(241) A.PALANI ACHARI (DIED) AND OTHERS Vs. MANI AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 10-06-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 7 Rule 11 — Rejection of Plaint — Res Judicata — A plaint can be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 (d) if the suit is barred by any law — The principle of res judicata (Section 11, CPC) constitutes a legal bar to a subsequent suit if the matter directly and substantially in issue has been directly and substantially in issue in a former suit between the same parties, litigating under the same title, and has been heard and finally decided by a court competent to t India Law Library Docid # 2427908
(242) TAMILSELVI Vs. RAMASAMY AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT (MADURAI BENCH)] 10-06-2025 Specific Relief Act, 1963 — Section 16(c) — Specific Performance — Readiness and Willingness — Proof — Plaintiff’s obligation to aver and prove continuous readiness and willingness to perform his part of the contract — Readiness implies financial capacity; willingness relates to conduct — While actual tender or deposit of money is not always essential, plaintiff must plead and adduce evidence of available India Law Library Docid # 2427909
(243) PRATHEEK KRISHNAMOORTHY Vs. THE STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 10-06-2025 Criminal Law — Murder — Circumstantial Evidence — Proof beyond reasonable doubt — In murder cases based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a complete chain of facts that points conclusively to the guilt of the accused, excluding all other reasonable hypotheses of innocence. India Law Library Docid # 2427910
(244) AMLESH KUMAR Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 09-06-2025 Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 341, 342, 323, 363, 364, 498(A), 504, 506 and 34 — Domestic Violence — Missing Person — Husband and Family Accused of Fouls Play — FIR Registered — Wife Allegedly Ran Away — Complaint Filed — Missing Person Not Found — Co-Accused Granted Bail — Appellant’s Bail Rejected Based on FIR Allegations and Co-Accused Confessional Statements — Appellant Approached High Court for Bail. India Law Library Docid # 2426540
(245) M/S. TSR FILMS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. M/S. NEW PRIDE MULTIPLEX, MAHARASHTRA[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 09-06-2025 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Sections 9, 11, 42 — Territorial Jurisdiction — Seat of Arbitration — Conflicting Jurisdiction Clauses — Contract stipulating “Courts in Mumbai” and “venue of arbitration...at Mumbai” but also “Courts at Chennai alone shall have the sole and exclusive jurisdiction” — Examination of surrounding circumstances including place of contract execution, stamp paper purchase, respondent’s office, and prior legal actions clearly indicates India Law Library Docid # 2427911
(246) DHANYAM Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-06-2025 Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 — Section 3 — Preventive Detention — “Notorious Goonda” — Threat to society at large — Justification for preventive detention — Power to be used sparingly and only in rare cases, as an exception to Article 21 of the Constitution — Extraordinary nature requires strict observance of procedural safeguards and demonstration of conformity with procedure established by law — Burden on detaining authority to prove justification — Preventive detention India Law Library Docid # 2426438
(247) THE STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. VINAY RAJASHEKHARAPPA KULKARNI[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-06-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973— Section 439(2) — Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 483(3) — Cancellation of bail — Jurisdiction of Trial Court (Court of Sessions) — Bail granted by Supreme Court — Trial Court declined to entertain CBI application for cancellation of bail granted by Supreme Court on grounds of maintainability and propriety — Erroneous view — Court of Sessions is entitled to entertain an application for cancellation of bail under Section 439(2) CrPC / 483(3 India Law Library Docid # 2426441
(248) M/S. BALAJI TRADERS Vs. THE STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 05-06-2025 Penal Code, 1860 — Section 387 — Putting person in fear of death or of grievous hurt, in order to commit extortion — Distinction from Section 384 (Punishment for extortion) — Essential ingredients of Section 387 are putting a person in fear of death or grievous hurt in order to commit extortion — This is a stage prior to actual commission of extortion under Section 383/384 — Delivery of property or valuable security, though essential for Section 383 India Law Library Docid # 2426436
(249) ABHISHEK SINGH Vs. AJAY KUMAR AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 05-06-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 482 — Quashing of FIR — Scope of High Court’s power — Determination of prima facie case confined to averments in FIR/complaint — Appreciation of defence evidence or undertaking mini-trial impermissible at initial stage — High Court cannot embark upon appreciation of evidence while considering quashing application — Quashing permissible only when allegations in FIR/charge-sheet do not India Law Library Docid # 2426437
