(521) SMT. NAIR PUSHPA SURESHKUMAR AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 12-12-2025 Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 — Sections 154B-8, 154B-23, and 77A — Disqualification of Managing Committee and Members — Non-supply of documents to members — Statutory Rigour: Section 154B-8(2) mandates that a Society must furnish copies of documents to a member upon written request and payment of fees within 45 days (or 30 days if Government-assisted) from the date of India Law Library Docid # 2436973
(522) SURESH RAMCHANDRA SANCHETI AND ANOTHER Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 12-12-2025 Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958 — Sections 2(i), 2(l), 3, 47, 48 — Refund of Stamp Duty — Instrument never executed — Limitation Period under Section 48(3) for claiming allowance of stamp duty — Execution is vital for an instrument to come into existence and attract stamp duty under Section 3 — Stamp duty is a duty on the instrument, not a transaction tax — Where stamp duty was paid electronically for an India Law Library Docid # 2436974
(523) BHAGWANDAS DENGWANI (DEAD) THROUGH LRS AND OTHERS Vs. VINESH KUMAR ASRA[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 12-12-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 100 — Second Appeal — Scope of Interference — The High Court, in the exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 100 CPC, should not interfere with concurrent findings of fact recorded by the lower courts unless it is established that the findings are perverse, contrary to law, or contrary to the evidence on record — Interference is restricted to errors in law or procedure, not errors on a question of fact or merely preferring another view — India Law Library Docid # 2437460
(524) RANCHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ANOTHER Vs. SURESH TIRKEY AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 12-12-2025 Jharkhand Municipal Act, 2011 — Section 606 — Encroachment on municipal property — Interpretation — Section 606 prohibits encroachment or obstruction on "any municipal property" and includes "such as a street or footpath or park" by way of elucidation — The provision is not confined only to streets, footpaths, or parks; it covers all municipal property — High Court Division Bench erred in restricting the India Law Library Docid # 2437509
(525) ARUN DASHMALE AND OTHERS Vs. RAMBHAROS SAHU[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 12-12-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 378(4) — Appeal against acquittal — Scope of interference — Appellate court must consider whether the trial court’s view is a “possible one” — An order of acquittal strengthens the presumption of innocence in favor of the accused, resulting in a “double presumption” — Reversal of acquittal should be done slowly and only after thorough scrutiny based on accepted legal parameters. India Law Library Docid # 2437530
(526) RAJKUMAR SATNAMI Vs. PANNA LAL SATNAMI AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 12-12-2025 Succession Act, 1925 — Section 63 — Execution of unprivileged Will — Mandatory Requirements — A will must be proved to be signed or marked by the testator, the signature/mark must be placed with the intention to give effect to the writing as a will, and the will must be attested by two or more witnesses, each of whom must have seen the testator sign and must sign the will in the presence of the testator. Non-compliance with India Law Library Docid # 2437531
(527) DILRAKHAN TIRKY Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 12-12-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 304-B — Dowry Death — Essential ingredients — For sustaining conviction, prosecution must prove: (i) death by burns, injury, or unnatural cause; (ii) death within 7 years of marriage; (iii) woman subjected to cruelty or harassment soon before death; and (iv) cruelty/harassment connected with dowry demand — Elements (i) and (ii) (suicide within 7 years of marriage) admitted; controversy India Law Library Docid # 2437532
(528) STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. MAHERIYA SINDHUKUMAR DEVJIBHAI AND OTHERS[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 12-12-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 378 — Appeal against Acquittal — Principle of double presumption — Appellate court's power to review: An appellate court has full power to review, reappreciate, and reconsider evidence in an acquittal appeal, and may reach its own conclusions on law and fact; however, it must bear in mind the double presumption of innocence in favor of the accused (initial presumption and reinforcement by trial court acquittal); Interference is justified only if the India Law Library Docid # 2437816
(529) HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPN. LTD. Vs. HEIRS OF DECD. SHISHIRKUMARI ALLAS FLORABEN AND OTHERS[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 12-12-2025 Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (Rent Act) — Section 29(2) — Revision — Scope — The revisional jurisdiction under Section 29(2) is limited to correcting errors that make a decision contrary to law and go to the root of the decision, but it does not confer the power to rehear the matter or reappreciate evidence — The fact that a different view on evidence is possible is not a ground for exercising India Law Library Docid # 2437817
(530) STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. JAYANTIBHAI @ LANGHO CHIMANBHAI SOLANKI[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 12-12-2025 Criminal Law (Amendment) Ordinance, 2018 — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 376AB — Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 — Sections 5(m) read with 6 — Rape on a child below 12 years of age — Sentencing — Death Penalty confirmed under Section 376AB IPC and Section 5(m) read with 6 POCSO Act by Trial Court — Commutation of sentence — Principles of rarest of rare case — Trial India Law Library Docid # 2437818
