(961) MALLA JAGGA RAO Vs. THE WORD TEACHER COOPERATIVE HOUSE BUILDING SOCIETY LTD, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY WTCBS LAYOUT AND OTHERS[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 17-09-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 100 — Second Appeal — Scope of Interference — High Court cannot substitute its opinion for the First Appellate Court unless findings are erroneous, contrary to law, or based on no evidence — Re-appreciation of evidence is not permitted if First Appellate Court exercised its discretion judicially. India Law Library Docid # 2433043
(962) SUNKARA PAWAN KUMAR @ CHINNA @ SUNKARA Vs. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 17-09-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 389(1) — Suspension of Sentence and Grant of Bail — Appeal Against Conviction of Murder and Offences Under SC/ST Act — Appellant sought bail and suspension of sentence pending disposal of appeal against conviction for murder, wrongful confinement, kidnapping, and offences under SC/ST Act — High Court dismissed the appeal, confirming the conviction and sentence, finding the prosecution proved the guilt beyond a reasonable India Law Library Docid # 2433044
(963) G.ADENNA Vs. A RAGHAVENDRA CHOWDARY[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 17-09-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 151 CPC — Interlocutory Applications — Temporary Injunction and amendment of plaint — Applications filed for temporary injunction to restrain alienation of suit property and to amend the plaint to include a prayer for refund of advance amount with interest — These applications are ancillary to the main appeal. India Law Library Docid # 2433045
(964) KARLAPALEM VENKATA KRISHNA GOKUL Vs. KARLAPALEM VENKATA NAGABHUSHANA RAO[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 17-09-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 20, Rule 5 and Order 14, Rule 2 — Trial Court judgment — Failure to decide each issue with reasons, discuss evidence of all witnesses, and address primary relief (cancellation of Will) — Judgment did not conform to mandatory requirements of CPC — Trial Court acted mechanically without applying its mind to facts and issues — Judgment is vitiated and amounts to no judgment in the eyes of law — Such a judgment deprives a party of the right to India Law Library Docid # 2433046
(965) VELLAYA PILLAI Vs. MANGALESHWARI[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 17-09-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 41 Rule 27 — Additional Evidence — Applicant sought to produce a judgment from a previous suit to discredit the respondent's testimony — The judgment pertained to the character or conduct of the respondent — The appeal's primary issues were the validity of marriage and liability to pay maintenance — The court held that the additional evidence was not directly relevant to determining these aspects of the appeal — Therefore, the petition to India Law Library Docid # 2433050
(966) NIRANJAN KUMAR JENA AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF ODISHA AND OTHERS[ORISSA HIGH COURT] 17-09-2025 Constitution of India, 1950 — Articles 226 & 227 — Writ of Mandamus — Property Rights — Human Rights — While the Right to Property is a Constitutional, Statutory, and Human Right, it does not grant absolute dominion if it harms others. Government cannot arbitrarily deprive individuals of their property without due process. India Law Library Docid # 2433149
(967) BABAJI CHARAN SAHU (SINCE DEAD THROUGH HIS LRS) Vs. BASANTA KUMAR PALEI AND OTHERS[ORISSA HIGH COURT] 17-09-2025 Partition Act, 1893 — Section 4 — Right to pre-emption/repurchase — A co-sharer cannot invoke Section 4 to repurchase property from a stranger purchaser unless the stranger purchaser has filed a suit for partition of their purchased share. The right to repurchase under Section 4 is only available when the transferee has sued for partition. India Law Library Docid # 2433150
(968) REGISTRAR GENERAL OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK AND OTHERS Vs. MALAYA RANJAN DASH AND ANOTHER[ORISSA HIGH COURT] 17-09-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 47 Rule 1 — Review Jurisdiction — A review petition is not an appeal against the original order and cannot be used to rehear or reargue matters already decided. The scope of review is limited to correcting errors apparent on the face of the record, discovering new evidence, or for other sufficient reasons akin to these grounds. Re-evaluation of facts or law to substitute one plausible India Law Library Docid # 2433151
(969) GOURHARI MOHANTY (DEAD) AND OTHERS Vs. BHARGABI DAS (DEAD) AND OTHERS[ORISSA HIGH COURT] 17-09-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 100 — Second Appeal — Issues — Substantial questions of law formulated regarding reversal of trial court judgment without discussing evidence, non-consideration of documents, binding nature of Rafa-nama, estoppel, and adverse inference. The Second Appeal addresses these interconnected questions. India Law Library Docid # 2433152
(970) VISHNUPRASAD S/O BHAGWANDASJI GEHLOD THROUGH LRS. SANDEEP AND OTHERS Vs. RAJENDRA SINGH[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 17-09-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 96 — First Appeal — Scope — Appellate Court has jurisdiction to reverse or affirm Trial Court's findings — First appeal is a valuable right, whole case is open for rehearing on facts and law — Appellate Court's judgment must reflect conscious application of mind and reasoned findings on all issues and contentions. India Law Library Docid # 2433295
