(741) JP BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR JAYANT SHASHIKANT PARIKH Vs. SANTOSH AMARSINGH SANDHU[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 23-09-2026 Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 — Section 13 — Execution of Agreement for Sale — Default by allottee — Justification of termination — The promoter repeatedly called upon the allottee to pay stamp duty and registration charges to execute the registered Agreement for Sale. The allottee failed to generate statutory challans, retrieved the deposited funds, and expressed inability to pay. Setting aside the orders of MahaRERA and the Appellate Tribunal directing execution of the agr India Law Library Docid # 2453492
(742) ARIF NOORMOHAMMED SHAIKH Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 23-09-2026 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302 — Circumstantial Evidence — Upholding conviction for wife's murder — Case resting entirely on circumstantial evidence — Prosecution successfully proved motive of habitual drunken domestic abuse and suspicion of wife's character, homicidal death caused by severe head injuries with a heavy stone grinder, cohabitation in rented premises, and accused's presence at the crime scene — Complete and unbroken chain of circumstances established excluding every hypothesi India Law Library Docid # 2453493
(743) DEVI CONSTRUCTION LLP Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 23-09-2026 Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 — Section 49(1) and Section 49(2) — Purchase Notice — Scope and applicability of Section 49(2) — The contingencies enumerated in Section 49(1)(a) to (e) are independent and mutually exclusive — Section 49(2) applies only to situations where an application for development permission was actually preferred to the Planning Authority and resulted in an order or decision, particularly under Section 49(1)(d) — Section 49(2) cannot be read as universally India Law Library Docid # 2453494
(744) HORMUZ KURUSH MUBARAKAI Vs. SCHEREZADE HORMUZ MUBARAKAI[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 23-09-2026 Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936 — Sections 3 and 29 — Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — Order VII Rule 11(d) — Rejection of Plaint — Jurisdictional fact — Matrimonial suit for divorce and permanent alimony — Both parties resided in Australia — Wife asserted marriage was solemnised in Mumbai — Husband contended event was merely a Tandoorasti (blessing) ceremony, not an Ashirvad ceremony — Essential statutory requisite under Section 3(1)(b) is solemnisation via Ashirvad ceremony before two witn India Law Library Docid # 2453495
(745) PARLE AGRO PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. UDAYAK AGRO PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 23-09-2026 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 9 — Interim measures — Power to grant relief affecting a non-signatory — Petitioner alleged breach of negative covenants by franchisee through its sister concern — Sister concern contended it was a non-signatory to the franchise agreement — Held, Section 9 jurisdiction is not limited to passing orders strictly against signatories — The Court has the power to grant interim protection affecting a non-signatory connected with a contracting party, whe India Law Library Docid # 2453496
(746) SMITA CONDUCTOR LTD Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CGST AND CENTRAL EXCISE-DAMAN[CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL WEST ZONAL BENCH AT AHMEDABAD] 23-09-2026 Central Excise Act, 1944 — Section 4 — Transaction Value — Includibility of Type Testing Charges — Assessee manufactured ACSR conductors and recovered type testing charges from the buyer — Assessee claimed testing was optional, third-party, and customer-specific — Held, type tests under IS 398 (Part II) verify design, quality, and safety for high-voltage electricity transmission and are mandatory, not optional — The sale of conductors could not occur without the requisite test certificates — Amo India Law Library Docid # 2453286
(747) FAMOUS STEEL Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS - MUNDRA CUSTOMS[CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, WEST ZONAL BENCH AT AHMEDABAD] 23-09-2026 Customs Act, 1962 — Section 28 and Section 27 — Recovery of duty — Challenge to self-assessment — Revenue issued show cause notice under Section 28 demanding unpaid Anti-Dumping Duty and IGST after clearance under self-assessment — Importer contended that self-assessment attained finality as Revenue did not appeal against it, relying on ITC Ltd. — Held, refund provisions under Section 27 stand on a different footing from recovery under Section 28 — The ratio of ITC Ltd. governs refund claims and India Law Library Docid # 2453287
(748) KESHAV BHALLA Vs. PRESCRIVE AUTHORITY /RENT AUTHORITY (ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE) AND ANOTHER[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 23-09-2026 Uttar Pradesh Regulation of Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021 — Section 21(2)(m) — Statutory interpretation — Punctuation and grammatical structure — Rule of the Last Antecedent — Section 21(2)(m) creates two distinct contingencies separated by the disjunctive "or" and a comma: premises required in existing form, or required after demolition and reconstruction for occupation by landlord — Qualifying phrase "for the purpose of its occupation by landlord" naturally refers to the second contingency India Law Library Docid # 2453827
(749) BHARAT VERMA Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 23-09-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 154, 156 and 173 — Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Sections 173, 175 and 193 — Second FIR — Impermissibility — Test of sameness — Only the earliest information regarding a cognizable offence constitutes an FIR under Section 154 CrPC. Successive FIRs cannot be sustained if they arise out of the same continuous transaction, incident, or cause of action. Where multiple complaints allege identical facts and offences against accused acting on India Law Library Docid # 2453828
(750) KAPIL DEV PUNDIR Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 23-09-2026 Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 — Sections 19(3) and 19(4) — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 446 — Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 491 — Bond to prevent domestic violence — Forfeiture procedure — Order requiring execution of bond is deemed an order under Chapter VIII CrPC/Chapter IX BNSS — In case of breach of an executed bond, penalty does not become automatically recoverable — Court must determine breach, record satisfaction, and afford op India Law Library Docid # 2453830
