(541) ROHIT ANAND DAS AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF ODISHA AND OTHERS[ORISSA HIGH COURT] 12-12-2025 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 21 — Right to Privacy — Right to privacy is a fundamental human right, recognized under Article 21, and though not absolute, it can only be subject to reasonable restrictions. India Law Library Docid # 2438164
(542) PARADIP PORT TRUST (PPT) Vs. PARESH CONSTRUCTIONS AND FOUNDATIONS PVT. LTD. (PCFPL)[ORISSA HIGH COURT] 12-12-2025 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 29A — Extension of Mandate — Maintaining writ jurisdiction — Court will not lightly re-examine factual assessments made by Section 29A court regarding delay, cause, or sufficiency when exercising supervisory jurisdiction, unless the decision suffers from a jurisdictional flaw or clear departure from statutory scheme. India Law Library Docid # 2438165
(543) M/S GOLDENLAND DEVELOPERS LTD Vs. STATE OF ODISHA[ORISSA HIGH COURT] 12-12-2025 Odisha Protection of Interests of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 2011 — Section 11 — Release of attached property — Furnishing security — This section allows for cancellation of an entire ad-interim attachment order upon furnishing satisfactory security, but does not permit partial release of attached India Law Library Docid # 2438166
(544) ROJESH NAYAK Vs. THE C.G.M. (TECH) & REGIONAL OFFICER NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA AND OTHERS[ORISSA HIGH COURT] 12-12-2025 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 37 — Appeal against order refusing to set aside arbitral award — Scope of interference is limited to grounds under Section 34 — Court cannot re-appreciate evidence or substitute its own view — Interference only in cases of patent illegality, perversity, or violation of statutory principles. India Law Library Docid # 2438167
(545) M/S. NATIONAL ALUMINIUM COMPANY LTD. Vs. J.P. MISHRA & COMPANY[ORISSA HIGH COURT] 12-12-2025 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 37 — Appeal against order refusing to set aside arbitral award — Scope of appellate jurisdiction — Court's power under Section 37 is significantly restricted and narrow, allowing interference only when the order appears perverse, arbitrary, or contrary to law. The appellate court cannot re-evaluate evidence or substitute its own view for that of the lower court or India Law Library Docid # 2438168
(546) PRABHASINI BATIK Vs. MAHINDRA & MAHINDRA FINANCIAL SERVICE LIMITED, MUMBAI AND OTHERS[ORISSA HIGH COURT] 12-12-2025 Constitution of India, 1950 — Articles 226 and 227 — Writ Jurisdiction — Maintainability against private entities — A writ petition is generally not maintainable against a private entity engaged in a purely contractual and commercial transaction, such as a loan agreement, unless the entity is performing a public duty or discharging a statutory obligation. India Law Library Docid # 2438210
(547) GANESHA Vs. RAHAMATHULLA[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 12-12-2025 Employee's Compensation Act, 1923 — Section 10 — Notice of Accident — Not mandatory when accident occurs at the workplace — The purpose of Section 10 is to protect the employer from penalties and interest if they are unaware of the accident, but a lack of notice is not a bar to a claim if the employer had knowledge of the accident or if the accident occurred at the workplace. India Law Library Docid # 2438235
(548) SRI. PANKAJ SRIVASTAVA Vs. SRI. DINESH PULIPATI[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 12-12-2025 Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — Liquidation Process — Forfeiture of Earnest Money Deposit (EMD) and Participation Deposit Money (PDM) — The High Court held that a Liquidator appointed under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, is empowered to forfeit the EMD and PDM deposited by a bidder who fails to fulfill their obligations as per the auction terms — The court found that the Auction Memorandum, which stipulated the conditions for forfeiture, was binding on the bidder — The court India Law Library Docid # 2438239
(549) SHRI PUNDLIK DAGU HOLGADE AND OTHERS Vs. SHRI PANDURANG KASHINATH HIRE (SINCE DECEASED THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS) AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 11-12-2025 Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Section 58(c) — Mortgage by Conditional Sale vs. Sale with Condition to Repurchase — Determination of Nature of Transaction — The intention of the parties is the determining factor, primarily gathered from the recitals and language of the document itself — If the language of the document is plain and unambiguous, it must be given its true legal effect based on the nature of the India Law Library Docid # 2436976
(550) M/S. AFSANA ENTERPRISES THROUGH PROPRIETOR MR. JAFFER MOHD. SAMI KHAN AND OTHERS Vs. THE ASSISTANT MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 11-12-2025 Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 — Section 351 — Unauthorized construction — Challenge to notice and speaking order confirming unauthorized nature of commercial structures — Duty to prove existence prior to datum line (01.01.1961) — Appellants, claiming occupancy as tenants, relied on stray, vague, and insufficient documents (rent receipts from 1990s/2000s, and recent electricity India Law Library Docid # 2436977
(551) SATISH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 11-12-2025 Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — Sections 18 and 19 — Omission of land details in Objection Petition — Correction of Objections — Application under Sections 151-153 CPC for correction of inadvertently omitted Killa numbers in Section 18 objection petition, filed after Reference Court and First Appeal proceedings, must be allowed — Section 18 does not mandate landowner to provide specific land details, India Law Library Docid # 2436946