(531) PANKAJ ZAVERCHAND HARIA AND OTHERS Vs. NONE[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 12-12-2025 Succession Act, 1925 — Section 232 — Grant of Letters of Administration with Will Annexed — Application rejected by Civil Court primarily for lack of No Objection Certificate from daughters of the deceased — Daughters subsequently providing No Objection Affidavits before the High Court on appeal — Effect on outcome — Where the deceased made a Will but did not appoint an executor, Section 232 governs the grant of Letters of Administration to a universal or residuary legatee — Public notice of the India Law Library Docid # 2437819
(532) STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. PATEL AMBALAL DWARKADAS AND ANOTHER[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 12-12-2025 Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Atrocity Act) — Investigation by Officer Below Rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police (Dy.SP) — Effect on Trial — Where offences relate to both Atrocity Act and Indian Penal Code (IPC), investigation by a Police Sub Inspector (PSI) for IPC offences, if subsequently part of a charge-sheet filed by a Dy.SP, does not automatically render the India Law Library Docid # 2437820
(533) STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. DEEPAK KUMAR[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 12-12-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 378 — Appeal against Acquittal — Scope of High Court's Interference — Principles for Reviewing Acquittal — The High Court, while dealing with an appeal against acquittal, has full power to review, reappreciate and reconsider the evidence; however, the scope of interference is limited — Interference is warranted only if the judgment of acquittal suffers from patent perversity, is based on misreading/omission of material evidence, India Law Library Docid # 2437995
(534) KHUSHAL CHAND AND OTHERS Vs. KANCHNA DEVI AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 12-12-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 100 — Scope of Second Appeal — Interference with findings of fact — High Court cannot ordinarily interfere with findings of fact arrived at by the First Appellate Court, the final court of facts, unless such findings are erroneous, contrary to mandatory provisions of law, settled legal position, based on inadmissible evidence, or arrived at without evidence — Re India Law Library Docid # 2437988
(535) RAGHUBIR SINGH (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS SATNAM KAUR AND OTHERS Vs. KANAURA RAM AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 12-12-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 100 — Second Appeal — Scope of interference — Concurrent findings of fact — High Court cannot re-appreciate evidence to substitute its own view for a plausible finding of fact arrived at by the first appellate court — Interference in Second Appeal is restricted to cases involving a substantial question of law, or where findings are perverse, based on no evidence, or India Law Library Docid # 2437989
(536) K.VIJAYARANGAM (DECEASED) Vs. M/S. BAJAJ PROMOTERS PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 12-12-2025 Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — Condonation of Delay — Seeking Condonation of Delay of 3110 Days in Filing Civil Revision Petition — Order Challenged: Dismissal of Application (I.A.No.16309 of 2013) to Condone Delay of 1350 Days in Setting Aside Ex-parte Decree — Requirement of Sufficient Cause — The court must restrict inquiry to whether applicant provided sufficient cause for delay; merits of main suit are secondary until sufficient cause is established — India Law Library Docid # 2438123
(537) L.MUNIYANDI Vs. K.DINESH RAJA[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 12-12-2025 Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlords and Tenants Act, 2017 — Section 4(2) — Section 21(2)(a) — Eviction — Splitting of Tenancy — Requirement of Joint Action by Co-lessors — The premises (a factory shed constructed over 3600 sq.ft of land jointly owned and rented out by two co-owners) was let out under a single agreement for a consolidated rent — The respondent (one co-owner) filed an eviction petition against the tenant, restricting the claim only to his India Law Library Docid # 2438124
(538) G.MANGAYARKARASI Vs. ELIZABETH AMIRTHAKANNU AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 12-12-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 23 Rule 1(3) — Withdrawal of suit with liberty to file fresh suit — Requirements for granting leave — Court must be satisfied and record reasons/finding that the defect is "formal" or that there are "sufficient grounds" warranting leave — Such discretion must be exercised judiciously, not in a routine manner or on mere asking — Trial court's order granting leave without identifying or recording reasons for the existence of a formal defect or India Law Library Docid # 2438125
(539) A.RAJAKUMARI AND OTHERS Vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER ZONAL II, HR & CE DEPARTMENT AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 12-12-2025 Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 — Section 78 — Encroachment on Temple Property — Land belonging to Temple — The property in question belongs to the Arulmigu Ekambareswara Thirukoil, administered by the HR & CE Department — Appellants/Writ Petitioners admitted in 2016 that the land belongs to the Temple and that substantial rent arrears were due, which amounts to India Law Library Docid # 2438126
(540) PRASANNA KUMAR BEHERA Vs. STATE OF ODISHA AND OTHERS[ORISSA HIGH COURT] 12-12-2025 Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 311(2)(b) – Dismissal from service dispensing with inquiry – Requirements – Disciplinary authority must be satisfied that holding an inquiry is not "reasonably practicable" – Such satisfaction must be based on objective facts, not whim or caprice – Reasons must be recorded in writing and must be relevant to the situation. India Law Library Docid # 2438163