(801) NORTH EASTERN ELECTRIC POWER CORPORATION LIMITED (NEEPCO) Vs. ASTRA CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-09-2026 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 31(7) — Scope of arbitrator's power to award interest and impact of party autonomy — Section 31(7)(a) of the 1996 Act expressly subordinates the arbitrator's power to award interest to the parties' bargain through the opening words "unless otherwise agreed by the parties" — An express bar in the agreement suffices to exclude this power, even if it is not specifically addressed to the arbitrator's jurisdiction, marking a clear departure from the st India Law Library Docid # 2453045
(802) KULWANT KAUR Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ANOTHER[UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] 22-09-2026 Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 — Section 12 — Maintenance — Determination of quantum — Status and standard of living — Legally wedded wife is entitled to live with dignity commensurate with the status and standard of living of her husband — Object of granting maintenance under the DV Act is to prevent financial deprivation and enable the aggrieved person to maintain herself with dignity — In assessing quantum, the court must balance the husband's income and financial capaci India Law Library Docid # 2453172
(803) BHARTENDU SOOD AND ANOTHER Vs. INDIAN RAILWAYS CATERING AND TOURISM CORPORATION (IRCTC) AND ANOTHER[STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, U.T., CHANDIGARH] 22-09-2026 Consumer Protection — Enhancement of Compensation — Quantum and adequacy — Consumer fora are empowered to grant compensation that not only recompenses the affected consumer for mental agony, harassment, and hardship, but also deters deficient conduct by service providers — Compensation is not restricted to actual pecuniary loss and must have a reasonable nexus with the nature of the deficiency, conduct of the service provider, and time and expenses expended in litigation — Award of a meagre cons India Law Library Docid # 2453454
(804) M/S. CEMCON TRACK INDUSTRIES Vs. M/S. BAJAJ ALLIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 22-09-2026 Consumer Protection — Insurance — Burglary Policy — Repudiation — Reasonable Precautions — Factory closed for months — Insured claimed massive loss of stock allegedly stolen over 2 to 3 months through multiple holes made in boundary walls — Insurer repudiated claim citing breach of policy condition requiring reasonable precautions — Deploying only a single security guard per shift for an inactive premises exceeding one acre held grossly inadequate — Failure to detect continuous theft and wall br India Law Library Docid # 2453226
(805) HARI NARAYAN SINGH Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 22-09-2026 Service Law — Departmental Enquiry — Service of Notice — Obligation to inform change of address — Delinquent employee challenged proceedings on ground of non-communication of notices — Notices were dispatched to permanent and local addresses provided by employee at time of appointment, but returned unserved — Employer is duty-bound to communicate only at the address furnished in official records — If an employee changes residence, the obligation to intimate the employer rests squarely on him — D India Law Library Docid # 2453116
(806) JITENDRA PRATAP SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 22-09-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 154 and Section 482 — Constitution of India — Article 226 — Registration of cross-FIR — Maintainability of writ petition — Merely labelling a complaint as a counter-version arising out of the same occurrence does not automatically entitle the complainant to a direction for registration of a second FIR — Where the investigating agency conducted a verification exercise pursuant to CVC directions, examined relevant records, found no actionable material India Law Library Docid # 2453129
(807) AMIT CHOUBEY @ AMIT KUMAR CHOUBEY @ ANKIT CHOUBEY @ AJIT CHOUBEY AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF BIHAR AND ANOTHER[PATNA HIGH COURT] 22-09-2026 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 304(A) read with Section 34 — Causing death by negligence — Accidental electrocution — Allegation against petitioners whose co-accused allegedly engaged deceased as a labourer — Investigation revealed that electrocution occurred due to non-insulated electric wire used by another co-accused to supply electricity via generator set to the village — Fellow labourers affirmed that death was accidental — Petitioners had no connection with supply or transmission of elec India Law Library Docid # 2453136
(808) VIKAS BHARDWAJ Vs. C. B. I.[DELHI HIGH COURT] 22-09-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 173, 239, 240 and 482 — Framing of charge — Standard of judicial scrutiny — Effect of closure reports — At the stage of framing charge, the court is not required to conduct a mini-trial or meticulously appreciate evidence, but only ascertain whether a prima facie case or grave suspicion exists — Mere submission of closure reports by the investigating agency does not bind the court if the record discloses sufficient material to proceed — Refusal of India Law Library Docid # 2453140
(809) NIKKI DEVI @ KHUSHBOO KUMARI Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR[PATNA HIGH COURT] 22-09-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 155(2) — Investigation into non-cognizable offences — FIR registered for offences under Section 171H IPC and Sections 125-A(1) and 125-A(3) of Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006 — Mandatory statutory requirement — Police officer cannot assume power to investigate a non-cognizable case without obtaining an order of the competent Magistrate — The requirement under Section 155(2) CrPC cannot be bypassed — Since the State failed to demonstrate that any order India Law Library Docid # 2453142
(810) SHYAM SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA[DELHI HIGH COURT] 22-09-2026 Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 — Section 23 — Condonation of delay — Delay of 775 days in filing appeal — Appellant, resident of a village, belonged to an economically weaker section, was illiterate, and suffered from paucity of funds, preventing timely legal advice — Considering the socio-economic condition of the appellant and the beneficial nature of the legislation, sufficient cause was shown — Delay condoned. India Law Library Docid # 2453151
