(841) CHOWGULE INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. ICRA LIMITED[BOMBAY HIGH COURT (GOA BENCH)] 19-09-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 7 Rule 10 — Return of Plaint — Territorial Jurisdiction — Parties agreed to exclusive jurisdiction of Delhi courts in their contract — Although tortious acts may give rise to jurisdiction in multiple courts, an exclusive jurisdiction clause, if valid and unambiguous, will govern. India Law Library Docid # 2434510
(842) THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELECTRICAL DIVISION) AND OTHERS Vs. SHRI SANJAY SINGH AND OTHERS[UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] 19-09-2025 Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 — Sections 25F, 2(oo) — Retrenchment — Employer-employee relationship — Award directing consideration for reinstatement and 20% back wages challenged — Petitioner argued no direct employer-employee relationship, workman engaged through contractor — Court held substance of engagement and actual working, not formal contract, determines master-servant India Law Library Docid # 2434611
(843) M/S OCL IRON & STEEL LTD. AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ANOTHER[UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] 19-09-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Inherent powers of High Court — Quashing of proceedings — Abuse of process of law — High Court can quash proceedings if allowing them to continue would be an abuse of the court's process or if ends of justice so require — Powers are to prevent harassment or persecution and to secure ends of justice. India Law Library Docid # 2434612
(844) USHA GUPTA AND OTHERS Vs. M/S MAX SUPER SPECIALITY HOSPITAL AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 19-09-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Medical Negligence — Causation — Circumstantial evidence — While claims of medical negligence were made regarding a Coronary Artery Bypass Graft (CABG) surgery and subsequent complications leading to Hypoxic Ischemic Encephalopathy, the Commission found itself unable to establish a direct causal link between the surgeon's actions and the patient's condition. India Law Library Docid # 2434661
(845) RAJPUT VIJAYSINH NATWARSINH Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 18-09-2025 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 451 — Disposal of property pending trial — Cash seized as proceeds of crime — Release of seized cash to a claimant prior to trial conclusion — Held premature and unjustified when ownership is disputed and other victims exist. India Law Library Docid # 2432758
(846) NITIN AHLUWALIA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 18-09-2025 Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 498A — Cruelty by husband or relatives of husband — Quashing of FIR — Abuse of process of law — FIR filed by respondent-wife after divorce proceedings initiated by appellant-husband and a foreign court order for child’s return — Respondent’s conduct questionable regarding child’s return to Australia and allegations in the complaint not supporting the offence of cruelty India Law Library Docid # 2432759
(847) FIITJEE LTD. Vs. SHLOK AGARWAL ALIAS SHLOK VIJAY AGARWAL[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 18-09-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(b) — Revisional Jurisdiction — Limited scope — National Commission cannot re-appreciate evidence like an appellate court; can only interfere in cases of jurisdictional error, failure to exercise jurisdiction, or illegal/irregular exercise of jurisdiction. India Law Library Docid # 2432815
(848) SOM NATH MUKHERJEE Vs. ATUL KUMAR SINHA AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 18-09-2025 Bihar Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 — Section 14(8) — Civil Revision — Maintainability — Revision filed by one of several aggrieved defendants against eviction decree — Maintainable even if other defendants are not parties, provided the ground of challenge is common and the revisionist challenges the decree in their own right India Law Library Docid # 2433008
(849) SMT. JYOTI SINGH Vs. SMT. GEETA DEVI AND OTHERS[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 18-09-2025 U.P. Zila Panchayat (Settlement of Dispute Relating to Membership) Rules, 1994 — Rule 4(3) — Presentation of Election Petition — Personal appearance — An election petition presented through e-filing, with the election petitioner appearing before the Munsarim on the date fixed, satisfies the requirement of personal presence as mandated by Rule 4(3), especially considering Covid-19 pandemic restrictions. India Law Library Docid # 2433017
(850) RISHI KUMAR JAIN AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 18-09-2025 Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam, 1965 — Section 24(2) of Act, 2013 — Applicability to acquisitions under Adhiniyam, 1965 — Not applicable — The intent of the 2013 Act was to improve conditions of compensation for acquisitions under the 1894 Act only. The 1965 Act is not included in the Fourth Schedule of the 2013 Act, and no amendments have been made to the 1965 Act to include provisions for deemed lapse as in the 2013 Act. Therefore, India Law Library Docid # 2433018
