(81) APPLAUSE ENTERTAINMENT PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. WWW.9XMOVIES.COM.TW AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 19-03-2025 Copyright Act, 1957 — Sections 2(d), 2(f), 17 — Ownership of Copyright — Cinematograph Film (Web Series) — Infringement — The plaintiff, being the producer of the web series ‘UNDEKHI’, qualifies as the author and first owner of the copyright in the said work, which constitutes a “cinematograph film” under Section 2(f) read with Sections 2(d) and 17 of the Copyright Act — The unauthorized reproduction, communication to the public, streaming, and making available for download of the plaintiff’s we India Law Library Docid # 2423980
(82) EDELSEISS ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMTIED Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 19-03-2025 Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) — Sections 5, 13(2), 14 — Assignment of Debt — Validity of Prior Notice for Assignee's Action — An Asset Reconstruction Company (ARC) or other entity acquiring financial assets, including debt and underlying security interests, through an assignment agreement under Section 5 of the SARFAESI Act, effectively steps into the shoes of the original lender (assignor) — Such an assignee i India Law Library Docid # 2424125
(83) HARDEEP SINGH Vs. MAYORSINGH @ NEYAR SINGH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (GWALIOR BENCH)] 19-03-2025 Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — Condonation of Delay — “Sufficient Cause” — Counsel's Negligence and Litigant's Duty of Vigilance — The discretion to condone delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, while to be exercised liberally to advance substantial justice, requires the applicant to demonstrate “sufficient cause” — Attributing delay solely to the alleged negligence or failure of counsel to communicate case updates is not, per se, sufficient cause, especially when the litigant fails t India Law Library Docid # 2424126
(84) SHARDA DEVI CHHAJER AND OTHERS Vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 19-03-2025 Income Tax Act, 1961 — Sections 147, 148, 148A, 151A — e-Assessment of Income Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022 (Notification No. 18/2022 dated 29.03.2022) — Jurisdiction to Issue Notice under Section 148 — Faceless Assessment Regime — Automated Allocation — The Scheme framed by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) vide Notification dated 29.03.2022, issued in exercise of powers under Section 151A of the Act, mandatorily requires that the issuance of notice under Section 148 for assessment, r India Law Library Docid # 2424178
(85) BASHARAT HUSSAIN Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF J&K AND OTHERS[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT AT JAMMU] 18-03-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 341, 323, 504 , 147 and 188 — Non-consideration of bail orders granted to a detenu in the FIRs that form the basis of a preventive detention order demonstrates non-application of mind by the detaining authority and renders the detention order unsustainable in law — The High Court allowed a habeas corpus petition and quashed a preventive detention order issued under the Public Safety Act — The court found that the detaining authority failed to consider the fact t India Law Library Docid # 2423817
(86) BHUPINDER SINGH MEHTA AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 18-03-2025 Service Law — Contractual employees — Contractual employees engaged by government-funded societies performing governmental functions for an extended period are entitled to consideration for regularization on par with other state government contractual employees, and denial of such can be discriminatory under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India — Writ petition by contractual computer operators engaged through a government society (CAMPA) for over two decades performing governmental fu India Law Library Docid # 2423804
(87) GAURAV KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 18-03-2025 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Sections 18, 20, and 29 — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 438 — Pre-arrest bail is an extraordinary remedy, particularly not to be granted in cases involving serious economic offences like those under the NDPS Act, especially when there is incriminating material and the need for custodial interrogation — Petition for pre-arrest bail in a case registered under the NDPS Act for recovery of a commercial quantity of opium and char India Law Library Docid # 2423805
(88) RAM KUMAR SHARMA AND OTHERS Vs. CHANDER MOHAN SHARMA AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 18-03-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 7 Rule 11(d) — Rejection of Plaint — Suit barred by limitation — Mixed question of law and fact — Plaintiff challenging Will alleging forgery and pleading lack of knowledge until recent event — Defendants asserting earlier knowledge and limitation bar — Held, when plaintiff specifically pleads lack of knowledge of the allegedly forged Will and subsequent transfer until a specific recent event triggering the cause of action, the determination of the actual date India Law Library Docid # 2423945
(89) MAHENDER AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S ELITE REALTECH PRIVATE LIMITED[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 18-03-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 6 Rule 17 — Amendment of Pleadings — Correction of Board Resolution details — After commencement of trial — Plaintiff inadvertently pleaded and annexed wrong Board Resolution (authorizing suit for different property) — Sought amendment to substitute correct Resolution and date — Held, such an amendment seeking correction of an error/oversight regarding the specific authorization document (Board Resolution) is a curable defect and formal in nature — It does not India Law Library Docid # 2423946
(90) BALWINDER SINGH Vs. BANT SINGH AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 18-03-2025 Contract Act, 1872 — Section 2(d), 25 — Agreement to Sell (Farokhatnama) — Consideration — Cheque Dishonour — Effect — Suit for declaration that unregistered agreement is void — Consideration cheque dishonoured — Defendant’s plea of subsequent cash payment disbelieved by First Appellate Court based on evidence appreciation — Held, upon dishonour of consideration cheque and failure to prove alternative payment, the agreement fails for want of consideration — Unregistered agreement does not confer India Law Library Docid # 2423947
