(201) RAYMOND LIMITED Vs. M/S. MILTEX APPARELS AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 21-02-2025 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 7 — Extension of Arbitration Agreement by Implication — The Court held that an arbitration agreement can be extended by implication, even if the underlying contract has expired, if the parties' conduct and communication suggest a mutual intention to continue the agreement, including the arbitration clause India Law Library Docid # 2423083
(202) PRAKASH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 21-02-2025 Himachal Pradesh Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1968 — Himachal Pradesh Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Rules, 1969 — Parole Granting — Balancing Rehabilitation and Public Interest — The Court allowed a convict's petition for parole, setting aside the rejecting order, to enable him to care for his ailing mother — The decision highlights the need for a balanced approach between rehabilitation and public interest, as per Asfaq vs. State of Rajasthan and others (2017) 15 India Law Library Docid # 2423089
(203) RUPCHAND Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA[BOMBAY HIGH COURT (NAGPUR BENCH)] 21-02-2025 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 6 — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 376(2)(h) — Conviction for Rape and POCSO Offences — Whether the accused's conviction is sustainable based on the evidence of the victim, medical evidence, and DNA reports — Yes, the conviction is sustainable as the evidence proves that the accused subjected the minor victim to sexual assault on the promise of marriage, which was a false promise, and the victim's consent was obtained under misco India Law Library Docid # 2423095
(204) M/S. NAJ PROPERTIES AND DEVELOPERS AND OTHERS Vs. MRS. NEELUFAR AND OTHERS[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 21-02-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 41 Rule 27 — Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — In arbitration proceedings, where a party seeks to produce additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 of the CPC, which was not previously adduced, but is crucial in deciding the fundamental issue between the parties, the court may allow such production, even at a belated stage, if it is satisfied that the document is a clinching material for deciding the issues involved, and the non-production of the docume India Law Library Docid # 2423164
(205) MUKESH MODI AND OTHERS Vs. THE COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL EXCISE COMMISSIONERATE[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 21-02-2025 Customs Act, 1962 — Section 130 — Denial of exemption from customs duties to a 100% Export Oriented Unit (EOU) for goods sold in the Domestic Tariff Area (DTA) — The dispute arises because the appellant-company, engaged in manufacturing marble, imported white marble blocks but primarily exported serpentine (green marble) — The revenue authorities contended that the DTA sales were permissible only for goods similar to those exported and that the appellant-company misused the EOU scheme by not exp India Law Library Docid # 2423245
(206) THE MEENACHIL RUBBER MARKETING AND PROCESSING COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. Vs. THE KADAPLAMATTOM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.[KERALA HIGH COURT] 21-02-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 21 Rules 67 and 90 — Inherent Lack of Jurisdiction — Objection to inherent lack of jurisdiction can be raised at any stage of a proceeding, and if found, renders the proceedings void — Unlike territorial or pecuniary India Law Library Docid # 2423230
(207) SUNEERA OVUNGAL Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 21-02-2025 Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 — Section 3(1) — Detention Order under PITNDPS Act while in Judicial Custody — A detention order can be validly passed under the Act even when the detenu is in judicial custody, but the authority must be aware of the custody and have reason to believe, based on reliable materials, that there is a real possibility of the detenu being released on bail and would indulge in prejudicial activity if India Law Library Docid # 2423231
(208) SAROJAM AND OTHERS Vs. REGHUVARA PANICKER AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 21-02-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 47 and Order 21 Rule 99 — A separate suit is maintainable to challenge a decree on grounds of fraud and collusion, as the execution court's jurisdiction under Order 21, Rule 99 and Section 47 of the CPC does not extend to invalidating a decree on such bases, thereby allowing an aggrieved party to seek relief through an independent suit to set aside the decree obtained through fraudulent or collusive means, rather than being limited to the execution proceedin India Law Library Docid # 2423232
(209) M/S RAMPABHU HOTELS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 21-02-2025 Rajasthan Stamp Law (Adaptation) Act, 1952 — Section 47A — Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 — Section 90B — The High Court addressed a petition concerning the transfer of shares in a private limited company that owned agricultural land — The Collector (Stamps) had issued a demand for stamp duty, arguing that the transfer of shareholdings by previous directors to new directors effectively transferred the company's property, thus constituting a lease by way of assignment — The court ruled that the India Law Library Docid # 2423284
(210) MANAGING COMMITTEE, SHRI MAHAVEER SR. SECONDARY SCHOOL, BHILWARA AND OTHERS Vs. SHRI KAILASH CHAND JAT AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 21-02-2025 Rajasthan Voluntary Rural Education Service Rules, 2010 — Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institution Act, 1989 — Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 — Section 4 — The High Court is presiding over a series of writ petitions concerning the entitlement of employees in non-government aided educational institutions to receive gratuity and encashment for privilege leaves upon transitioning to government service under the Rajasthan Voluntary Rural Education Service Rules, 2010 — The central question is India Law Library Docid # 2423285