(751) NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. FAIZABAD THRU. MANAGER LEGAL AND OTHERS Vs. REETA AND OTHERS[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (LUCKNOW BENCH)] 23-09-2026 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Sections 168 and 173 — Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — Order XLI Rule 33 — Enhancement of compensation without cross-appeal or cross-objection — Appellate Court's power — Insurer challenged the award on quantum — Claimants did not file an appeal or cross-objection — Held, Section 168 mandates awarding just and fair compensation under beneficial legislation — Order XLI Rule 33 of CPC empowers appellate courts to pass appropriate orders to render complete justice — The a India Law Library Docid # 2453831
(752) REKHA SAXENA AND ANOTHER Vs. ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESE, ALLAHABAD PVT. LTD. THRU. DIRECTOR GENERAL THE BISHOP AND ANOTHER[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (LUCKNOW BENCH)] 23-09-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 39 Rules 1 & 2, Order 43 Rule 1(r) and Section 94 — Temporary injunction — Settled possession — Protection against forcible dispossession — Appellants in continuous, peaceful, and settled possession of residential property since 1987 — Earlier ex-parte decree cancelled appellants' predecessor's sale deed and barred further construction, but granted no relief for eviction or possession — Rejection of interim injunction by Trial Court held perverse — A pers India Law Library Docid # 2453832
(753) ANTRIKSH DEVELOPERS AND PROMOTERS PVT. LTD. THRU. AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY SARA FARAZ AHMAD Vs. SHYAM SUNDAR AGARWAL[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (LUCKNOW BENCH)] 23-09-2026 Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 — Sections 43(3), 44(5) and 55 — Validity of Tribunal Proceedings — Defect in Constitution — Appellant contended that the Appellate Tribunal's order was coram non judice due to the absence of a Technical or Administrative Member. The High Court rejected the plea, holding that Section 55 explicitly protects proceedings from invalidity on grounds of vacancy or constitutional defect. The Bench comprising the Chairman and a Judicial Member was prope India Law Library Docid # 2453833
(754) UMA KANT TRIPATHI Vs. C/M BAHRAICH COOP BANK LTD.[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (LUCKNOW BENCH)] 23-09-2026 Service Law — Temporary Appointment — Right to regularisation or continuance — Petitioner appointed on temporary basis for period not exceeding 89 days, terminable without notice — Appointment annulled and petitioner relieved — Contention that post was not filled by regular selection — Held, a time-bound temporary appointment does not convert into a permanent one merely because regular selection did not take place — Petitioner acquired no enforceable right to continue in service or seek regulari India Law Library Docid # 2453834
(755) STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. SMT. P LATHA[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 23-09-2026 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) — Demand and acceptance of illegal gratification — Material contradictions and omissions — Complainant alleged demand of bribe by accused for issuing cheque — Cross-examination and previous statement under Section 161 CrPC established that the cheque was handed over when complainant asked about it, without any demand — Evidence of complainant was replete with material omissions and subsequent improvements — Glaring discrepancies India Law Library Docid # 2454073
(756) THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs. BABLOO KUMAR AND ANOTHER[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 23-09-2026 Service Law — Railway Recruitment — Group-D Posts — Allocation of Posts as per medical fitness category and preference — Applicants cleared written test, PET, and medical examinations, qualifying in medical categories between A-1 to C-3 — Railways refused to consider them for posts of next preference after finding them unsuited for higher-preference posts — Held, applicants were not medically unfit but had qualified for specific fitness levels matching particular posts for which they had exercis India Law Library Docid # 2454313
(757) THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs. BABLOO KUMAR AND OTHERS[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 23-09-2026 Service Law — Railway Recruitment — Medical fitness and categorization — Disqualification versus re-allocation — Railway Board Circular No. 91/2009 prohibiting alternative appointment to medically unfit candidates — Scope and applicability — Candidates qualifying written test and physical efficiency test were empaneled in specific medical fitness categories ranging from A-1 to C-3 — Railways denied appointment on the ground of medical unsuitability for preferred posts — Held, Circular No. 91/200 India Law Library Docid # 2454315
(758) SANJAY KUMAR AGARWAL Vs. STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LIMITED (SAIL) AND OTHERS[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 23-09-2026 Government Contracts and Tenders — Eligibility criteria — "Similar work" requirement — Bidder disqualified at techno-commercial stage for failing to satisfy experience criteria under Clause 3(b) read with Clause 3(i) — Bidder submitted two separate sets of work orders to demonstrate handling and processing experience respectively — Held, the tender condition required the qualifying work orders to encompass experience of both processing and handling together — Bidder relied on separate, unlinked India Law Library Docid # 2454325
(759) PALLAB SANA Vs. SRI NISHANT PASARI AND ORS.[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 23-09-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Sections 104(2), 107(2) and Order 39 Rule 2A — Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 227 — Maintainability of revisional application — Order passed by Appellate Court under Order 39 Rule 2A — Bar on further appeals — Where an application under Order 39 Rule 2A is rejected by the First Appellate Court exercising powers under Section 107(2), Section 104(2) expressly bars any further appeal against such an order. Held, since no appellate remedy is available under India Law Library Docid # 2454339
(760) SMTI. REBON KALITA AND 2 ORS Vs. SRI SANJIV KUMAR SONI AND ANR[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 23-09-2026 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Sections 166 and 168 — Assessment of income — Absence of documentary proof — Standard of proof — Strict rules of evidence do not apply to motor accident claims, where standard of proof is preponderance of probability — Absence of formal documentary proof does not justify automatic rejection of testimony or adoption of lowest tier of minimum wages — Where unrebutted oral evidence of witnesses, including a veterinary doctor and small tea growers association member, estab India Law Library Docid # 2454348