ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(801) BIPIN KUMAR SINGH @ BIPIN SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. ASHIQUE MIAN AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 25-02-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 41 Rule 27 and Section 151 — An appellate court can permit the production of additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 only under specific circumstances, such as refusal of evidence by the trial court, discovery of new evidence despite due diligence, or when the appellate court requires it for pronouncing judgment, but not to fill lacunae in a party's case — The High Court dismissed a petition seeking to produce additional evidence in a title appeal under Orde
India Law Library Docid # 2423635

(802) NANDU MAHTO Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 25-02-2025
Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 324, 325, 307, 341, 323, 379, 337, 504 and 34 — Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 — Section 3 — A trial court commits an irregularity and impropriety by not ensuring the appearance of crucial prosecution witnesses like the I.O. and the Doctor through processes such as bailable and non-bailable warrants, and acquitting accused based on the absence of their evidence without exhausting these measures can lead to the setting aside of the acquittal in appeal — The High Cour
India Law Library Docid # 2423636

(803) RUPESH KUMAR Vs. THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 25-02-2025
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Sections 7, 17A and 19 — Prior approval under Section 17A is not necessary for cases involving arrest on the spot for accepting undue advantage, and the necessity of such approval for other offences related to the discharge of official functions can be a matter to be determined during trial, where the accused can present evidence of having acted lawfully and honestly — The High Court dismissed a criminal writ petition seeking to quash a charge-sheet and cogniz
India Law Library Docid # 2423638

(804) SHRI LAXMAN DAS JAISINGHANI Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 25-02-2025
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 — Section 107(1), (4), (6)(b) — Appeal — Limitation — Pre-deposit — Mode of Payment — Compliance — Effect of Non-uploading of Order on GST Portal — Where an assessee deposits the mandatory 10% pre-deposit amount under Section 107(6)(b) into the GST Electronic Cash Ledger within the initial three-month limitation period prescribed by Section 107(1), this constitutes sufficient compliance with the pre-deposit requirement — The dismissal of a
India Law Library Docid # 2424069

(805) M/S AQUATIC PIPES AND TUBES PVT. LTD. THROUGH ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER SHRI INDRAJEET BACHHERIA Vs. STATE OF M.P. THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 25-02-2025
Industrial Policy — M.P. Micro Small and Medium Enterprises (MSME) Protsahan Scheme, 2019 — Clauses 3.12 & 4.11 — Subsidy for Expansion/Diversification — Interpretation of “Previously Installed Capacity” vs. “Actual Production” — Clause 4.11 of the M.P. MSME Protsahan Scheme, 2019, conditions the grant of subsidy for expansion/diversification on there being “no reduction in the previously
India Law Library Docid # 2424070

(806) DAMODAR AND OTHERS Vs. SUWA LAL AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 25-02-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Ss. 151, 152, 153 — Clerical Error in Judgment/Order — Power of Correction — Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 — The Rent Tribunal, like any civil court, possesses inherent power and specific power under CPC sections (applicable mutatis mutandis or inherently) to correct clerical or arithmetical errors in its judgments or orders arising from any accidental slip or omission, to ensure the record correctly reflects the court's intention and prior findings.
India Law Library Docid # 2424274

(807) MAHENDRAN @ BASKARAN Vs. SIVAPERUMAL AND ANOTHER[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 25-02-2025
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 173 — Contributory Negligence — Pillion Rider — Non-wearing of Helmet — Nexus to Injury — Where a pillion rider sustains multiple facial fractures, including nasal bone and medial wall of orbit fractures which are unlikely to have been averted even by wearing a helmet, attributing 30% contributory negligence solely for failure to wear a helmet is disproportionate — Considering the nature of injuries and the limited causal link between the failure to wear a helm
India Law Library Docid # 2424403

(808) RAJ AGRAWAL Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 25-02-2025
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 — Sentencing Object — The primary objective of Section 138 NI Act proceedings is compensatory, aiming to ensure the complainant receives the cheque amount, with punishment (imprisonment or fine) serving as a means to achieve this — Courts have discretion, and imposing only a fine or compensation is permissible.
India Law Library Docid # 2424668

(809) IDEMIA SYSCOM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. CONJOINIX TOTAL SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED[DELHI HIGH COURT] 24-02-2025
Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 — Section 18 — Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Override of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — MSMED Act, 2006, being a special legislation, prevails over A&C Act, 1996, in matters of dispute resolution for MSMEs, due to non-obstante clauses in Section 18 of MSMED Act
India Law Library Docid # 2422765

