(861) S.K.S. RESORTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025 Tamil Nadu District Municipalities (Hill Stations) Building Rules, 1993 — Rule 27-B — Powers of District Collector — Recommendations of Committee for Architectural and Aesthetic Aspects (AAA) — The District Collector, as the approving authority under Rule 27-B, possesses the independent power to either approve or reject the recommendations received from the AAA Committee regarding building plan applications in hill stations — The recommendations of the AAA Committee are not binding on the Collec India Law Library Docid # 2424419
(862) V. THIRUPATHY Vs. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025 Registration Act, 1908 — Section 22-A — Tamil Nadu Regularization of Unapproved Layouts and Plots Rules, 2017 — Rule 15(b) — Prohibition on Registration of Unapproved Plots — Cut-off Date — Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908, read harmoniously with Rule 15(b) of the 2017 Rules and the clarification issued by the First Bench order dated 15.06.2017 in W.M.P.No.15656 of 2017, prohibits the registration of unapproved layout plots sold or intended for use as house sites after the cut-off date India Law Library Docid # 2424420
(863) ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. (IN PLACE OF BHARTI AXA GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.) Vs. M/S. FIVE STAR VANIJYA PVT. LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 24-03-2025 Insurance Law – Motor Insurance – Repudiation of Claim – Breach of Policy Conditions – Use for ‘Hire or Reward’ – Overloading – Burden of Proof – Repudiation of an own damage claim under a Private Car Package Policy on the grounds that the vehicle was used for ‘hire or reward’ and was carrying passengers beyond its seating capacity requires the insurer to discharge the burden of proving such breaches with cogent evidence — Relying solely on newspaper reports (hearsay evidence) or an investigatio India Law Library Docid # 2424493
(864) BALAMURUGAN (NOW CONFINED AS LIFE CONVICT IN PALAYAMKOTTAI CENTRAL PRISON) Vs. THE STATE[MADRAS HIGH COURT (MADURAI BENCH)] 24-03-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 300 Exception 1, 302, 304 Part I — Culpable Homicide not Amounting to Murder — Sudden Intervention & Loss of Self-Control — Where the accused, following a quarrel with PW1, pursued her with a weapon (‘aruval’) and fatally attacked the deceased (PW1’s grandfather) upon the latter’s sudden intervention to protect PW1, the act, although demonstrating transferred malice, falls within Exception 1 to Section 300 IPC — The sudden intervention acted as a grave provocati India Law Library Docid # 2424460
(865) MARUDHU PANDI Vs. THE STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE[MADRAS HIGH COURT (MADURAI BENCH)] 24-03-2025 Evidence Act, 1872 — Appreciation of Evidence — Eyewitness Testimony — Relatives and Neighbours — Reliability — Testimony of eyewitnesses (PW1-PW4, PW16), including close relatives (husband, granddaughter) and neighbours, regarding a daytime murder involving a known accused, is considered reliable and natural when their presence at the scene is probable and their accounts regarding the assault are consistent and corroborated by other evidence, despite minor defence suggestions of India Law Library Docid # 2424461
(866) NITIN PRABHAKAR BHAGAWAT Vs. KESHAV MANSING SALUNKHE[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 24-03-2025 Specific Performance — Readiness and Willingness — Failure to Pay Balance Consideration — In a suit for specific performance, the plaintiff’s failure to pay the balance sale consideration within the stipulated four—month period (the longer period provided in the agreement) demonstrates a lack of readiness and willingness, disentitling him to the discretionary relief India Law Library Docid # 2424549
(867) SAROJ PORWAR (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. Vs. JUGAL KISHORE AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 24-03-2025 U.P. Urban Buildings Act, 1972 — S. 21(1)(a) — Bona Fide Need — Evolution of Need — Subsequent Events — The landlord’s bona fide need under S. 21(1)(a) is not static and can be sustained even if the original family member for whom the need was pleaded is no longer available (due to death), provided another family member demonstrates a genuine and subsisting need for the premises arising subsequently India Law Library Docid # 2424535
(868) TELIZ REALTORS AND OTHERS Vs. JTL PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025 Commercial Courts Act, 2015 — Section 2(1)(c) — Commercial Dispute — Definition — A dispute arising from alleged fraud, misrepresentation, and embezzlement of funds, where the defendant induced the plaintiff to part with money under the guise of a non-existent joint venture or construction project with no intention to perform, does not constitute a ‘commercial dispute’ under Sections 2(1)(c)(vi) (construction contracts) or 2(1)(c)(xi) (joint venture agreements) India Law Library Docid # 2424577
(869) P.J. FRANCIS Vs. C.D. JOSE[KERALA HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025 Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 — Section 5 — Fixation of Fair Rent — Factors — Fair rent fixation must consider not only the location’s importance and potential rent of comparable buildings but also specific factors like the age and condition of the tenanted building, accessibility, lack of amenities and other circumstances affecting its rental value. Arbitrary or excessively high enhancement causing undue hardship is impermissible. India Law Library Docid # 2424578
(870) UMER ALI Vs. STATE OF KERALA[KERALA HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025 Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 65B — Admissibility of Electronic Evidence — Secondary Evidence — A copy of an electronic record (CCTV footage copied from a DVR onto a DVD) constitutes secondary evidence and is inadmissible unless accompanied by the mandatory certificate under Section 65B(4) India Law Library Docid # 2424579
