(401) STATE Vs. FIRASUL NABI[DELHI HIGH COURT] 11-03-2025 Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 3 — Appreciation of Evidence — Testimony of Prosecutrix — Sexual Offences/POCSO Act — Reliability — Contradictions and Improvements — While conviction can rest on the sole testimony of a prosecutrix if it inspires confidence, courts must exercise extreme care, especially when the testimony suffers from contradictions and improvements — Where prosecutrix's (minor victim) testimony regarding wrongful restraint, robbery, sexual harassment (IPC 341/392/354/506, S. 12 POC India Law Library Docid # 2423991
(402) NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA Vs. PANKAJ KUMAR[DELHI HIGH COURT] 11-03-2025 Administrative Law — Principles of Natural Justice — Debarment / Blacklisting — Audi Alteram Partem — Issuance of Show Cause Notice — Mandatory Requirement — Order debarring respondent (Consultant's Team Leader) from NHAI/MoRTH projects passed without issuing a prior show cause notice clearly encapsulating grounds and proposed penalty — Debarment/blacklisting orders are stigmatic, entail 'civil death', and preclude participation in future government tenders — Strict adherence to natural justice, India Law Library Docid # 2423992
(403) NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. SMT. DEV KUMARI AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 11-03-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Sections 166 & 168 — Compensation — Entitlement of Legal Representatives — Dependents vs. Non-Dependents — Loss of Dependency vs. Loss to Estate — Law recognizes two distinct claims upon death in accident: (i) 'Loss of Dependency' claimable by dependents based on deceased's contribution to family, and (ii) 'Loss to Estate' claimable by all legal representatives (including non-dependents) based on deceased's savings/accumulation which forms part of the estate — Married India Law Library Docid # 2423994
(404) IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. SMT. GEETA AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 11-03-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Negligence — Collision with Stationary Vehicle — Duty of Driver of Stationary Vehicle — Contributory Negligence — Driver parking/halting a vehicle on the road (even due to breakdown/emergency) has a duty to take precautionary measures like switching on parking indicators or placing warning signs/objects — Lack of such due care constitutes negligence — Where offending truck was parked on the left side of road without indicators/reflectors/caution signs, it India Law Library Docid # 2424018
(405) NEERAJ AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 11-03-2025 M.P. Land Revenue Code, 1959 — Section 248 — Summary Eviction — Limitation — Bona Fide Dispute of Title — The summary procedure for eviction of unauthorized occupants provided under Section 248 of the M.P. Land Revenue Code, 1959, cannot be invoked by the State/Revenue Authorities where there exists a bona fide dispute regarding the title to the property — Such summary power is generally intended for clear cases of encroachment on undisputed government land and not for resolving complicated India Law Library Docid # 2424085
(406) CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. MUNNI BAI AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (GWALIOR BENCH)] 11-03-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 150 (as amended, erstwhile Section 149) — “Pay and Recover” Principle — Effect of Omission of Proviso to S.149(4) and S.149(5) — Held, the principle of “pay and recover,” established by the Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Swaran Singh (2004 ACJ 1), allowing the Claims Tribunal to direct the insurer (who has successfully proved a defence under Section 149(2), now S.150(2), like breach of policy condition regarding driving license) to pay the thi India Law Library Docid # 2424086
(407) RANJEET SINGH Vs. RADHESHYAM AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 11-03-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 100 — Second Appeal — Substantial Question of Law — Scope of Interference — The jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 100 CPC is confined to appeals involving a substantial question of law — The High Court generally should not interfere with findings of fact arrived at by the first appellate court, which is the final court of fact, unless its conclusions are found to be erroneous being contrary to mandatory provisions of law, based on inadmissible evid India Law Library Docid # 2424087
(408) BHARAT SINGH PATEL AND OTHERS Vs. ANTAR SINGH GOUR AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 11-03-2025 Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) — Section 34 — Bar on Civil Court Jurisdiction — Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act creates an express bar on the jurisdiction of Civil Courts to entertain any suit or proceeding concerning matters which the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT) or the Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) is empowered to determine under the Act — No injunction can be granted by a Civil Court regarding actions taken or to India Law Library Docid # 2424120
(409) REKHA KANWAR AND OTHERS Vs. MOHAN RAM @ BHALLU AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 11-03-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Compensation — Determination of Income — Absence of Documentary Proof — Owner-Driver — In assessing compensation for the death of a self-employed person, such as an owner-driver, the Tribunal or Court should not mechanically adopt minimum wages merely due to the absence of strict documentary proof of income — Where evidence establishes the deceased’s age, ownership of a vehicle (supported by Registration Certificate and Driving License), and engagement in the India Law Library Docid # 2424179
