(201) SHANKAR CHANBASSAPPA CHILLALSHETTI AND OTHERS Vs. DR. J. J. MAGDUM TRUST, JAYSINGPUR AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT (CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR)] 16-10-2025 Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 — Section 7(7) — Appeal period — Condonation of delay — Appellate Authority's power to condone delay is limited to 60 days beyond the initial 60-day period, making the maximum appeal period 120 days from the receipt of the order. Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, is excluded by necessary implication. India Law Library Docid # 2434383
(202) LALIT RAMKRUSHNA BODE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 16-10-2025 Disciplinary Proceedings — Second Enquiry — Validity — Employee exonerated in first enquiry — Employer appoints new Enquiry Officer and orders fresh enquiry — Court quashes second enquiry if no valid reasons are provided for disagreeing with first enquiry report. India Law Library Docid # 2434517
(203) VILAS BABANRAO KALOKHE Vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) PUNE[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 16-10-2025 Income Tax Act, 1961 — Section 276 C (2) — Willful attempt to evade tax — Non-payment of self-assessment tax along with return — Default in payment of self-assessment tax on due date is not sufficient to attract Section 276 C (2) unless it is established that the evasion was willful or intentional — Mere delay in payment after filing return does not equate to willful evasion, especially when tax is paid later with India Law Library Docid # 2434523
(204) ASHAPURA OPTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. ASHAPURA DEVELOPERS AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 16-10-2025 Specific Relief Act, 1963 — Section 6 — Suit for possession of immovable property — Elements — Plaintiff must prove possession and dispossession within six months prior to filing suit, otherwise than in due course of law — Court’s inquiry limited to possession and dispossession, not title — Prior peaceful settled possession is evidence of title and can be protected even against rightful owner if dispossessed by India Law Library Docid # 2434524
(205) PRAKASH CHIMANLAL SHETH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 16-10-2025 Right to Information Act, 2005 — Section 8(1)(h) — Exemption from disclosure — Information that would impede investigation or prosecution of offenders — Petitioner sought information related to passport, Lookout Circular (LOC), and detention of an accused in a private complaint case — Rejection by Public Information Officer justified as disclosure could impede investigation and prosecution. India Law Library Docid # 2434546
(206) GUDDE NINGAPPA SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 16-10-2025 Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 — Section 45 — Grant of occupancy rights — Application by tenant — Appeal against setting aside of order of Land Tribunal — Held, Land Tribunal failed to consider material documents like Record of Rights (ROR) and oral/documentary evidence — When ROR entries are presumed correct, India Law Library Docid # 2434547
(207) UNION BANK OF INDIA Vs. M/S NHDPL SOUTH PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS NHDPL PROPERTIES PVT. LTD. AND PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS NITESH HOUSING DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 16-10-2025 Bank Guarantee — Invocation — Compliance with terms — The court found that the email sent by the beneficiary constituted a valid invocation of the bank guarantee as it clearly stated the intention to invoke if the guarantee was not renewed and provided details for payment. The bank's argument that it was not a "written demand" was rejected. India Law Library Docid # 2434548
(208) SRI GODARI RAMULU AND OTHERS Vs. SRI GODARI BHEERAIAH[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 16-10-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 96 — Appeal against Judgment and Decree — Suit for partition and separate possession — Plaintiff claims to be son of deceased Godari Beeraiah from his second wife Banamma — Defendants (appellants) contend plaintiff is not Beeraiah's son and suit is barred by limitation — Evidence on India Law Library Docid # 2434622
(209) SHANMUGAM Vs. M/S. BHUVANESHWAR FINANCE[MADRAS HIGH COURT (MADURAI BENCH)] 16-10-2025 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 148 — Condition for suspension of sentence — Appeal against conviction under Section 138 — Appellate Court can order deposit of minimum 20% of fine or compensation — Amount must be deposited within 60 days, extendable by 30 days for sufficient cause — Non-compliance with this India Law Library Docid # 2434816
(210) ANU.C.R. Vs. STATE OF KERALA[KERALA HIGH COURT] 16-10-2025 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 528 — Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 — Section 143(2) — Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Section 138 — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 482 — Cross-examination of witness — Admissibility of documents — Trial court's refusal to allow defence counsel to confront witness with photograph and site plan — Held, it was impermissible to India Law Library Docid # 2434859
