ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(861) ANKUSH TIWARI Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 17-02-2025
Transfer of Property through Will — A Will does not involve transfer of property between living persons (inter vivos), but rather regulates succession after the testator's death (testamentary succession), thus not falling under the ambit of 'transfer' as contemplated in Section 165(6) of the M.P. Land Revenue Code, 1959.
India Law Library Docid # 2422733

(862) EX-LT COL PK TIWARI (SL-04526K) Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 17-02-2025
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 — Limitations of Judicial Review under Article 226 — The High Court's power of judicial review under Article 226 is limited to examining if there is a denial of a fundamental right under Part III of the Constitution or if there is a jurisdictional error or error apparent on the face of the record, in matters related to court martial
India Law Library Docid # 2423074

(863) KAMALAKSHAN Vs. USHA AND ANOTHER[KERALA HIGH COURT] 17-02-2025
Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Sections 10 and 11 — A settlement deed authorizing a person to deal with property for a specific purpose does not transfer absolute right, and a subsequent sale deed executed without such right is void ab initio.
India Law Library Docid # 2423175

(864) MUHAMMED SHIBIL Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND ANOTHER[KERALA HIGH COURT] 17-02-2025
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Sections 22(b), 29(1), 31, 31A, and 37 — Cancellation of Bail — The Court held that, unlike IPC offences, subsequent crimes under the NDPS Act justify bail cancellation, considering the gravity of drug-related crimes and their societal impact
India Law Library Docid # 2423176

(865) K.SASIDHARAN Vs. SECRETARY, ANITHAKUMARI P, T.K. DIVAKARAN MEMORIAL TRUST AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 17-02-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 1 Rule 10 — Impleadment of Additional Respondent — The Court set aside the order impleading an additional respondent in a different capacity, citing the statutory mandate in Order I Rule 10 CPC and the law declared by the Supreme Court.
India Law Library Docid # 2423177

(866) AJESH Vs. STATE OF KERALA[KERALA HIGH COURT] 17-02-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 164 — Non-Recording of 164 Statement not fatal to Prosecution — The Court held that non-recording of a victim's statement under Section 164 CrPC is not fatal to the prosecution if the evidence otherwise establishes the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
India Law Library Docid # 2423178

(867) GANRAJ BISHNOI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 17-02-2025
Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951 — Rules 7(8)(b)(iii) and 25-A — Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1958 — Rule 13 — The primary legal issue revolves around orders placing government employees in Rajasthan under 'Awaiting Posting Orders' (APO) — The court is examining the legality and propriety of these orders, especially concerning Rule 25-A of the Rules, 1951, and whether these APO orders are a disguised form of punishment or transfer — The judgment specifies guide
India Law Library Docid # 2423240

(868) OMAXE LTD. Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 17-02-2025
Rajasthan Stamp Act, 1998 — Section 51 — Quashing of an order by the Collector (Stamps) regarding a deficit in stamp duty for a development agreement — The petitioner entered into a development agreement to jointly develop a township project, with 50% of the project's shares given to the petitioner — The market value was initially assessed at Rs. 16,71,75,968/-, but a spot inspection revised it to Rs. 39,71,16,218/- — Consequently, stamp duty was charged, and the document was registered on 18.10
India Law Library Docid # 2423254

(869) SHRINATH TRAVEL AGENCY PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. AJAY KUMAR SHARMA AND ANOTHER[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 17-02-2025
Trade Marks Act, 1999 — Section 57 — Under Section 57, the High Court has the jurisdiction to entertain a rectification application and direct the removal of a trademark from the register if it is deceptively similar to a prior registered trademark, especially when the prior user has established extensive use, goodwill, and reputation, and a competent court has already found the later mark to be infringing; the prior and continuous use of a trademark, coupled with the deceptive similarity of a s
India Law Library Docid # 2423327

(870) S. JYOTHI Vs. S. SATHISH CHAKRAVARTHI AND OTHERS[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 17-02-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 397, 401 and 248(1) — Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 498-A, 323, 342 and 34 — The High Court's revisional power under Sections 397 and 401 Cr.P.C. to interfere with an order of acquittal is extremely limited, requiring a finding of manifest illegality or gross miscarriage of justice, and does not extend to re-appreciation of evidence.
India Law Library Docid # 2423397

(871) KANDULA SURYA KUMARI AND OTHERS Vs. GUTHULA KANNABABU (DIED) AND OTHERS[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 17-02-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 100 — A second appeal under Section 100 CPC can only be admitted when a substantial question of law arises, and the High Court will not interfere with concurrent findings of fact by lower courts.
India Law Library Docid # 2423398

