ive
User not Logged..
India's Biggest Headnotes Library over 53.69 Lakhs Headnotes
    Free Artificial Intelligence Drafting  

    Free Artificial Intelligence Case Analyzer  

   AI Submission Generator   

Latest Cases

(121) SMT. ASHA DEVI Vs. MARWARI PANCHAYATI DHARAMSHALA[UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] 04-09-2025
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 227 — Supervisory jurisdiction — High Court powers — Writ petition maintainable only for grave miscarriage of justice or jurisdictional error — Not an appellate jurisdiction — Cannot correct mere errors of fact or law unless they go to the root of jurisdiction.
India Law Library Docid # 2432339

(122) SREEJA D G AND OTHERS Vs. ANITHA R. NAIR AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 04-09-2025
Court Jurisdiction — Stay of Proceedings — High Court passing orders modifying bail conditions when such order is under challenge before the Supreme Court is contrary to judicial propriety and discipline
India Law Library Docid # 2432451

(123) SHIVRANJAN TOWERS SAHAKARI GRIHA RACHANA SANSTHA MARYADIT Vs. BHUJBAL CONSTRUCTIONS AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 04-09-2025
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Sections 16, 34, 5, 37 — Writ Petition against Arbitrator's order on jurisdiction — High Court ordinarily entertains such petitions only in cases of patent lack of inherent jurisdiction, where lack of jurisdiction is glaringly evident, or where a party is left remediless, or where bad faith is exhibited — Minimal judicial intervention and non-breakability of arbitral process to be adhered to —
India Law Library Docid # 2432518

(124) RAJENDRA SHARMA AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 04-09-2025
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 — Writ Jurisdiction — Public employment — Regularization of daily wage employees — This writ petition concerned the regularization of services of daily wage employees who had been working for a considerable period. The petitioner was initially appointed on daily wages, had his services terminated, and was later reinstated. Despite completing more than ten years of service and previous court directions for regularization, his services were not regularized
India Law Library Docid # 2432529

(125) BANARSI DASS AND OTHERS Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER, REVENUE, J&K GOVERNMENT, SRINAGAR AND OTHERS[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT AT JAMMU] 04-09-2025
Jammu and Kashmir Land Revenue Act, Section 12(2) — Revision Petition — Limitation — Provisions of Limitation Act applicable to civil suits apply to revisions under the Land Revenue Act — Period of limitation for revision against a revenue officer's order is the same as for a civil suit revision, which is ninety days.
India Law Library Docid # 2432539

(126) BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. NOOR BEGUM AND OTHERS[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT AT JAMMU] 04-09-2025
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 145 — Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal — Award — Appeal — Non-joinder of driver as a necessary party — Contention that claim petition is not maintainable due to non-joinder of driver rejected — Held, driver is a proper party but not a necessary party for claim petition — Tribunal duty-bound to implead necessary/proper parties and issue notices, but non-impleadment by claimant
India Law Library Docid # 2432540

(127) MEHRAJ-UD-DIN KHAN Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND OTHERS[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT AT SRINAGAR] 04-09-2025
Service Law — Dismissal from service — Absence from duty — Petitioner, a Constable, was removed from service for unauthorized absence from duty due to alleged militant threats — Petitioner failed to provide evidence for threats and did not rejoin duty for nineteen years — His representations were rejected, and Tribunal upheld dismissal — Held, a police official cannot abandon duties due to perceived threats, and petitioner's
India Law Library Docid # 2432550

(128) MUZAFFAR IQBAL QURESHI Vs. STATE OF J&K AND ANOTHER[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT AT SRINAGAR] 04-09-2025
Jammu & Kashmir Higher Judicial Service Rules, 2009 — Rule 24 — Premature Retirement — Assessment of utility of judicial officer for continued service beyond age of 58 years must be completed before attaining that age — Delay in conducting assessment, particularly when officer is close to superannuation, defeats purpose of rule.
India Law Library Docid # 2432551

(129) VISHAL AND OTHERS Vs. SUNITA AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 04-09-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 6 Rule 17 — Amendment of Pleadings — Proviso — Trial commenced — No due diligence — Application for amendment to introduce plea of ancestral coparcenary property dismissed — Plaintiff already led evidence on a different plea — Allowing amendment would cause irreparable loss and delay proceedings — High Court's power under Article 227 to be exercised with judicial
India Law Library Docid # 2432582