(250) UNION OF INDIA Vs. M/S KAMAKHYA TRANSPORT PVT. LTD. ETC.ETC.[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 05-06-2025 Railways Act, 1989 — Sections 66, 73, 78 & 54(1) — Carriage of goods — Misdeclaration of goods vs. Overloading of wagons — Punitive charges — Stage of imposing charges — Section 66, dealing with misdeclaration of goods, imposes a charge for materially false statements regarding goods description to determine carriage rate — Section 66 does not specify whether the charge must be made before or after delivery, implying permissibility at either stage, unlike Section 73 which specifically mandates r India Law Library Docid # 2426434
(251) VAIBHAV Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 04-06-2025 Criminal Law — Circumstantial Evidence — Admitted Facts — Cause of death by gunshot from a specific weapon in appellant’s home undisputed — Appellant admitted removing the body and cleaning the scene — Discovery of articles linked to the incident from appellant’s disclosure relevant for Section 201 IPC. India Law Library Docid # 2426342
(252) HARINAGAR SUGAR MILLS LTD. (BISCUIT DIVISION) AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 04-06-2025 Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 — Section 25-O — Procedure for closing down an undertaking — Right to close down business is integral to right to carry on business under Article 19(1)(g) but subject to reasonable restrictions — Section 25-O provides a detailed procedure for obtaining prior permission for closure — Appropriate India Law Library Docid # 2426343
(253) NAGARAJAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 04-06-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 386(b)(iii) & 401 — Appellate Court Powers — Exercise of Revisional Powers — Scope Of — Appeal from conviction filed by accused — Enhancement Of sentence — High Court in appeal filed by accused, cannot, while affirming the conviction, enhance the sentence (Paras 9, India Law Library Docid # 2426344
(254) GHANSHYAM SONI Vs. STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 04-06-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 468 — Limitation for taking Cognizance — Computation of Limitation Period — Relevant Date — It is settled law that for computing the limitation period under Section 468 CrPC, the relevant date is the date of filing of the complaint or the date of institution of prosecution, not the date on which the Magistrate takes cognizance. (Paras 15, 16 India Law Library Docid # 2426345
(255) GREATER MOHALI AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (GMADA) THROUGH ITS ESTATE OFFICER (H) Vs. ANUPAM GARG ETC.[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 04-06-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 / Consumer Protection Law — Delay in delivery of possession — Allottee’s remedies — Developer’s liability — Refund of amount paid with interest and compensation — Where the developer has received full price but fails to deliver possession within the stipulated or reasonable time, or cancels/refuses possession without justifiable cause, the allottee is entitled India Law Library Docid # 2426439
(256) T.SIVAKUMAR Vs. D.NARMADHA[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 04-06-2025 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1)(i-a) — Cruelty — Staying with Parents — Wife’s parents staying with the couple due to the father’s illness does not, by itself, constitute cruelty, especially when the wife is fulfilling her duty to care for an ailing parent and arrangements are made to ensure privacy. India Law Library Docid # 2427912
(257) V.RAJESH Vs. S.ANUPRIYA[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 04-06-2025 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1)(i-a) — Divorce — Cruelty — False allegations — Unsubstantiated sexual allegations made by one spouse against the other and their family members in a police complaint, even if later withdrawn, can constitute mental cruelty if they cause stigma and mental agony — Such allegations, if not proven, are considered defamatory — The withdrawal of a complaint alone does not automatically invalidate the truth of the allegations if it was based on an India Law Library Docid # 2427913
(258) K.SELVAMANI Vs. MAGESHWARI[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 04-06-2025 Family Law — Judicial Separation — Cruelty — Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Section 10 — Wife’s petition for judicial separation granted by Family Court based on husband’s mental and physical cruelty, including abusive language, physical violence, and neglect of family needs — Husband’s counter-allegations of desertion by wife unsubstantiated — Evidence from wife (P.W.1) and son (P.W.2) India Law Library Docid # 2427914
(259) S.SHANHMUGA KALAIVANI Vs. S. GANESAN[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 04-06-2025 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13 (1) (i-a) — Cruelty — Suppression of Age — Admissibility of Photocopy of Horoscope — Family Courts Act, 1984, Section 14 — Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Section 21-C — A wife’s deliberate suppression of her true age at the time of marriage, especially when it is proven by objective evidence (like a school record confirming a different date of birth than what India Law Library Docid # 2427915
(260) DEVI AND OTHERS Vs. TAMILARASI AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 04-06-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 100 — Second Appeal — General Power of Attorney (GPA) — Validity of Revocation — Effect of prior alienation by agent — Where Sale Deeds were executed by a Power Agent pursuant to a valid GPA, the subsequent unilateral revocation of the GPA by the Principal has no legal effect on the already executed Sale Deeds. India Law Library Docid # 2427916