(872) DIPJYOTI SAHARIA AND ANOTHER Vs. PURABI MEDHI AND OTHERS[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 17-02-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 6 Rule 17 — Trial Courts have discretion to allow amendments to pleadings under Order 6 Rule 17, particularly when it facilitates the determination of real questions in controversy and the trial has not yet commenced — The High Court dismissed a civil revision petition challenging the Trial Court's order allowing the plaintiffs to amend their plaint to include a prayer for partition
India Law Library Docid # 2423488

(873) TOPESWAR RABHA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 17-02-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 313 — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302 — A conviction for murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code can be upheld based on the consistent testimony of an eyewitness supported by circumstantial and medical evidence, and the rejection of an unproven alibi — The High Court dismissed a criminal appeal against the appellant's conviction for murder, finding a consistent eyewitness account corroborated by medical evidence matching the alleged w
India Law Library Docid # 2423489

(874) ON THE DEATH OF SANKAR DAS HIS LEGAL HEIRS SMTI. REKHA DAS AND ANOTHER Vs. PANKAJ SARDA AND OTHERS[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 17-02-2025
Assam Non-Agricultural Urban Areas Tenancy Act, 1955 — Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 100, Order 21 Rules 97, 99, 101, 103 and Section 151 — A Regular Second Appeal under Section 100, can only be entertained on substantial questions of law, and the High Court cannot re-appreciate findings of fact made by the lower appellate courts — The High Court dismissed a Regular Second Appeal against concurrent judgments that rejected the appellants' claim of non-evictable tenancy and ownership in exe
India Law Library Docid # 2423490

(875) SRI AJIT DATTA Vs. SRI MITHAN DAS AND ANOTHER[TRIPURA HIGH COURT] 17-02-2025
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Sections 20, 118, 138, 139, 142 — Failure to prove service of a demand notice as per the proviso to Section 138 can lead to the acquittal of the accused, but this finding can be challenged in appeal, especially if the accused does not deny the issuance of the cheque or the receipt of the notice — The High Court set aside the acquittal of an accused under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, finding that the trial court erred in acquitting the accused solely on the grou
India Law Library Docid # 2423497

(876) SARAL BAHADUR MOLSOM Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA AND OTHERS[TRIPURA HIGH COURT] 17-02-2025
Tripura State Civil Service (Revised Pay) Rules, 2009 (12th Amendment Rules, 2015) — Recovery of wrongly paid excess salary from employees can be deemed impermissible if it would be iniquitous, harsh, or arbitrary, especially after a considerable lapse of time and when the employee was not at fault — The High Court allowed a writ petition, setting aside an order for the recovery of excess ACP-I benefits paid to a Senior Computer Assistant in the Rural Development Department — The court relied on
India Law Library Docid # 2423498

(877) SADHAN PAUL Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA AND OTHERS[TRIPURA HIGH COURT] 17-02-2025
Standing Order of Tripura Jute Mills Limited — Clause 23 — When an employee's initially recorded date of birth in service records is disputed and a subsequent medical board determination contradicts it, and the employer inconsistently acts upon the medical board's finding, the court can direct an inquiry into alternative evidence like a school certificate to resolve the discrepancy — The High Court allowed a writ petition filed by an employee of Tripura Jute Mills Limited challenging his prematu
India Law Library Docid # 2423499

(878) JITAN SINGH Vs. ABHI SINGH AND OTHERS[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 17-02-2025
Hindu Law — Partition Suit — A suit for partition is not maintainable if a prior family partition has already taken place and attained finality, especially when dealing with customs specific to a particular school of Hindu law that were considered in previous binding decisions between the parties — The High Court dismissed a second appeal in a partition suit, upholding concurrent findings that a prior family partition, including the allocation of 'Jesthansh' under the Mitakshara school of Hindu
India Law Library Docid # 2423588

(879) JAWAHAR LAL Vs. JAI PRAKASH LAL[PATNA HIGH COURT] 17-02-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 39 Rule 1 — The High Court will generally not interfere with concurrent findings of subordinate courts granting status quo orders for the preservation of lis property, unless there is a glaring mistake or perversity — The High Court dismissed a civil miscellaneous petition, affirming the orders of the lower courts that directed both parties to maintain status quo on the suit property in a partition suit between brothers, finding no perversity in the concurrent
India Law Library Docid # 2423645

(880) LALSA YADAV Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE, LUCKNOW AND OTHERS[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 17-02-2025
U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 — Sections 4(2) and 9(A)2 — U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 — Sections 33, 39, 218 and 219 — An order passed by the Consolidation Officer under the Act, 1953, which has attained finality, cannot be overridden in a summary proceeding under the U.P. Land Revenue Act — The petitioner challenges the Board of Revenue's order remanding a case concerning revenue records, arguing that the Additional Commissioner rightly upheld the petitioner's father's entry based on
India Law Library Docid # 2423735