(901) AMIT CHOPRA AND OTHERS Vs. JITENDER KUMAR AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 21-03-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Compensation — Fatal Accident — Enhancement — Deceased aged 44 ½ years, Permanent Employee (Bank Clerk-cum-Cashier) — Tribunal applied correct multiplier (14) but erred in deducting 1/3rd instead of 1/4th for personal expenses (implicitly assuming 4-6 dependents) and failed to award future prospects & adequate conventional heads — Held, applying principles from Sarla Verma India Law Library Docid # 2423956
(902) KAMALJIT KAUR AND OTHERS Vs. NARINDERJIT SINGH AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 21-03-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Compensation — Fatal Accident — Enhancement — Deceased aged 52 years, Permanent Employee (JBT Teacher) — Tribunal applied incorrect multiplier (6 instead of 11) and incorrect deduction for personal expenses (1/3rd instead of 1/4th) — Failed to award future prospects and adequate conventional heads — Held, applying principles laid down in Sarla Verma (2009) and Pranay Sethi (2017), correct multiplier is 11; deduction for personal expenses is 1/4th; future India Law Library Docid # 2423957
(903) SHAKUNTALA AND OTHERS Vs. MURTI DEVI AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 21-03-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 39 Rules 1 and 2, Section 104, Order 43 Rule 1 — Temporary Injunction — Trinity Test — Necessity of Reasoning — Grant of temporary injunction requires the court to satisfy the well-established 'trinity test' — An impugned order granting injunction restraining defendants from construction and alienation, which lacks reasoning on how the plaintiffs established a prima facie case regarding their India Law Library Docid # 2423971
(904) NARINDER KUMAR Vs. USHA RANI TUTEJA AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 21-03-2025 Succession Act, 1925 — Section 63 — Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 68 — Probate Proceedings — Proof of Will — Suspicious Circumstances — Onus on Propounder — The propounder seeking probate bears the onus of proving due execution of the Will as per S. 63 of the Succession Act and S. 68 of the Evidence Act — Crucially, the propounder must dispel all legitimate suspicious circumstances surrounding the execution to the satisfaction of the court's conscience — Failure to remove such doubts India Law Library Docid # 2423972
(905) SHRI VIKRAMBHAI PATEL Vs. M/S PRAVEEN GROUP OF CONSTRUCTIONS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 21-03-2025 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 482 — Maintainability — Second Petition — A subsequent petition under Section 482 CrPC challenging an order is not maintainable if the same ground was raised or available to be raised in a prior petition under Section 482 CrPC which was dismissed as withdrawn/not pressed — Permitting successive petitions on grounds available earlier constitutes an abuse of process, preventing parties from raising pleas in instalments. (Bhisham Lal Verma; Vinod Kumar, IA India Law Library Docid # 2424152
(906) NAVNEET SHAH Vs. MOOL CHAND AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 21-03-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 9 Rule 13 — Setting Aside Ex Parte Decree — Irregularity in Service vs. Knowledge of Proceedings — An ex parte decree cannot be set aside solely on the ground of irregularity in the service of summons if the Court is convinced, based on material on record, that the defendant had knowledge of the suit proceedings and could have appeared — Even if the applicant under Order 9 Rule 13 establishes some irregularity in service, the application is liable to be dismiss India Law Library Docid # 2424153
(907) ABHIJEET BENIWAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 21-03-2025 Passports Act, 1967 — Sections 6(2)(f), 10, 22 — Passports Rules, 1980 — Rule 12 — Passport Renewal — Pendency of Criminal Case — Gazette Notification G.S.R. 570(E) — The mere pendency of a criminal case does not automatically restrict the issuance or renewal of a passport to a period less than the standard 10 years prescribed by Rule 12. Gazette Notification G.S.R. 570(E) dated 25.08.1993, which permits shorter validity contingent on court orders, does not override the India Law Library Docid # 2424164
(908) MR. SUNIL ABRAHAM Vs. MS. REETH ABRAHAM[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 21-03-2025 Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 17, Section 21 — Admission in Pleadings — Effect of Withdrawal of Petition — Evidentiary Value — An admission made in pleadings, such as a joint petition for mutual consent divorce, generally binds the maker — The subsequent withdrawal of the petition does not automatically efface the contents or destroy the evidentiary effect of the admission contained therein — However, an admission is not conclusive proof and can be explained away by its maker — Its weight depends India Law Library Docid # 2424341
(909) FRANK ANTHONY @ FRANK Vs. STATE BY CCB P.S.[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 21-03-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) — Sections 218, 219, 220(1) — Joint Trial vs. Separate Trials — Offences of Same Kind vs. Offences in Same Transaction — Prejudice — Section 218 Cr.P.C. mandates separate trials for distinct offences, with Sections 219 to 223 providing exceptions — Section 219 permits joint trial for up to three offences “of the same kind” committed within twelve months — Offences are of the same kind if punishable with the same amount of punishment under the same section India Law Library Docid # 2424380
(910) C. RAJ Vs. E. GIRIJA[MADRAS HIGH COURT (MADURAI BENCH)] 21-03-2025 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1A)(ii) — Divorce post-[Restitution of conjugal rights] RCR Decree — Maintainability of Fresh Petition: A fresh petition for divorce under Section 13(1A)(ii) is maintainable based on the distinct cause of action arising from non-resumption of cohabitation for over one year following a decree for restitution of conjugal rights (RCR) — The petitioner is not obligated to seek restoration of a India Law Library Docid # 2424421