(130) PHOOL CHAND Vs. M/S. MOHAN DAI OSWAL CANCER TREATMENT AND RESEARCH FOUNDATION AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 04-09-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 114 — Review — Grounds for review — Limited to discovery of new and important matter or evidence, or mistake or error apparent on the face of the record — Cannot be used to re-argue case as an appeal or for repetition of old arguments, rehearing, or mere disagreement with verdict.
India Law Library Docid # 2432583

(131) PUNJAB STATE WAREHOUSE CORPORATION AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S. KATARIA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 04-09-2025
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 8 — Power to refer parties to arbitration — Requirement of arbitration agreement — Court can refer parties to arbitration if an arbitration agreement exists, even if the original or certified copy of the agreement is not produced, provided its existence is not disputed by either party.
India Law Library Docid # 2432584

(132) MUKESH Vs. BALDEV SINGH[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 04-09-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 41 Rule 23-A — Remand of case — When Lower Appellate Court's judgment is set aside, the High Court may order a retrial. The High Court found that the original suit was not properly decided due to issues with evidence and re-evaluation of a demarcation report. Therefore, the case was remanded to the trial court for a fresh decision after proper demarcation of the
India Law Library Docid # 2432678

(133) GURMAIL SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs. SUKHMINDER SINGH AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 04-09-2025
Indian Succession Act, 1925 — Section 63 — Wills — Suspicious circumstances — A Will revoked by a subsequent unregistered Will is not invalid per se, however, the circumstances surrounding the execution of the subsequent Will must be scrutinized for suspicious elements — A registered Will executed by the testator indicates awareness of the importance of formal documentation, making a purportedly
India Law Library Docid # 2432679

(134) JAISHANKAR SHARMA AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 04-09-2025
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 143, 341, 323, 336 — Unlawful assembly, Wrongful restraint, Voluntarily causing hurt, Rash or negligent act endangering life — Framing of charges — Prima facie case — Evidence on record, including witness statements and recovery of a lathi, sufficiently establishes voluntary causing of hurt, wrongful restraint, and rash/negligent acts, forming a prima facie case for these offences.
India Law Library Docid # 2432727

(135) STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. JAIPAL JAIN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 04-09-2025
Factories Act, 1948 — Sections 34 and 38 — Penalty for contravention of provisions relating to safety — Prosecution based on negligence causing injury — Essential element is proof of violation of specific safety norms or lapses by employers — Failure of prosecution to produce the injured witness for examination-in-chief and cross-examination is fatal to the case
India Law Library Docid # 2432728

(136) URMILA CHAND Vs. SONU CHAND AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 03-09-2025
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Compensation — Disbursement — Review Petition — Delay — Rejection of review petition not condoned for want of substantiated delay — Grounds for review were that disbursement was unfair and contrary to succession law — Appellant accepted cheque for Rs. 1,00,000/- and signed order sheet without demur — Review application filed after almost 7 months of receiving payment —
India Law Library Docid # 2432309

(137) C.P. FRANCIS Vs. C.P. JOSEPH AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 03-09-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 100 — Second Appeal — Framing of Additional Substantial Question of Law — High Court's power to frame new question of law under Proviso to Section 100(5) is discretionary and exceptional, requiring strong and convincing reasons to be recorded — Such question must be grounded in pleadings and findings of lower courts and not be a mere legal plea formulated without notice or opportunity to the opposite party to argue — Introducing a new case
India Law Library Docid # 2432310

(138) KU. RANU Vs. SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELD LIMITED AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 03-09-2025
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 — Writ Petition — Compassionate Appointment — Rejection of application — Petitioner challenged rejection of her application for dependent employment by South Eastern Coalfields Limited (SECL) — Grounds for rejection were delay in filing and petitioner’s name not being in service records — SECL rejected application after petitioner’s brother, initially
India Law Library Docid # 2432315

(139) ATUL GUPTA Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND[UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] 03-09-2025
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 — Writ Petition — Quashing of Orders — Release of Vehicle — Petitioner sought quashing of orders refusing release of vehicle confiscated in connection with ivory sale — Vehicle detained by forest authorities after apprehension of three persons with ivory — Petitioner, registered owner, sought interim release citing deterioration of vehicle — Orders of respondent authorities rejecting
India Law Library Docid # 2432340

(140) DEVENDRA SHARMA Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS[UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] 03-09-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Quashing of proceedings — Abuse of process of court — High Court has inherent power to quash criminal proceedings that are essentially civil in nature to prevent abuse of process or secure ends of justice — Revisional Court correctly quashed summoning order as proceedings were initiated after a civil dispute regarding ownership of a firm was established and a Civil
India Law Library Docid # 2432341