statement in the plaint and cannot look into the written statement or any other material — No evidence or merits of the India Law Library Docid # 2425548
(564) RATTAN WATI AND OTHERS Vs. SAVITA CHOUDHARY AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 24-04-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order VII Rule 11 — Rejection of Plaint — Disclosure of Cause of Action — Scope of Enquiry — For deciding an application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, only the averments made in the plaint can be considered, without examining evidence or the merits of the controversy — The defence taken by the defendant cannot be a ground for rejecting the plaint — If the plaint, read as a whole, discloses a cause of action, the application for rejection must India Law Library Docid # 2425549
(565) THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND OTHERS Vs. SMT. ARUNA AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 24-04-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Compensation in Death Case — Deceased Businessman, Aged 42 Years — Calculation of Compensation — Application of Future Prospects, Multiplier, and Conventional Heads — In a motor accident claim arising from the death of a 42-year-old businessman with an assessed annual income of Rs. 3,75,000/-, the compensation was re-assessed by — (i) adding 25% for future prospects as per National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi; (ii) applying a multiplier of India Law Library Docid # 2425590
(566) ASHOK KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 24-04-2025 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 and Section 147 — Compounding of Offences — Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 320 — Compromise effected after conviction and dismissal of appeal — Revision petition against concurrent conviction under Section 138 NI Act — Parties effected compromise, and entire cheque amount paid to complainant who consented to nullification of proceedings — Held, an offence under Section 138 NI Act can be compounded under Section 147 NI Act even after conv India Law Library Docid # 2425591
(567) M/S VATIKA LIMITED Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 24-04-2025 Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA Act) — Sections 40(1), 71, 81 — Haryana Land Revenue Act, 1887 — Sections 10, 27, 67 — Haryana Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017 — Rule 27 — Delegation of Powers — Execution of Orders — Validity of Notification vesting Adjudicating Officer with powers of Collector for executing recovery certificates issued by HRERA — Held, The impugned notification vesting the Adjudicating Officer (appointed under Section 71 of RERA Act India Law Library Docid # 2425592
(568) VIKRAM AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 24-04-2025 Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 — Sections 33, 34 — Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 — Sections 32, 33 — Reservation in employment — Post of Assistant Lineman/Groundsman — Eligibility of persons with disability of one leg — Advertisement confining reservation for Assistant Lineman to persons who are ‘deaf and hard of hearing’ challenged as contrary to Government of India Notification dated 29.07.2013 (identifying India Law Library Docid # 2425593
(569) VISHAV BHOOSHAN SOOD Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 24-04-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 173 (corresponding to Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) — Section 193) — Power of Magistrate to order further investigation — A Magistrate is competent to order further investigation after receipt of a report under Section 173 Cr.P.C., whether it recommends cancellation of FIR or otherwise. However, this power should be exercised only in exceptional and extraordinary circumstances where there is a serious defect or deficiency in the initial i India Law Library Docid # 2425594
(570) SMT NALIMA WARRAICH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 24-04-2025 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) — Section 195 and Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 174-A — Cognizance of Offence under Section 174-A IPC — Mandatory Requirement of Written Complaint by Public Servant — Section 195(1)(a)(i) Cr.P.C. bars a court from taking cognizance of any offence punishable under Sections 172 to 188 IPC (which includes Section 174-A IPC) unless there is a written complaint by the concerned public servant or their administrative superior — This provision is mandatory India Law Library Docid # 2425595
(571) AMTOJ SINGH Vs. SUKHCHAIN SINGH[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 24-04-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order XLI Rules 23, 23A and 25 — Power of Appellate Court to remand — Scope and limitations — Plaintiff challenged First Appellate Court’s order remitting specific performance suit to Trial Court after allowing defendant’s application to amend written statement — Amendment highlighted bifurcation of Khasra number, asserting that a part of the suit land was not in existence on the date of the agreement to sell — Held, an appellate court’s power to remand is regulated India Law Library Docid # 2425596