(810) CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. BHUPAN PASWAN AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 24-02-2025
Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 — Section 173 — Calculation of Compensation for Death of a Minor in Motor Vehicle Accidents — In assessing compensation for the death of a minor in a motor vehicle accident, courts should adopt the “Minimum Wage” criteria, calculating notional income based on the minimum wage of a skilled worker in the relevant state (plus 40% for future prospects and minus 50% for personal expenses), and apply a multiplier of 18 to determine total loss of dependency, in addition to award
India Law Library Docid # 2422766

(811) SADH RAM [DECEASED] THROUGH LR SH. RAM DAYAL Vs. DARSHAN SINGH AND ANOTHER[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 24-02-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 2(9) and Order 43 Rule 1 — Maintainability of Letters Patent Appeal — Interlocutory Orders — The Court dismissed a Letters Patent Appeal (LPA) for being non-maintainable, as the impugned order merely condoned the delay in filing a review application, which is an interlocutory order not affecting the final judgment
India Law Library Docid # 2423011

(812) POOJA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA[BOMBAY HIGH COURT (AURANGABAD BENCH)] 24-02-2025
Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 — Section 8 — Natural Guardian's Power to Deal with Joint Family Property: The Court held that a natural guardian, as the eldest member of the joint family, has the power to deal with the minor's undivided interest in the joint family property, provided the alienation is for legal necessity or for the benefit of the minor, without seeking permission under Section 8
India Law Library Docid # 2423082

(813) VIKAS AND OTHERS Vs. JAYASHREE AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT (AURANGABAD BENCH)] 24-02-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 7 Rule 11 — Rejection of plaint — Cause of Action and Limitation not decidable at threshold — The Court held that the issue of cause of action and limitation in a suit cannot be decided at the threshold, and the trial court's order rejecting the application under Order 7 Rule 11(a) & (d) was justified
India Law Library Docid # 2423084

(814) BABUBHAI SHANKARLAL MEHTA AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 24-02-2025
Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 — Section 127 — If a planning authority fails to take effective steps for acquisition of land within the stipulated period under Section 127 of the MRTP Act, the reservation on the land will lapse, and the State Government must notify the lapsing of the reservation in the Official Gazette
India Law Library Docid # 2423085

(815) ISHAN SHARMA Vs. STATE OF H.P. AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 24-02-2025
Service Law — Compassionate Employment — Right to Reasoned Decision — The Court quashed an order rejecting the petitioner's claim for compassionate employment, citing the lack of reasoning and non-compliance with a previous tribunal directive to consider the case in light of Avinash Chauhan vs. State of H.P. & Ors
India Law Library Docid # 2423090

(816) THOMAS MANI Vs. G. SHANKAR[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 24-02-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 2(wa) and 378 — Definition of “victim” — In a case instituted upon a complaint, under the CrPC, a victim, as defined under Section 2(wa), has the right to prefer an appeal against an order of acquittal before the Appellate Court or Sessions Court, to which an appeal ordinarily lies against the order of conviction of such Court, and not necessarily before the High Court directly, as the provision of Section 378 of the CrPC supersedes the requirement
India Law Library Docid # 2423165

(817) THE GOOD SAMARITAN CHARITABLE TRUST Vs. SAMUEL AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 24-02-2025
Specific Relief Act, 1963 — Section 16 — In a suit for specific performance of an agreement for sale, the plaintiff must prove the due execution of the agreement, their readiness and willingness to perform, and the defendant's failure to honour the agreement
India Law Library Docid # 2423235

(818) K.I.V.GOPINATH Vs. K.I.V.VIMALA AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 24-02-2025
Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Sections 68 and 123 — Evidence Act, 1872 — In proving the execution of a registered settlement deed or gift deed under the Registration Act, 1908, and the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, it is not mandatory to examine one of the attesting witnesses, unless the execution of the document is specifically denied by the person who purportedly executed it, as per Section 68 of the Evidence Act, 1872 — However, where the execution is disputed, and the document's validit
India Law Library Docid # 2423233

(819) NOUSHAD K Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND ANOTHER[KERALA HIGH COURT] 24-02-2025
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 21 —Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 41 and 436 — While investigating a criminal case, the police must conduct a bilateral investigation, considering both the complainant's and the accused's versions, rather than unilaterally proceeding based solely on the complainant's statement, especially in cases involving serious allegations like sexual assault, and must apply common sense to determine whether to file a charge sheet — Furthermore, the pri
India Law Library Docid # 2423234

(820) VIJAYRAJ AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 24-02-2025
Rajasthan Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Amendment Act, 2022 — Sections 3, 6, 9, and 10 — Paper leak in the Rajasthan Public Service Commission (RPSC) Teacher Gr. II Examination 2022 — The accused are charged with violating Sections 419, 420, and 120-B of IPC, as well as Sections 3, 4, 6, and 6(a) of the Rajasthan Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 1992, and Sections 3, 6, 9, and 10 of the Rajasthan Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Amendment Act,
India Law Library Docid # 2423270