(211) RAMESHBHAI CHHELSHANKAR OZA Vs. DEVEN JAGNATH JOSHI AND OTHERS[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 21-02-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 23 Rule 1 — A plaintiff has an unqualified right to unconditionally withdraw a suit under Order 23 Rule 1(1) CPC, which a defendant can generally not object to absent specific exceptions like seeking leave to refile or proven fraud at the time of withdrawal India Law Library Docid # 2423311
(212) PATEL PRAKASHKUMAR RASHIKBHAI Vs. R K ENGLE AND OTHERS[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 21-02-2025 Motor Accident Claims — Computation of future loss of income must account for prospective income — In an appeal for enhanced compensation in a motor accident claim, the High Court found that the MACT erred by not considering the prospective income of the claimant while calculating the future loss of income, a principle laid down by the Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi [(2017) 16 SCC 680] — The High India Law Library Docid # 2423331
(213) SRINIVASULA VARALAXMI AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 21-02-2025 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Section 52-A — Disposal of seized narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances — Non-Compliance with Section 52-A of NDPS Act — Not Fatal to Prosecution — In cases under the NDPS Act, non-compliance with Section 52-A is not fatal to the prosecution case if there are no discrepancies in the physical evidence, and other material on record supports the prosecution's case, as held in Bharat Aambale v. The State of Chattisgarh (Criminal Appeal No.2 India Law Library Docid # 2423351
(214) RADHA KRISHNAN VIJAY KRISHNAN Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 21-02-2025 Legal Metrology Act, 2009 — Vicarious Liability of Directors — Not Applicable — Directors of a company cannot be held vicariously liable for offences under the Legal Metrology Act, 2009, without specific allegations against them, and in the absence of the company being made an accused India Law Library Docid # 2423352
(215) M/S ISABELLE TOURS N TRAVELS AND ANOTHER Vs. DEVANGSHUBHAI SHANTILAL KOTHARI[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 21-02-2025 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 227 — Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 37 — An appellate court will typically not interfere with a trial court's order under Order 37 of the CPC, unless there is a gross error of law or jurisdictional error. India Law Library Docid # 2423374
(216) PENNERA NAGARAJU Vs. G RAMESH AND OTHERS[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 21-02-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 1 Rule 10 and Order 22A Rule 10 — A Civil Revision Petition seeking to implead the petitioner as a defendant in a specific performance suit is dismissed — The petitioner claimed title to part of the suit property via a post-contract partition deed, arguing for impleadment to avoid multiplicity of proceedings — While acknowledging the court's discretion to implead transferees pendente lite, the court relies on a Supreme Court precedent to rule that those claimin India Law Library Docid # 2423392
(217) PERAIPALLI SUBAN BASHA Vs. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 21-02-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 397 and 401 — Penal Code, 1860, — Section 498-A — The High Court's revisional jurisdiction under Sections 397 and 401 Cr.P.C. against a conviction is limited, and it will generally not re-appreciate evidence; however, considering factors like the death of the complainant, long pendency of the case, and the right to a speedy trial guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution, the court can modify the sentence while upholding the conviction India Law Library Docid # 2423393
(218) VIDHYUT SOUDHA APSEB HYD AND OTHERS Vs. GANDRETI RAMANDORA AND ANOTHER[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 21-02-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 100 — Electricity Act, 2003 — Under Section 100 CPC, a second appeal regarding damages for electrocution due to a live wire will not be entertained unless there is a substantial question of law; electricity boards owe a high duty of care, and negligence is often presumed in such cases (res ipsa loquitur), potentially leading to strict liability, with compensation often assessed based on principles similar to those under the Motor Vehicles Act India Law Library Docid # 2423413
(219) SANJIB MAHANTI BISWANATH CHARIALI Vs. STATE OF ASSAM[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 21-02-2025 Evidence Act, 1872 — Sections 6, 25 and 106 — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302 — In cases relying solely on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish an unbroken chain of circumstances that leads only to the guilt of the accused, excluding any other reasonable hypothesis — The High Court dismissed an appeal against the Trial Court's judgment convicting the appellant under Section 302 for the murder of his wife — The case rested on circumstantial evidence — The court considered India Law Library Docid # 2423445
(220) BHASKER MANUVANSH Vs. VINOBA BHAVE UNIVERSITY AND OTHERS[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 21-02-2025 Bihar College Service Commission Act, 1976 — Sections 2(9) and 2(10) — Bihar State Universities Act, 1976 (now Jharkhand State University Act, 2000) — Sections 59, 60 and 57(A) — Appointments made without following proper procedures, including advertisement and adherence to merit, violate Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution and cannot be sustained, with "back-door" entrants not entitled to regularization — A writ petition by a lecturer seeking regularization and challenging the appointments India Law Library Docid # 2423580