(661) SMT. UMA DEVI AND OTHERS Vs. SRI. ANAND KUMAR AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-04-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 7 Rule 11(a) & (d) — Rejection of Plaint — Cause of Action — Barred by Law (Limitation) — Application for rejection of plaint in a suit for partition — Suit filed in 2023 claiming partition of ancestral property — Defendants contended prior oral partition/family settlement in 1968, evidenced by revenue record mutations, and subsequent registered sale deeds by family members (including plaintiffs' predecessors) starting 1978 — Averments in the plaint must be rea India Law Library Docid # 2424194
(662) VINAY AGGARWAL Vs. THE STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-04-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 482 — Investigation — Transfer to Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) — Exercise of Power by High Court — Power of Courts (High Courts) to transfer investigation to CBI is an extraordinary power, derived from constitutional provisions, not limited by the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 — Such power must be exercised sparingly, cautiously, and only in exceptional circumstances — Transfer should not be ordered routinely or merely because a par India Law Library Docid # 2424195
(663) THE MANAGEMENT OF WORTH TRUST Vs. THE SECRETARY, WORTH TRUST WORKERS UNION[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-04-2025 Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 — Section 1(3)(a), 2(17) read with Factories Act, 1948 — Section 2(m) — Applicability — Factories run by Charitable Trust — The Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 applies to every ‘factory’ as defined under Section 2(m) of the Factories Act, 1948 — Where a Trust, initially established for charitable purposes (rehabilitation of handicapped persons), diversifies its activities and operates distinct units engaged in commercial manufacturing (automobile parts, industrial machinery India Law Library Docid # 2424196
(664) ASHOK SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-04-2025 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Sections 118 and 139 — Presumption — Rebuttal — Burden of Proof — In a prosecution under Section 138, once the complainant establishes the foundational facts (issuance of cheque signed by accused, presentation, dishonour, statutory notice), presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 arise favouring the existence of a legally enforceable debt or liability — The burden then shifts to the accused to rebut these presumptions by raising a probable defence — A mere ora India Law Library Docid # 2424197
(665) MANISH Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-04-2025 Penal Code, 1860 — Section 415, 420 — Cheating — Breach of Contract vs. Criminal Offence — Dishonest Intention at Inception — To establish the offence of cheating under Section 415 IPC, punishable under Section 420 IPC, the prosecution must demonstrate the existence of a fraudulent or dishonest intention on the part of the accused at the very inception of the transaction — A mere subsequent failure to fulfil a promise, honour a commitment, or repay dues arising from a commercial transaction (lik India Law Library Docid # 2424198
(666) M/S FERRO CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION (INDIA) PVT. LTD. Vs. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-04-2025 Arbitration Act, 1940 — Interest — Pendente Lite Interest — Arbitrator's Power — Contractual Bar — Under the Arbitration Act, 1940, an arbitrator possesses the inherent power to award pendente lite interest (interest for the period from the date of entering reference until the date of the award) unless there is an express and specific contractual provision that explicitly excludes the arbitrator's jurisdiction to award such interest — The interpretation of contractual clauses under the 1940 Act India Law Library Docid # 2424199
(667) THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, OPERATION, TELANGANA STATE SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LTD. AND OTHERS Vs. CH. BHASKARA CHARY[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-04-2025 Service Law — Appointment — Consideration for Appointment — Parity Principle — Appointment of Juniors — Where persons lower in merit/seniority, as per a list prepared under a specific recruitment policy (based on factors like man-days served or date of engagement), have been appointed (including pursuant to court directions, even after the policy's formal withdrawal), a candidate admittedly higher on the same list is entitled to have their case considered for appointment on par with those junior India Law Library Docid # 2424200
(668) THE GENERAL MANAGER BUSINESS NETWORK PLANNING (RETAIL) BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED AND ANOTHER Vs. P. SOUNDARYA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-04-2025 Administrative Law — Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs) — Selection Process — Retail Outlet Dealership — Adherence to Guidelines and Application Terms — Selection for retail outlet dealerships by PSUs like BPCL must strictly adhere to the terms and conditions laid down in the advertisement and selection guidelines — Where guidelines require applicants to declare their category in the application form, supported by specific documentation and undertakings, the selection process must proceed based s India Law Library Docid # 2424201
(669) JOMON K.K. Vs. SHAJIMON P. AND OTHERS ETC[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-04-2025 Service Law — Recruitment — Essential Qualifications — Specific Licence Required vs. Different/Higher Licence Held — Effect of Statutory Rules — Where statutory rules (Kerala State Water Transport Subordinate Service (Operating Wing) Special Rules, 1975, R. 6) explicitly prescribe possession of a "current Lascar's licence" as the essential qualification for appointment to the post of Lascar, a candidate holding only a Syrang's licence (even if considered superior or requiring a Lascar's licence India Law Library Docid # 2424202
(670) CHIRAGSINH AJITSINH SOLANKI Vs. THE STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-04-2025 Bail — Regular Bail (Post-Chargesheet) — Grant by Supreme Court — Factors Considered — Accused charged with offences under IPC (including S. 376(2)(n)), IT Act, SC/ST Act, and Gujarat Police Act — Bail application rejected by Sessions Court and appeal under S. 14A SC/ST Act dismissed by High Court — Supreme Court granted regular bail considering factors including the period of incarceration (since May 2024), stage of trial (charges framed in Jan 2025), number of prosecution witnesses (23) indica India Law Library Docid # 2424651