(871) ARJUN MADOU DUGI Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025 Passports Act, 1967 — Sections 3 and 12(1)(b) — Applicability to Foreign Citizens — Section 3, read with its Explanation, prohibits departure from India without a valid passport or travel document, including a valid foreign passport — Consequently, Section 12(1)(b), which penalizes contravention of Section 3, applies even to foreign citizens attempting to depart India using an invalid or tampered foreign passport. India Law Library Docid # 2424580
(872) SARASWATHIAMMA AND OTHERS Vs. MANUEL AND ANOTHER[KERALA HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 21 Rule 32(5) — Execution of Prohibitory Injunction — Restoration — The Executing Court has the power under Order 21 Rule 32(5) to direct restoration of the property to its original condition, including reconstruction of structures like boundary fences destroyed by the judgment debtor in violation of a decree for permanent prohibitory injunction, by the decree holder or a person appointed by the court, at the cost of the judgment debtor. India Law Library Docid # 2424581
(873) HDFC BANK Vs. KENWOOD MARKETING INC. AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 24-03-2025 Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) — S. 13(2) — Demand Notice — Requirement of Break-up — High Court affirmed DRAT order holding S. 13(2) notice invalid for lacking specific break-up of the amount due — Supreme Court, referring to its prima facie view expressed in an earlier interim order (dated 03.03.2025) and the decision in Arce Polymers (P) Ltd. v. Alphine Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd. & Ors, (2022) 2 SCC 221, opined India Law Library Docid # 2424654
(874) SRI HARBILAS GOYAL CHARITABLE TRUST Vs. SANJAY KUMAR MITTAL AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 24-03-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 7 Rule 11 & Order 23 Rule 3A — Rejection of Plaint — Bar of Suit to Set Aside Compromise Decree — Remand by High Court — Where a prior suit concerning donated land was settled by a compromise decree specifying its usage, and plaintiffs filed a subsequent suit alleging breach (transfer to third parties) and seeking injunction, the defendant-Trust filed an application under O. 7 R11 CPC invoking the bar under O. 23 R3A CPC — Trial Court allowed the India Law Library Docid # 2424648
(875) NADIR LALANI Vs. SMT. RESHMA PIRANI AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 36 — Enforcement of Award — Non-Arbitrable Disputes — Child Custody — Matters relating to child custody are non-arbitrable as a matter of public policy and fall within the exclusive domain of courts — Consequently, an application under Section 36 of the Act seeking enforcement of an arbitration award or agreement dealing with child custody is not maintainable India Law Library Docid # 2424701
(876) LOUIS SUNNA UZOMA PETERSON ZUMBA Vs. UNION OF INDIA[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) — Section 37 — Bail in cases involving Commercial Quantity — Twin Conditions — Section 37 imposes stringent conditions for grant of bail where commercial quantity is involved — The Court must have reasonable grounds to believe (i) that the accused is not guilty of the offence, and (ii) that the accused is not likely to commit any offence while on bail — These conditions are cumulative and mandatory India Law Library Docid # 2424764
(877) CHETUKURI MADHAVA REDDY Vs. MANDA SAVITHRAMMA AND ANOTHER[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025 Specific Relief Act, 1963 — Section 34 — Suit for Declaration of Title — Burden of Proof — In a suit for declaration of title, the plaintiff must succeed based on the strength of their own title and not on the weakness of the defendant’s case — The onus lies heavily on the plaintiff to adduce sufficient evidence to discharge this burden. India Law Library Docid # 2424746
(878) SYED HIDAYAT MOHIUDDIN KHAN AND ANOTHER Vs. SMT JAMAL BEE AND OTHERS[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025 Wakf Act, 1995 — Lease of Wakf Property — Subsequent Lease during Litigation — Effect — Granting of a fresh lease by the Wakf Board to the tenant’s heir during the pendency of eviction proceedings based on termination of the original tenancy fundamentally alters the cause of action, rendering the validity of the original termination notice less critical. India Law Library Docid # 2424774
(879) ANGARA MOSQUE Vs. SREENIVASA RICE MILL AND OTHERS[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025 Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 101 — Burden of Proof — Suit for Declaration of Title — In a suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession, the plaintiff must succeed based on the strength of their own title and not on the weakness, if any, of the defendant’s case — The initial burden lies squarely on the plaintiff to adduce sufficient evidence to establish a clear title. India Law Library Docid # 2424810
(880) THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR, ESI CORP. VIJAYAWADA AND ANOTHER AND OTHERS Vs. IMMISETTY VENKATESWARLU[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025 Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 — Section 2(12) and Section 1(4) — Initial Applicability — Definition of ‘Factory’ — Employee Threshold — For the Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 (ESI Act) to apply to an establishment for the first time under Section 1(4), the establishment must meet the definition of a ‘factory’ as provided in Section 2(12) of the Act — As per the definition amended in 1989, this requires the employment of ten or more persons currently or on any day of the preceding tw India Law Library Docid # 2424819