(811) MURZBAN NUSSERWANJI KHARIWALA AND OTHERS Vs. KAKAD CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 22-09-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 7 Rule 11(d) — Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 — Section 149 — Bar of suit — Challenge to building permissions — A suit simpliciter challenging sanctioned building plans and development permissions granted by a planning authority, without seeking a declaration of title or recovery of possession, is expressly barred under Section 149 of the MRTP Act. Mere narration of title history in the plaint does not convert such a challenge into a tit India Law Library Docid # 2453458
(812) RAPTAKOS, BRETT & COMPANY LIMITED AND ANOTHER Vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, THANE CITY AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 22-09-2026 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 — Writ of Mandamus — Police protection to enforce interim injunction — Maintainability — Writ petition seeking police protection cannot be made a forum to adjudicate civil rights or resolve private property disputes — Police protection through mandamus has a limited scope and cannot be extended where rights, possession, or identity of the property are not unambiguously determined by the civil court — Where heavily disputed questions of fact exist regardi India Law Library Docid # 2453459
(813) PANDIT SHIVAJI KUMBHARKAR AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 22-09-2026 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 — Judicial Review — Policy decision — Siting of Greenfield Airport — Challenge to location on ground that alternative site was more viable — Held, selection of a site, alignment, and land requirement for public infrastructure projects fall within executive policy and technical expertise — Courts must exercise judicial restraint and not substitute their judgment for that of experts — Landowners cannot dictate site selection to the State merely to protect India Law Library Docid # 2453460
(814) ALL INDIA TRAVEL SERVICES Vs. ASHOK K. UPADHAYAY AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 22-09-2026 Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 — Section 15-A — Indian Partnership Act, 1932 — Section 69(2) — Deemed tenancy rights — Unregistered partnership firm — Applicant firm occupied premises as licensee on the notified date 01.02.1973 under a 1966 agreement — Firm was unregistered on the notified date but registered subsequently in October 1973 — Courts below held firm disentitled to declaration of tenancy due to non-registration on notified date — Held, Section 15-A conf India Law Library Docid # 2453461
(815) MARTAND SAKHARAM GHOLAP Vs. BHARU KHAN AND ANOTHER[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 22-09-2026 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Sections 166 and 168 — Injury claim — Assessment of functional disability — Difference between physical disability and loss of earning capacity — Claimant, working as a postal clerk, sustained amputation of right arm below elbow, certified as 65% permanent physical disability — Held, while medical experts assess physical impairment, the court must ascertain functional disability based on claimant's occupation — Loss of an arm by a clerk does not cause total functional India Law Library Docid # 2453462
(816) MAHARASHTRA KRISHNA VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION Vs. MARUTI LAXMAN KHEDKAR AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 22-09-2026 Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — Sections 18 and 53 — Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — Section 141 and Order XXII Rules 3, 4 and 10A — Death of sole claimant during reference proceedings — Application of Order XXII CPC — Duty to substitute — A reference under Section 18 is governed by the CPC via Section 53. The claimant occupies a status akin to a plaintiff seeking enhancement, and the burden to bring legal representatives on record lies on the claimant's side. If the sole claimant dies and no subst India Law Library Docid # 2453463
(817) TAHIR KHAN Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 22-09-2026 Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 32(1) — Dying declaration — Evidentiary value — Absence of doctor's certificate and Magistrate — Delay in death — Multiple oral declarations made to witnesses and a written statement given to police were consistent, voluntary, and truthful — Doctors and police testified the deceased was conscious and speaking — Held, a valid dying declaration neither strictly requires recording by a Magistrate nor a formal medical fitness certificate if the declarant is found conscio India Law Library Docid # 2453464
(818) DR. JAYDEEP ARUN DATE Vs. MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 22-09-2026 Medical Council of India Regulations, 2000 — Disciplinary Proceedings — Natural Justice — Reversal of exoneration — Ethics Committee of MCI failed to supply copies of complainant's appeal and documents to doctors — Subsequent meetings held without notice — No urology specialist included on panel adjudicating specialized urological procedures — Appellate body reversed State Medical Council's exoneration order through a cryptic order without assigning reasons — Held, quasi-judicial bodies imposing India Law Library Docid # 2453465
(819) DR. JAYDEEP ARUN DATE Vs. MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 22-09-2026 Administrative Law — Principles of Natural Justice — Medical Council of India (MCI) — Disciplinary Proceedings — Breach of natural justice — Petitioner-doctors were served only notice of hearing without copies of the appeal memorandum or accompanying documents filed by complainant — Ethics Committee held subsequent meetings behind their backs without notice — Committee also lacked a specialist in Urology despite allegations involving specialized urological procedures — Furthermore, the Ethics Co India Law Library Docid # 2453466
(820) COLETTE M. LOUIS AND ANOTHER Vs. JUNITA A. UBALE AND ANOTHER[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 22-09-2026 Indian Succession Act, 1925 — Section 63(c) — Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 68 — Proof of Will — Execution and attestation — Evidence of single attesting witness — Plaintiffs sought probate of a registered Will — One attesting witness, an advocate, testified to due execution by the testator and attestation by both witnesses — Testimony remained unshaken in cross-examination — Held, where one attesting witness clearly proves execution and attestation in compliance with statutory requirements, exam India Law Library Docid # 2453468