(572) KULWINDER SINGH Vs. NEETU RANI AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 24-04-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) — Section 125 — Interim Maintenance — Minor Child — Interim maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month awarded to the minor child by the Family Court upheld — The object and purpose behind granting interim maintenance is to ensure that the dependent spouse and children are not reduced to destitution or vagrancy on account of failure of marriage — A just and careful balance must be struck to ensure that this provision does not degenerate into a weapon to punish t India Law Library Docid # 2425597
(573) M/S HANUMAN PAPER WORKS AND ANOTHER Vs. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAX[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 24-04-2025 Chhattisgarh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 — Section 55(2) — Reference Application — Non-submission of C-Form for Inter-State Sale — Assessing Authority treating inter-state sale as local sale and imposing tax and interest thereon due to non-submission of C-Form within prescribed time — Appellate authority and Tribunal upholding assessment — Tribunal rejecting application for reference under Section 55(1) — Power of authorities to extend time for submission of C-Form for sufficient cause — Tribunal India Law Library Docid # 2425666
(574) TSEWANG THINLES Vs. U. T. OF LADAKH AND ANOTHER[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT AT JAMMU] 24-04-2025 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 34(2) — Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 — Section 94 — Age determination of victim — Special Court’s jurisdiction and procedure — Section 34(2) of POCSO Act empowers Special Court to determine age of a person (whether offender or victim) whenever a question arises in any proceeding — Procedure under Section 94 of JJ Act applies for victim age determination — Section 94 prescribes tiered approach: school India Law Library Docid # 2425818
(575) JAMMU COOPERATIVE HOUSE BUILDING SOCIETY APNA VIHAR KUNJWANI JAMMU Vs. UT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND OTHERS[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT AT JAMMU] 24-04-2025 Jammu and Kashmir Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1961 — Section 1(4) — Voluntary Coverage — Requirement of Notification — Applicability of the Act to an establishment, not otherwise covered, becomes final only after a notification to this effect is published in the Official Gazette — Non-publication of such notification renders proceedings regarding registration and coverage non est in law — This requirement is not merely ministerial but integral to making the Act a India Law Library Docid # 2425819
(576) NAZIR AHMED SHAH Vs. U.T. OF J&K AND OTHERS[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT AT JAMMU] 24-04-2025 Jammu & Kashmir Waqf Act, 1978 — Section 6(1) — Waqf Property — Challenge to Notification — SRO No. 351 dated 23.08.1982 declaring land as Waqf property — Petitioner claiming ancestral ownership based on document from villagers in 1973 Bikrami (1916-17 AD) — Document interpreted as bestowing land upon predecessor-in-interest in capacity of Manager/Majawar of Shrine, not personally — Revenue records consistently showing Shrine as owner since 1969 — Petitioner’s possession found to be as Manager/M India Law Library Docid # 2425820
(577) DES RAJ AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF J&K AND OTHERS[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT AT JAMMU] 24-04-2025 Jammu & Kashmir Agrarian Reforms Act — Sections 4 & 8 — Mutation of Rights — Challenge to — Limitation — Petitioners challenging mutations attested under the Act after a delay of three decades — Allegation of lack of knowledge dispelled by evidence of predecessors’ presence and consent to earlier inheritance mutation of respondent’s predecessor — Knowledge of joint tenancy established through earlier inheritance mutation — Proprietary rights properly India Law Library Docid # 2425821
(578) SUBHASH CHAND MEHENDRA (SINCE DECEASED) THROUGH HIS LRS Vs. STATE OF H.P. AND ANOTHER[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 24-04-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 47 Rule 1; Section 114 — Review — Scope of — Three broad components for review are aggrieved person, when review can be sought, and grounds; power exercised subject to grounds listed: discovery of new evidence, mistake/error apparent on face of record, or any other sufficient reason — Any other sufficient reason’ means reasons analogous to previous grounds — Subsequent events generally not a ground for review of order India Law Library Docid # 2425890
(579) KANTILAL NAGJIBHAI ZALAVADIYA AND OTHERS Vs. PRAKASHBHAI CHHAGANBHAI PATEL AND OTHERS[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 24-04-2025 Constitution of India — Article 227 — Power of Superintendence — Interference in interlocutory orders of subordinate courts — Exercised to quash an order rejecting withdrawal of suit where co-plaintiffs lacked proprietary interest in suit property and underlying dispute was settled by compromise decree in another suit. India Law Library Docid # 2425995
(580) SHRI PINAKI PRASAD BISWAS AND OTHERS Vs. SMTI. MANDIRA DANDA AND OTHERS[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 24-04-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 100 — Second Appeal — Substantial Question of Law — Concurrent Findings of Fact — The High Court in second appeal lacks jurisdiction to interfere with concurrent findings of fact by the trial court and first appellate court — Such interference is permissible only if material or relevant evidence is not considered, or if findings are based on inadmissible evidence — Where both courts considered pleadings, evidence, and relevant India Law Library Docid # 2426207