(410) MADHU SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 11-03-2025 Penal Code, 1860 — Section 306, 107 — Abetment of Suicide — Quashing of FIR (Section 482 CrPC) — For establishing an offence under Section 306 IPC, there must be clear evidence of direct or indirect acts of instigation, intentional aiding, or conspiracy by the accused, demonstrating a mens rea to push the deceased towards suicide — Such acts must be proximate to the time of suicide — Mere allegations of harassment, disputes, or annoying conduct, without positive action compelling the India Law Library Docid # 2424165
(411) MAMTA MEENA Vs. AMAN KUMAR DHARWAL AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 11-03-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 173 — Appeal against MACT Award — Scope — Consideration of an appeal preferred by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, where the challenge is confined solely to the quantum of compensation, with the finding on negligence not being disputed by the appellant. India Law Library Docid # 2424215
(412) GAS AUTHORITY OF INDIA LIMITED Vs. M/S MAHIMA REAL ESTATE (P) LIMITED[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 11-03-2025 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Execution of Award — Jurisdiction — Transfer Certificate — An executing court possesses jurisdiction to entertain and decide an execution application for an arbitration award if the property related to the underlying dispute, or assets for execution, are situated within its territorial jurisdiction. India Law Library Docid # 2424217
(413) SHANKAR LAL SONI AND OTHERS Vs. PRAHLAD GURJAR AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 11-03-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 173 — Appeal for Enhancement of Compensation — Appeal preferred by claimants seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for the death of the deceased in a motor vehicle accident. India Law Library Docid # 2424219
(414) JHABAR SINGH JAT Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 11-03-2025 Service Law — Transfer — Scope of Judicial Review — Administrative Exigency — Judicial review of transfer orders is limited and minimal — Courts should not interfere with transfers made in the public interest and for administrative reasons unless the order is vitiated by mala fides or is made in violation of any mandatory statutory Rule — Administrative authorities are best placed to determine postings based on operational requirements and efficiency. India Law Library Docid # 2424208
(415) SUHAS DAMODAR SATHE Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 11-03-2025 Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958 — Section 2(g), Article 5(g-a), Article 25 (Explanation I) — Conveyance vs. Development Agreement — Determination for Stamp Duty — The determination of whether an instrument is a ‘Development Agreement’ chargeable under Article 5(g-a) or a ‘Conveyance’ under Article 25 (read with Explanation I) of Schedule I to the Maharashtra Stamp Act depends on the substance of the transaction and the rights transferred, rather than the nomenclature used by the parties — If the ins India Law Library Docid # 2424291
(416) AVINASH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 11-03-2025 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) — Section 187(3) — Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) — Section 111 — Organized Crime — Invocation of Offence — Effect on Statutory Bail Period — Judicial Scrutiny — The invocation of the offence of organized crime under Section 111 BNS, which carries a higher punishment including life imprisonment, automatically extends the period for completion of investigation and filing of the final report from sixty days to ninety days under Section 187(3) BN India Law Library Docid # 2424342
(417) SMT. SUSHEELAMMA Vs. SRI. MUNIYAPPA AND ANOTHER[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 11-03-2025 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — Order 21 Rule 106 — Limitation Act, 1963 — Article 122, Section 5 — Restoration of Execution Petition dismissed for default — Condonation of Delay — Sufficient Cause — An application under Order 21 Rule 106 CPC for setting aside an order dismissing an execution petition for default must be filed within 30 days as prescribed by Article 122 of the Limitation Act — While Section 5 of the Limitation Act allows for condonation of delay beyond this period upon showing “ India Law Library Docid # 2424388
(418) GOOGLE LLC Vs. G. VENKATACHALAM AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 11-03-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order VIII Rule 1 — Commercial Courts Act, 2015 — Filing of Written Statement — Condonation of Delay — Intermediary Liability — Sufficiency of Reasons — In a commercial suit seeking injunction and removal of allegedly defamatory content against multiple defendants including an online intermediary (Google LLC), an application to condone a delay of 156 days in filing the written statement by the intermediary was considered — The reason cited — requirement to secu India Law Library Docid # 2424468
(419) UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD Vs. THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 11-03-2025 Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997 (Act 10/1997) — Section 3(2) — Notice proposing Acquisition — Validity — Pre-decision — Post-decisional Hearing — Natural Justice — Effect of Undertaking in Prior PIL — A show cause notice issued under Section 3(2) of the Act proposing to acquire the petitioner’s land is liable to be quashed as being a fait accompli and amounting only to a post-decisional hearing, where the acquiring body (CMRL) had already given an undertaking bef India Law Library Docid # 2424469
(420) SETHULAKSHMY Vs. SAROJINI AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 11-03-2025 Easement Act, 1882 — Section 22 — Servient Owner’s Right to Shift Easement — Section 22 empowers the servient owner to request the confinement (shifting) of an easement, including a right of way acquired by necessity or prescription, to a determinate part of the servient heritage — This right is exercisable provided the shifting makes the easement least onerous to the servient owner and causes no detriment, prejudice, or inconvenience to the dominant owner. India Law Library Docid # 2424564