(211) P.T.BABU Vs. VIJAYA BANK AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 16-10-2025 Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 14(2) — Exclusion of time of prosecuting proceedings bona fide without jurisdiction — Applicable to execution proceedings — Conditions for applicability include same prior and subsequent proceedings, due diligence and good faith, failure due to defect of jurisdiction or similar cause, same matter in issue, and institution in a court — Exclusion not available when court has India Law Library Docid # 2434860
(212) ABDUL RASHEED @ DR.A.R.BABU Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION (CBI) AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 16-10-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Further Investigation — Order for — High Court's power of revision and superintendence — Special Judge's order directing further investigation was justified based on the evidence and the explanation provided by the Investigating Officer, particularly concerning the alleged role of bank officials and the handling of loan proceeds. The High Court can uphold such an order if it finds it to be in accordance with law and evidence. India Law Library Docid # 2434861
(213) RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. MEENA DEVI AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 16-10-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 163A — Motor Accident Claims Tribunal — Maintainability of claim — Claim by legal representatives of deceased who was riding the insured vehicle not maintainable under Section 163A as deceased was not a third party — Deceased was in the shoes of the owner as borrower of the vehicle. India Law Library Docid # 2434942
(214) DR. MRS. VINOD KUMARI SANGWAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 16-10-2025 Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996, Rule 22(1) & 22(2) — Preliminary enquiry and charge-sheet — Mere non-mentioning of a specific rule does not invalidate an inquiry or proceedings if the substance and intent are clear and legal power exists India Law Library Docid # 2435165
(215) SUDHA MEDICAL COLLEGE, THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL AND CONTROLLER Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 16-10-2025 Medical Colleges — Affiliation — Rajasthan University of Health Sciences (RUHS) — Consent of Affiliation (CoA) — Maharashtra University of Health Sciences Ordinance — Petitioner college sought affiliation for 150 seats, but was initially granted for 100 seats. NMC rejected the proposal for increased seats due to issues with CoA validity. RUHS issued a clarification stating original CoA was valid India Law Library Docid # 2435166
(216) SHREE SANATAM DHARAM HIGH SCHOOL BHIWANI Vs. DHARAM PAL AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 16-10-2025 Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — Condonation of delay — Sufficient cause — Court should adopt a liberal, pragmatic, and justice-oriented approach — However, this does not mean the concept of reasonableness can be freely disregarded — Gross negligence, lack of bona fides, or inordinate delay without a satisfactory explanation are India Law Library Docid # 2435198
(217) RAMPHAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 16-10-2025 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 — Offence of dishonour of cheque — Compounding of offence — Parties have amicably settled their dispute — Petitioner seeks acquittal on grounds of compromise — Complainant and State counsel have no objection — Held, offence under Section 138 of the Act can be compounded at any stage of litigation, even after conviction and dismissal of appeal. High Court's inherent India Law Library Docid # 2435199
(218) AMIT GOYAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 16-10-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 216 — Alteration of charge — Power of Court — The power to alter or add to a charge at any time before judgment is pronounced is exclusively vested in the Court and no party (complainant, accused, or prosecution) has a vested right to demand such alteration or addition — While a party India Law Library Docid # 2435200
(219) INSTITUTE OF NANO SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, MOHALI Vs. M/S. CITIZEN INDUSTRIES[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 16-10-2025 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 5 — Extent of judicial intervention — High Courts should exercise self-restraint in interfering with interlocutory or procedural orders passed by Arbitral Tribunals, particularly those concerning witness examination and cross-examination — Intervention is permissible only in exceptional circumstances, such as when an order is patently perverse or shows bad faith, to avoid India Law Library Docid # 2435196
(220) VED PARKASH PALIWAL AND ANOTHER Vs. MUNICIPAL COUNCIL PANIPAT, NOW MUNICIPAL CORPORATION PANIPAT, THROUGH ITS COMMISSIONER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 16-10-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 100, Order XLI Rule 27(1)(b) — Appeal — Res Judicata — Where a first appellate court did not properly consider whether an appeal was filed without proper authorization by a resolution, it should have either directed production of a power of attorney or examination of a competent witness to prove ratification of the action, particularly when the substantive right should not be India Law Library Docid # 2435197