(91) SURJIT SINGH ALIAS TIKKA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 18-03-2025 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Section 52A(1) & (2) — Sampling and Inventory Certification — Procedure — Samples drawn at spot by police — Inventory prepared, presented along with case property and seals to Duty Magistrate, who compared and certified inventory as correct — Held, distinguishing Mohanlal (2016(1) RCR (Cri) 858) and relying on Bharat Aambale (2025 SCC India Law Library Docid # 2423948
(92) HARJIT KAUR AND ANOTHER Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF CHANDIGARH AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 18-03-2025 Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 — Sections 21, 22 — Jurisdiction of District Magistrate/Tribunal — Eviction of Children/Relatives — Requirement of Ownership — Held, the jurisdiction vested in the authorities under the 2007 Act to direct eviction of children/relatives is contingent upon the senior citizen applicant being the owner of the property in question — The Act’s provisions, aimed at protecting the life and property of senior citizens, apply to property own India Law Library Docid # 2423949
(93) SURJIT KAUR Vs. PEPSU ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, PATIALA AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 18-03-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Compensation — Fatal Accident — Enhancement — Deceased Bachelor aged 23 years — Tribunal applied incorrect multiplier (5 instead of 18) and incorrect deduction for personal expenses (1/3 instead of 1/2) — Failed to award future prospects and conventional heads — Held, applying principles laid down in Sarla Verma (2009) and Pranay Sethi (2017), multiplier of 18 applicable for age group 21-25; deduction for personal expenses for bachelor is 1/2; India Law Library Docid # 2423950
(94) NKG INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER[DELHI HIGH COURT] 18-03-2025 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 11(6) — Appointment of Arbitrator — Unilateral Appointment Clause — Validity — Where an arbitration clause empowers one party's representative to appoint a sole arbitrator, such a clause pertaining to the unilateral appointment mechanism is legally invalid and unenforceable, following the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Perkins Eastman Architects DPC and Anr. v. HSCC (India) Limited, (2020) 20 SCC 760 and Central Organisation for Railways India Law Library Docid # 2423978
(95) WINZO GAMES PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. CREATIVELAND ADVERTISING PRIVATE LIMITED[DELHI HIGH COURT] 18-03-2025 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 37(2)(b) — Appeal against Order under Section 17 — Scope of Interference — The scope of judicial interference in an appeal under Section 37(2)(b) against an interlocutory order passed by an Arbitral Tribunal under Section 17 is extremely limited and even narrower than the restrictive scope under Section 34 — The appellate court does not sit in appeal over the arbitrator's findings India Law Library Docid # 2423979
(96) MS HIMALAYAN FLORA AND AROMA PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. UTTAR PRADESH IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT AND ANOTHER[DELHI HIGH COURT] 18-03-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order VI Rule 15A — Statement of Truth — Non-filing with Written Statement — Nature of Defect — Following the ratio decidendi of the Full Bench in Bharat Broadband Network Ltd. v. Sterlite Technologies Ltd. (2025 SCC OnLine Del 636), the non-filing of a mandatory Statement of Truth, as required under Order VI Rule 15A CPC, along with a pleading in a commercial suit, is a curable defect and does not, by itself, render the filing of the pleading non-est — The reasoning India Law Library Docid # 2423981
(97) SHABANA Vs. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 18-03-2025 Information Technology Act, 2000 — Section 79(3)(b) — Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 — Rules 3(1)(d), 3(1)(j), 4 — Law Enforcement Agency (LEA) Requests to Intermediaries — Timelines and Cooperation — In the context of LEAs seeking user information from IT Intermediaries for investigation purposes, particularly in urgent matters like missing persons, bomb threats, or serious crimes, the maximum timeline of 72 hours prescribed under Rule India Law Library Docid # 2423982
(98) MRS MEENA VOHRA Vs. MASTER HOSTS PVT LTD. AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 18-03-2025 Commercial Courts Act, 2015 — Section 2(1)(c)(i) — “Commercial Dispute” — Ordinary Transactions of Merchants, Bankers, Financiers, Traders — Mercantile Documents — Interpretation — For a dispute to qualify as a “commercial dispute” under Section 2(1)(c)(i) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, two cumulative conditions must be met: (1) it must arise out of “ordinary transactions” of or between merchants, bankers India Law Library Docid # 2424016
(99) HARMANPREET KAUR DHIR Vs. PRITAM SINGH BHATIA[DELHI HIGH COURT] 18-03-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 7 Rule 11(a) and (d) — Rejection of Plaint — Cause of Action — Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) — Partition Suit — Pleading Requirements — Triable Issue — An application for rejection of plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC requires the Court to examine only the averments in the plaint, assuming them to be true — While mere bald assertions of the existence of an HUF and coparcenary rights are insufficient post the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, a plaint cannot be rejected India Law Library Docid # 2424017
(100) PRASHANT GUPTA AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 18-03-2025 Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 376, 107, 109 — Rape and Abetment — Liability of Woman — While Section 376 IPC defines the offence of rape as being committed by 'a man', thereby excluding women from committing the act of rape itself, a woman can be held criminally liable for the distinct offence of abetment of rape under Section 109 IPC if she intentionally aids, instigates, or conspires in the commission of rape by a man, as per the definition of abetment in Section 107 IPC. (Paras 7, 8) India Law Library Docid # 2424127