(141) ASHOK KUMAR (SINCE DECEASED THROUGH LRS) AND ANOTHER Vs. NIRMALA DEVI AND ANOTHER[DELHI HIGH COURT] 05-10-2026 Transfer of Property — Landlord and Tenant — Derivative Title — Suit for possession and arrears of rent — Erstwhile owner sold the suit property and was inducted as a tenant under a contemporaneous rent agreement — Landlady subsequently sold the property to the plaintiff — Tenant contended that no fresh rent agreement was executed with the plaintiff — Held, upon acquisition of the property through a registered sale deed, the plaintiff became the landlord by operation of law — Execution of a sepa India Law Library Docid # 2455099
(142) ANIL KUMAR AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF NCT DELHI AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 05-10-2026 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 528 — Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 482 — Inherent powers of High Court — Quashing of non-compoundable offences on settlement — High Court is empowered to quash criminal proceedings involving non-compoundable offences where parties have arrived at an amicable compromise — Inherent powers are recognized to prevent abuse of the process of any court and to secure the ends of justice — While serious and heinous offences involving mental India Law Library Docid # 2455105
(143) USHA GUPTA AND ANOTHER Vs. YOGENDRA PAL SINGH AND ANR (RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE LTD)[DELHI HIGH COURT] 05-10-2026 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Standard of proof — Claim for compensation — Standard of proof applicable in motor accident claim petitions is preponderance of probabilities and not proof beyond reasonable doubt — Strict proof of an accident caused by a particular vehicle in a particular manner is not required — Claimants are only required to establish their case on the touchstone of preponderance of probability — Burden stands discharged if evidence renders one version more probable th India Law Library Docid # 2455108
(144) VIJAY YADAV @ MONU Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 05-10-2026 Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 483 — Excise Act — Section 34(2) — Regular bail — Illicit liquor seizure — Applicant apprehended with 5.4 bulk liters of country-made liquor — Applicant sought bail on ground of completed investigation, charge-sheet filing, and custody period — Prosecution opposed citing 10 criminal antecedents, including 7 under Excise Act — Held, existence of multiple pending criminal antecedents of identical nature underscores a persistent pattern of offending India Law Library Docid # 2455113
(145) ABHISHEK MISHRA AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND ANOTHER[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 05-10-2026 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 528 — Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Sections 85, 296, 115(2), 351(3), 118(1) and 3(5) — Quashing of FIR and criminal proceedings — Matrimonial discord — Parties amicably resolved their disputes through mediation before High Court Mediation Centre — Settlement terms included payment of permanent alimony and return of jewelry — Complainant-wife recorded statement expressing no objection to quashing of case — Parties also initiated mutual divorce India Law Library Docid # 2455118
(146) KALINDRI BAI NIRMALKAR AND OTHERS Vs. RAJU CHANDRAVASHI AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 05-10-2026 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 173 — Enhancement of compensation — Assessment of deceased's income — Deceased died in a motor accident on 13.11.2020 while working as a driver with a cargo company — Tribunal assessed monthly income at Rs. 10,000/- — Salary statements and witness testimony established that the basic salary was Rs. 13,000/- per month, whereas additional distance-based travel incentives were meant for personal expenses and excluded from salary — Held, the income assessed by the India Law Library Docid # 2455121
(147) SUB AREA MANAGER SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELD LIMITED (SECL) AND ANOTHER Vs. THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY UNDER THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT 1972 AND THE DEPUTY CHIEF LABOUR COMMISSIONER (C) GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT AND ANOTHER[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 05-10-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 47 Rule 1 — Scope and ambit of review jurisdiction — Error apparent on the face of the record — Review is maintainable only if there is a patent mistake or an error apparent on the face of the record — An error that is not self-evident and requires detection through a process of reasoning does not justify review — Review court does not sit in appeal over its own order — Rehearing of a matter or substitution of a view is impermissible, and parties cannot re-agit India Law Library Docid # 2455124
(148) URMILA PANIGRAHI AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 05-10-2026 Service Law — Panchayat Employees — Entitlement to Pension — Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993, Section 131 — Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976, Rule 2 — Janpad Panchayat employees governed by Contributory Provident Fund claimed pension under Section 131 of the 1993 Act — Held, Panchayat employees are not Government servants, as Panchayats are autonomous bodies governed by distinct service rules — Section 131 is merely a saving clause protecting pre-existing benefits and India Law Library Docid # 2455134
(149) RABBUL ISLAM Vs. THE STATE OF ASSAM[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 05-10-2026 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 35(1)(b) and Section 35(3) — Arrest without warrant — Offences punishable with imprisonment up to seven years — Statutory compliance — Issuance of notice under Section 35(3) is the rule and arrest is an exception — Police officer must record specific reasons in writing justifying why arrest is necessary instead of issuing notice — Arrest cannot be made merely on satisfaction of commission of offence — Failure of investigating officer to record r India Law Library Docid # 2455142
(150) MS RAHUL ENTERPRISE AND 2 ORS Vs. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 05-10-2026 Assam Excise Rules, 2016 — Rule 279A (inserted by Assam Excise (Amendment) Rules, 2022) — Conversion of IMFL "ON" licence to IMFL "OFF" licence — Timeline and mandatory requirements — Proviso to Rule 279A requires an application along with an application fee of Rs. 25,000/- to be submitted within 90 days of publication of the Rules in the Official Gazette — Held, Rule 279A does not envisage or require that the conversion fee of Rs. 1,25,000/- must also be deposited at the time of submitting the India Law Library Docid # 2455159