(851) GRANDHE DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. Vs. THE STATE OF TELANGANA[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 18-09-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Quashing of proceedings — Agreement of sale dispute — Allegations of offences under Sections 406, 420, 120B IPC arising from an agreement of sale — Court's role at cognizance stage is to ascertain a prima facie case, not to evaluate sufficiency of evidence — Dispute over genuineness of agreement and payment of amounts are matters for trial — Pendency of a civil suit for specific performance does not automatically bar India Law Library Docid # 2433036
(852) R. MAHENDER Vs. STATE OF A.P. ACB[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 18-09-2025 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) — Demand and acceptance of bribe — Essential ingredients — Prosecution failed to prove demand for illegal gratification beyond reasonable doubt — Key witnesses turned hostile — Evidence suggested money was for supervisory charges, not bribe — Mere recovery of money without proof of demand is insufficient for conviction — Presumption under Section 20 arises only after demand and acceptance are proved — Conviction India Law Library Docid # 2433037
(853) KAMAL KHAN Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND OTHERS[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 18-09-2025 Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 — Section 21(5) — Jharkhand Minor Minerals Concession Rules, 2004 — Rule 54(6) — Recovery of illegally extracted minerals — State government has the power to recover the price of illegally extracted minerals or rent, royalty, or tax for unauthorized occupation of land — Supreme Court in Common Cause v. Union of India held that 100% recovery should be made — This precedent is binding on High Courts under Article 141 of the India Law Library Docid # 2433319
(854) SURESH THAKUR AND OTHERS Vs. IRA MITRA AND OTHERS[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 18-09-2025 Specific Relief Act, 1963 — Section 16(c) — Readiness and willingness — Plaintiff must prove continuous readiness and willingness from the date of agreement until the decree — Mere plea or deposit of balance consideration in court after a significant delay is insufficient — Availability of funds and evidence are crucial India Law Library Docid # 2433320
(855) HEM PRASAD SINGH MUNDA AND OTHERS Vs. SRIKANT SINGH MUNDA AND OTHERS[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 18-09-2025 Chota Nagpur Tenancy Act, 1908 — Section 240 — Restriction on transfer of Mundari Khunt Kattidari Tenancy — Sale of such tenancy by a tenant is void ab initio and confers no right, title, or interest. India Law Library Docid # 2433321
(856) GOURI DWIBEDY AND OTHERS Vs. NAGENDRA KUMARI ACHARYA @ DWIBEDY AND OTHERS[ORISSA HIGH COURT] 18-09-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 6 Rule 17 — Amendment of Pleadings — Application for amendment of plaint was rejected by the trial court on two grounds: (1) lack of due diligence by the plaintiffs and (2) the proposed amendment would change the nature and character of the suit, leading to a de novo trial. The High Court held that the 'due diligence' requirement under the amended rule would not apply to suits filed India Law Library Docid # 2433148
(857) STATE OF ASSAM AND OTHERS Vs. RAJEN DOLEY AND OTHERS[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 18-09-2025 Indian Evidence Act, 1872 — Sections 24, 25, 26, 27 — Confession made in police custody — Confession made to witnesses while accused were in police custody and in presence of police officers is inadmissible — Discovery of weapons at instance of accused — Admissibility under Section 27 requires clear link between information and discovery, and discovery from open places or without specific information makes it India Law Library Docid # 2433116
(858) M/S. KAPSUN INDUSTRIES AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S. AVNI FINANCE AND ANOTHER[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 18-09-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 37 — Summary Suits — Leave to Defend — Scope of interference under Article 227 of Constitution of India — Court will not interfere with the trial court's order granting conditional leave to defend unless shown to be erroneous, arbitrary, or suffering from jurisdictional error. India Law Library Docid # 2433130
(859) PREM MOTERS PVT. LTD. Vs. RAJENDRA UPADHYAY[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (GWALIOR BENCH)] 18-09-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 7 Rule 11 — Rejection of Plaint — Cause of Action — Limitation — On a meaningful reading of the plaint, if it is found that the suit is manifestly vexatious, meritless, or barred by limitation, the court should exercise its power under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. Clever drafting to create an illusion of a cause of action or to circumvent limitation must be nipped in the bud. India Law Library Docid # 2433296
(860) THE STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Vs. ANIL AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 18-09-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 374(2) — Appeals against conviction — High Court's duty as first appellate court — Independent application of mind to evidence required — Acquitment without reasoned judgment and marshaling of facts and evidence is unsustainable. India Law Library Docid # 2433423