(671) AZAM KHAN Vs. DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER FAIZABAD AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-04-2025 Auction Sale — Setting Aside — Refund to Purchaser — Statutory Compensation vs. Equity — U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Rules, 1952 — Rule 285L — Rule 285L, providing for refund of purchase money plus up to 5% compensation when an auction sale is set aside, may not provide adequate recompense to an auction purchaser, especially when the sale is set aside after a very long period (28 years) India Law Library Docid # 2424530
(672) PIL (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. VINOD KUMAR JAIN AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-04-2025 Contempt of Court — Jurisdiction — Scope Limited to Contemnors — The jurisdiction of a court under the Contempt of Courts Act is primarily focused on determining whether the alleged contemnors (in this case, Customs officers) have wilfully disobeyed the court’s orders India Law Library Docid # 2424538
(673) BIHAR RAJYA DAFADAR CHAUKIDAR PANCHAYAT (MAGADH DIVISION) Vs. STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-04-2025 Constitution of India — Articles 14 & 16 — Public Employment — Equality of Opportunity — Hereditary Appointments/Appointments based on Descent — Appointment to public service based on descent or hereditary claims, such as a rule permitting a retiring employee (Chaukidar) to nominate a dependent kin for appointment in his place, violates the fundamental rights to equality of opportunity guaranteed under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution — Such practices are archaic, constitutionally impermis India Law Library Docid # 2424251
(674) NAJMA AND OTHERS Vs. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 01-04-2025 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — S. 439 — Grant of Bail — Conditions — Jurisdiction — Restoration of Possession — A Court exercising jurisdiction under S. 439 CrPC, while granting bail, acts beyond its scope and power if it imposes a condition requiring the accused to handover possession of immovable property to the de facto complainant — Such a condition effectively amounts to passing a decree for restoration of possession, which is impermissible in bail proceedings — Legal position clarified India Law Library Docid # 2424204
(675) STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANOTHER Vs. MOUMITA SAHA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 01-04-2025 Service Law — Transfer — Writ of Mandamus — Judicial Interference — Power of High Court — State challenged Division Bench order directing transfer of Assistant Professor to a specific college near her parental home, setting aside Single Judge’s dismissal of writ petition — Division Bench issued mandamus primarily on grounds of equity and personal hardship (commute distance, ailing parents) — Supreme Court held that High Court erred in issuing such a mandamus directing transfer, as it amounted to India Law Library Docid # 2424603
(676) THE SECRETARY, ALL INDIA SHRI SHIVAJI MEMORIAL SOCIETY (AISSMS) AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 01-04-2025 Service Law — Pay Scale & Promotion — Teachers in Technical Institutions — AICTE Regulations — 6th Central Pay Commission — Entitlement to higher pay scale (Pay Band Rs. 37400-67000, AGP Rs. 9000) and re-designation as Associate Professor under AICTE Notification dated 05.03.2010, Clause (ix) — Dispute concerning Assistant Professors/Lecturers in private unaided technical institutions governed by AICTE norms, specifically whether possessing the India Law Library Docid # 2424105
(677) PIRAMAL CAPITAL AND HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS DEWAN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION LIMITED) Vs. 63 MOONS TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 01-04-2025 Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) — Sections 30(2), 31, 61(3) — Resolution Plan — Approval — Scope of Judicial Review — Commercial Wisdom of Committee of Creditors (CoC) — The scope of judicial review for the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT) under S. 31 is limited to examining if the resolution plan meets the requirements of S. 30(2) IBC — The scope of review for the Appellate Authority (NCLAT) under S. 61(3) is further restricted to the specific grounds mentioned therein — The commercial India Law Library Docid # 2424106
(678) KISHORE CHHABRA Vs. THE STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 01-04-2025 Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Release of Land from Acquisition – State Policy (Haryana) – Release of existing factory – Requirement of valid Change of Land Use (CLU) permission – Where the State policy provides for release of existing factories from acquisition, such release is contingent upon the factory/establishment possessing a valid CLU permission issued under the relevant development control legislation (Punjab Scheduled Roads & Controlled Areas Restrictions of Unregulated Development Act, India Law Library Docid # 2424107
(679) I. K. MERCHANTS PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 01-04-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 34 — Interest — Award of interest on decretal amount for payment of money — Valuation of Shares — Delayed Payment — Where the valuation of shares acquired by the State Government in 1973 was finally determined after five decades of litigation, the primary issue remaining was the appropriate rate of interest payable on the enhanced valuation to compensate the appellants for the delay. India Law Library Docid # 2424108
(680) AMRESH SHRIVASTAVA Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 01-04-2025 Service Law — Disciplinary Proceedings — Quasi-Judicial Functions — Scope of Inquiry — Disciplinary proceedings against a government officer for an order passed while exercising quasi-judicial functions (like a Tehsildar passing a land settlement order under the M.P. Land Revenue Code, 1959) are permissible only in specific, limited circumstances and not merely because the order is erroneous or incorrect — The government is not precluded from taking action only if the officer's conduct falls wit India Law Library Docid # 2424109