(552) M/S R.C. SOOD & COMPANY LTD. Vs. INDRA SETHI AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 11-12-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 2 Rule 2 — Bar to subsequent suit for specific performance — Distinction between suit for Permanent Injunction and Specific Performance — Earlier suit for declaration/injunction filed in 1985 based on apprehension of alienation (distinct cause of action) — Earlier Courts upheld that claiming specific performance in 1985 would be premature due to statutory India Law Library Docid # 2436947
(553) KRISHNA MANDADI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT (NAGPUR BENCH)] 11-12-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Inherent powers of High Court — Quashing of First Information Report (FIR) and consequential proceedings — Offence under Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860, Section 304-A (Causing death by negligence) — Allegation against Managing Director and Engineer of a construction company after a child drowned in a pothole at the construction site — Absence of prima facie case — Principles governing quashing of FIRs enunciated in State of Haryana vs. India Law Library Docid # 2437113
(554) MITARAM Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA[BOMBAY HIGH COURT (NAGPUR BENCH)] 11-12-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302 — Conviction challenged — Homicidal death established through medical evidence (Postmortem report, medical officer testimony) — Cause of death: Hemorrhagic shock due to severe head injury caused by "axe" (sharp and heavy object) — Eyewitness testimony: PW4 (mother of deceased) testified that the accused (father) assaulted the deceased (son) on the head with an axe following a quarrel over money demand — Corroboration: Circumstantial evidence, including seizu India Law Library Docid # 2437114
(555) ABDUL RAHMAN ABDUL RAZZAQUE AND OTHERS Vs. CHOTI MASJID TRUST[BOMBAY HIGH COURT (AURANGABAD BENCH)] 11-12-2025 Waqf Act, 1995 — Section 69 — Waqf Scheme — Interpretation and Clarification of ambiguous clauses (8 C and 8 D) for conducting elections — Need for Standard Operational Procedure (SOP) pending Scheme modification — Where the existing scheme framed by the Joint Charity Commissioner is ambiguous regarding the electoral process (specifically clauses 8 C and 8 D), the High Court may provide clarification to ensure free and transparent elections until the Waqf Board modifies the Scheme, despite India Law Library Docid # 2437120
(556) MS XAMI DHA TIRAKITA KAYE Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT (GOA BENCH)] 11-12-2025 Citizenship Act, 1955 — Section 3(1)(c)(ii) — Citizenship by birth — Requirement that one parent is a citizen of India and the other parent is not an “illegal migrant” at the time of birth — Petitioner (child) born in India on 24.01.2018; mother is an Indian citizen, father is a British National — Dispute whether the father was an “illegal migrant” on the date of birth — Father was convicted for overstaying previously but was granted permission by the Ministry of External Affairs/FRRO to stay in India Law Library Docid # 2437180
(557) UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER Vs. SMTI KRISHNA DEVI @ SABITRI DEVI[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 11-12-2025 Arbitration Act, 1940 — Section 30 (Setting aside award) — Limitation — Application to set aside an award must be filed within 30 days from the date of service of notice of the filing of the award (Article 158 of Limitation Act, now Article 119(b) of Limitation Act, 1963) — An application under Section 30 filed beyond the period of limitation India Law Library Docid # 2437276
(558) LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER Vs. VITA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 11-12-2025 Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 — Scope and Applicability — Overriding Effect over State Rent Control Legislations — Whether PP Act 1971 prevails over State Rent Control Acts (such as Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 or Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958) regarding eviction from 'Public Premises' defined under Section 2(e) — Both PP Act 1971 and State Rent Control Acts are India Law Library Docid # 2436681
(559) PRADEEP ARORA AND OTHERS Vs. DIRECTOR, HEALTH DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 11-12-2025 Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897 — Prevention and Containment of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Regulations, 2020 (Maharashtra) — Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Yojana (PMGKY) Package: Insurance Scheme for Health Workers Fighting COVID-19 — Insurance Claim — Eligibility — Requisition of Services — Private medical practitioners — Interpretation of "requisition" in the context of pandemic India Law Library Docid # 2436682
(560) JOTHI @ NAGAJOTHI Vs. THE STATE, REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 11-12-2025 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) — Sections 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(C) and 29(1) — Conviction for possession of commercial quantity of ganja (23.500 kg) and conspiracy — Appeal against concurrent findings of lower courts — Absence of independent witnesses — Failure to secure independent witnesses is not fatal to the prosecution case, especially under the NDPS Act, if the India Law Library Docid # 2436683