(911) MOHAMMED FARUK Vs. UNION OF INDIA[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 21-03-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 317 & 70(2) — Dispensing with Appearance / Recall of Warrant — Exercise of Judicial Discretion — Natural Justice — The powers vested in a trial court under Section 317 CrPC (to dispense with personal appearance) and Section 70(2) CrPC (to recall a warrant) are discretionary — Such discretion must be exercised judiciously, with care and caution, balancing the individual’s liberty (Article 21, Constitution of India) against the interests of trial India Law Library Docid # 2424422
(912) PUTTAPPA AND OTHERS Vs. STATE[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 21-03-2025 Criminal Law — Circumstantial Evidence — Standard of Proof — Panchsheel Principles — Unbroken Chain — In cases resting solely on circumstantial evidence, conviction requires the prosecution to firmly establish each circumstance forming a complete and unbroken chain that unerringly points only towards the guilt of the accused, excluding every other possible hypothesis consistent with their innocence — A break in the chain India Law Library Docid # 2424423
(913) MANIKANDAN Vs. STATE[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 21-03-2025 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) — Sections 2(d), 5(l), 6 — Consent of Minor — Immateriality — The consent of a ‘child’ (person below 18 years, as defined in Section 2(d)) is immaterial for establishing offences involving penetrative sexual assault under Sections 5(l) read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act — Arguments based on alleged love affair or consent provided by the minor victim do not India Law Library Docid # 2424424
(914) STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND OTHERS Vs. R.K. JALAN AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 21-03-2025 Stamp Act, 1899 — Sections 17, 47-A — Tamil Nadu Stamp (Prevention of Undervaluation of Instruments) Rules, 1968 — Registration Act, 1908 — Specific Relief Act, 1963 — Stamp Duty on Conveyance executed pursuant to Decree for Specific Performance — Valuation Date — Stamp duty payable on a Deed of Conveyance, including one executed pursuant to a decree for specific performance obtained from a Civil Court, is to be calculated based on the market value of the property prevailing on the date of execu India Law Library Docid # 2424425
(915) CHANDRASHEELA GAJBHIYE AND OTHERS Vs. JILA SAHKARI KENDRIYA MARYADIT BANK[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-03-2025 Insurance Law – Personal Accident Insurance – Group Policy – Exclusion Clause – Driving Without Valid Licence – Repudiation of Claim – Deficiency in Service – Repudiation of a claim under a Group Personal Accident Insurance Policy by the insurer is justified and does not constitute deficiency in service, where the insured person died in a road accident while riding a motorcycle without possessing a valid and effective driving licence at the time of the accident — Such an act constitutes a breach India Law Library Docid # 2424494
(916) RATANMANI KESHARWANI Vs. DR. RAJSHEKHAR KRISHNA, ORTHOPAEDIC SURGEON[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-03-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Medical Negligence – Hysterectomy (Laparoscopic) – Post-Operative Complications – Acute Pancreatitis – ARDS – Multi-Organ Failure – Causation – Burden of Proof – Expert Opinion – A complaint alleging medical negligence against a surgeon and hospital following the death of a patient who underwent laparoscopic hysterectomy was examined — The patient was discharged post-surgery but readmitted days later with abdominal distension, diagnosed as acute pancreatitis, refe India Law Library Docid # 2424495
(917) VIKAS KUMAR Vs. ZONAL MANAGER, BANK OF INDIA[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-03-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Section 2(1)(g) – Banking Service – Deficiency – Unauthorized Withdrawal – Forged Signature – Duplicate Passbook – CCTV Footage – A bank (Bank of India) committed deficiency in service by: (a) issuing a duplicate passbook for the complainant’s Savings Bank account without his request; (b) subsequently honouring a withdrawal slip bearing a forged signature, leading to the unauthorized withdrawal of a large sum (Rs. 5,32,000/-) from the complainant’s account using t India Law Library Docid # 2424496
(918) A. PAVUNAMMAL Vs. ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A&E), DEPARTMENT OF TREASURIES AND ACCOUNTS AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT (MADURAI BENCH)] 21-03-2025 Service Law — Pension — Family Pension — Recovery of Excess Payment — Natural Justice — An order seeking recovery of alleged excess family pension paid to the widow of a deceased government servant, passed without issuing a prior show cause notice or affording a sufficient opportunity of hearing to the family pensioner, is violative of the principles of natural justice and is liable to be quashed on this ground alone — The fact that the recovery order was passed on the same day an alleged consen India Law Library Docid # 2424462
(919) SREE GOKULAM CHIT AND FINANCE CO.(P) LTD. AND ANOTHER Vs. ASHOK KUMAR[KERALA HIGH COURT] 21-03-2025 Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Section 83 — Nature and Scope of Proceedings — Proceeding under Section 83 is summary, procedural, and ministerial in character — Court’s jurisdiction is limited to recording the deposit of mortgage money and issuing notice to the mortgagee. India Law Library Docid # 2424574
(920) G.SASIDHARAN Vs. SREE GOKULAM CHIT & FINANCE CO. (P) LTD. AND ANOTHER[KERALA HIGH COURT] 21-03-2025 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Sections 138 & 147 — Compounding of Offences — Statement by Complainant’s Counsel — Court can act upon a statement filed by the complainant’s counsel confirming amicable settlement and receipt of the entire amount, without insisting on a formal compounding petition signed by both parties or the physical presence of the accused, to record the compounding and set aside conviction and sentence under Section 138. India Law Library Docid # 2424575