(151) GAMAN SARKAR AND OTHERS Vs. THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 05-10-2026 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 and Article 14 — Government Contracts — Judicial Review — Arbitrariness and Doctrine of Approbate and Reprobate — Termination of LPG transportation work orders — IOCL issued a final reminder note granting limited relaxation allowing upload of updated Registration Certificates (RC) with PESO amendment applications by a specified deadline — Petitioners who complied with said relaxation had their contracts terminated without consideration of the note — Held India Law Library Docid # 2455164
(152) NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. MD. TAZAL AHMED @ TAJEL AHMED @ TAJUL @ KAJAL[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 05-10-2026 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 and Section 168 — Assessment of income — Unorganized sector — Vegetable vendor — Proof of income — Claimant claimed Rs. 15,000/- monthly income but failed to examine official who issued income certificate — Tribunal made guesswork assessing income at Rs. 9,000/- per month — Held: While guesswork must have some basis such as minimum wage notifications, assessing monthly income of a vegetable vendor at Rs. 9,000/- for an accident occurring in 2014 is reasonab India Law Library Docid # 2455165
(153) BHAURAV AND OTHERS Vs. LATA DHOTE BEVA AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 05-10-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 7 Rule 11(d) — Rejection of plaint — Limitation — Mixed question of fact and law — While deciding an application under Order 7 Rule 11, only the averments in the plaint are germane and defense raised by defendants cannot be considered — Suit filed in 2025 challenged a 2019 registered sale deed on the ground that knowledge of the transaction was acquired only in 2024 — Whether the suit was barred by limitation was a triable issue requiring appreciation of India Law Library Docid # 2455166
(154) MADHU ANAND TRADING AND SERVICES Vs. NEPA LIMITED AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 05-10-2026 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 — Contractual matters — Scope of judicial review — Petitioner challenged forfeiture notice terminating sale order and forfeiting earnest money and security deposit — Contention that Public Sector Undertaking acted arbitrarily in adjusting payments — Held, scope of interference under Article 226 in commercial contracts is very limited and requires judicial restraint — While writ jurisdiction is available where arbitrariness is writ large, it cannot be inv India Law Library Docid # 2455169
(155) BHAGWAT KUMRE Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 05-10-2026 Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 300 Exception 4, 302 and 304 Part I — Distinction between murder and culpable homicide — Determination of intention — Appellant picked up a stone lying at the spot during a sudden quarrel and struck a single blow to the victim's head without repeating the assault — Victim survived for nine days before succumbing — Held, inflicting a single blow with a weapon picked from the spot in the heat of passion without premeditation or cruelty negates intention to cause death u India Law Library Docid # 2455179
(156) SHARAFAT ALI AND OTHERS Vs. PANGIKRAT SARVJANIK TRUST MANDIR MURTI SHRI MURLI MANOHAR JI MAIN BAZAR SHEOPUR THR. MUKHYA TRUSTI P AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (GWALIOR BENCH)] 05-10-2026 Madhya Pradesh Public Trusts Act, 1951 — Section 27 — Challenge to registration of Public Trust in eviction suit — Maintainability — Tenants challenged the plaintiff's status as a public trust, contending it was formed by members of the same family for unlawful gain — Held, plaintiff established its public trust status through the registration order and trust register entries — The validity of trust registration cannot be adjudicated in a collateral civil suit for eviction — The tenant was requi India Law Library Docid # 2455181
(157) NARENDRA SINGH KUSHWAH Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (GWALIOR BENCH)] 05-10-2026 Service Law — Termination of Service — Stigmatic Order — Necessity of Regular Departmental Enquiry — Petitioner, working as Gram Rojgar Sahayak, was terminated on allegations of financial irregularities, disobedience, and dereliction of duty without conducting a regular enquiry — Held, an order of termination attributing dereliction of duty and misconduct is stigmatic as it entails serious adverse consequences on future prospects of the employee — Such an order cannot be passed merely on a show- India Law Library Docid # 2455183
(158) LAXMINARAYAN SONI Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (GWALIOR BENCH)] 05-10-2026 Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order IX Rule 13 — Setting aside ex parte decree — Condonation of delay — Delay of 14 days from date of knowledge — Respondent-State gathered knowledge of ex parte decree on 11.11.2025 and initiated administrative steps to appoint an Officer-in-Charge, followed by court winter vacation — Application filed on 05.01.2026 — Petitioner failed to prove prior knowledge — Non-disclosure of source of information not fatal where explan India Law Library Docid # 2455184
(159) SMT. RAMSHRI W/O SHRI BRIJLAL (DEAD) THROUGH HER LEGAL HEIR SMT. GEETA AND OTHERS Vs. RAMKUMAR KATARE AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (GWALIOR BENCH)] 05-10-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 41 Rule 11 — Summary dismissal of first appeal — Scope and power — An appellate court possesses inherent power to dismiss a first appeal summarily at the admission stage without requisitioning the trial court record or issuing notice to the respondent, upon being satisfied that the appeal is meritless, an abuse of process, or raises no arguable question of law or fact — Such power must be exercised judicially and consciously by way of exception, supported by a India Law Library Docid # 2455189
(160) SANJAY AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 05-10-2026 Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 — Section 64(2)(b) read with Section 37(2) — Limitation for reference — Drafting error — Statutory interpretation — Reference to "Section 21" in Section 64(2)(b) must be read down as "Section 37(2)" — Notice under Section 21 is issued prior to award, whereas Section 37(2) intimates the award — Where the land loser or representative was not present when the award was made and no notice was s India Law Library Docid # 2455197