(971) GINNA RAM Vs. JAI SINGH (SINCE DECEASED) THROUGH LRS AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 17-09-2025 Indian Evidence Act, 1872 — Sections 65, 61, 63, 64 — Secondary evidence — Admissibility — Application for permission to produce secondary evidence to prove a Will — Trial Court allowed the application — Held, while the specific application for secondary evidence might not be strictly necessary, the trial court's decision was not erroneous as it ultimately allowed for the determination of admissibility of secondary India Law Library Docid # 2433854
(972) RAJ SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs. ASHOK KUMAR AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 17-09-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 100, Order 41, Rule 27 — Second Appeal — Scope in Punjab and Haryana High Court — Treated as appeal under Section 41 of Punjab Courts Act, 1918 — No question of law required to be framed — Judgments of Supreme Court in Pankajakshi, Kirodi, and Satender relied upon. India Law Library Docid # 2433866
(973) GIRDAWAR SINGH Vs. KULWINDER KAUR[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 17-09-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 151 — Condonation of delay — Application for condonation of delay of 58 days in refiling appeal allowed. India Law Library Docid # 2433867
(974) RAM LAL AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF H.P.[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 17-09-2025 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 152 — Conditional order for removal of nuisance — Procedural requirements — A conditional order under Section 152 BNSS must precede an absolute order — The person against whom the order is made has the right to appear and show cause against it — If they show cause, an inquiry must be conducted before the conditional order can be made absolute, modified, or discharged. India Law Library Docid # 2434087
(975) VINOD KUMAR Vs. VINOD KUMAR SHARMA (DECEASED) THROUGH HIS LRS ANKESH KUMAR AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 17-09-2025 H.P. Urban Rent Control Act, 1987 — Section 14 — Eviction of tenant — Bona fide requirement of landlord — Section 14(3)(a)(i) Proviso requires landlord to plead and prove that he is not occupying other similar premises and has not vacated such premises within five years without sufficient cause — Failure to plead and prove these mandatory conditions renders eviction order on ground of bona fide requirement illegal. India Law Library Docid # 2434088
(976) ROOP CHAND AND OTHERS Vs. STATE[DELHI HIGH COURT] 17-09-2025 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Sections 7, 13(1)(d), 12, 13(2) & 120B IPC — Demand and Acceptance of Bribe — No direct evidence of demand from accused — Complainant turned hostile — No recovery of bribe money from accused — Inconsistency in testimony regarding place of handwash — Reliance on handwash test alone insufficient without proof of demand and acceptance — Acquittal. India Law Library Docid # 2434242
(977) LATE SH PRAMOD KUMAR JAIN PROPRIETOR OF MS JAIN ENTERPRISES THROUGH HIS LEGAL HEIRS AND OTHERS Vs. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI AND ANOTHER[DELHI HIGH COURT] 17-09-2025 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 37(1)(c) — Appeal against dismissal of Section 34 petition upholding Arbitral Award — Limitation period for starting arbitration runs from the date the cause of action accrues — Cause of action arises when a claim is first asserted and remains unanswered, constituting a denial. India Law Library Docid # 2434243
(978) SMT. JANAK KUMARI GANDHI AND OTHERS Vs. REGISTRAR CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 17-09-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 114 and Order XLVII — Review Petition — Principles governing review — Review is a restricted power to correct errors apparent on the face of the record or for discovery of new and important matters, not an appeal in disguise — Review petition filed after considerable delay without sufficient cause is liable to be dismissed — Review petition does not disclose any new evidence or India Law Library Docid # 2434244
(979) PRAVIN Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA[BOMBAY HIGH COURT (NAGPUR BENCH)] 17-09-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 306 — Abetment of suicide — Ingredients — To attract Section 306, prosecution must prove the accused actively instigated or aided the commission of suicide. There must be direct or indirect incitement, and the accused must have played an active role. Merely experiencing marital discord or a broken relationship without a direct positive action leading to suicide is insufficient India Law Library Docid # 2434502
(980) UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER Vs. DR. ARTI GARG[UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] 17-09-2025 Civil Services — Promotion — Flexible Complementing Scheme (FCS) — In-situ upgradation — Not a conventional promotion, but dependent on merit, performance, and minimum residency. Rule 12(5) allows relaxation of minimum residency from five to four years for "exceptionally meritorious" officers with "Outstanding" gradings in all Annual Performance Appraisal Reports (APARs) during the residency period. India Law Library Docid # 2434603