ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(801) HANS RAJ Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 302, 304II and 34 —The Supreme Court heard a criminal appeal where the appellant was initially convicted under Section 302 for an incident that occurred in 1986 — The High Court later altered the conviction to Section 304(II) of the IPC and sentenced the appellant to five years imprisonment — Considering the appellant's age (approximately 84 years old) and the passage of time since the incident, the Supreme Court modified the High Court's judgment — While uphold
India Law Library Docid # 2421570

(802) SUNAINA SONKAR Vs. LALIT [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025
Matrimonial Law — Transfer of Case — Supreme Court has allowed a transfer petition filed by the petitioner-wife, seeking the transfer of a case titled "Lalit vs. Sunaina Sonkar" from the Family Court in Delhi to the Family Court in Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh — The court considered the facts and circumstances of the case and determined that the matter should be transferred — Consequently, the case has been transferred to the Family Court in Prayagraj, and the court is instructed to issue fresh noti
India Law Library Docid # 2421575

(803) C. GEETHA Vs. CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS-CUM SECRETARY INCHARGE AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025
Service Law — Selection Process — Post of Archaeological Officer — The appellant, ranked 7th for an Archeological Officer post, was not called for certificate verification despite uploading required documents — The High Court initially ruled in her favor but was overturned on appeal — The Supreme Court, noting her high qualifications and three available posts, directed the State to appoint her, setting aside previous judgments — The court left legal questions open for future cases and instructed
India Law Library Docid # 2421582

(804) PEHAL CHOUDHARY Vs. NITYA PRAKASH [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025
Matrimonial Law — Transfer Petition — wife filed a transfer petition to move a case initiated by her husband from a court in Kharar, Punjab, to a court in Jaipur, Rajasthan — The husband was served notice but did not appear — The issue before the Supreme Court of India was whether to grant the wife's request to transfer the case from the Family Court in Kharar, Punjab to the Family Court in Jaipur, Rajasthan — The wife argued that there was sufficient cause to warrant the transfer of the case –
India Law Library Docid # 2421585

(805) THIMAKKA SINCE DECEASED BY LRS Vs. VENKATARAMANAPPA SINCE DECEASED BY LRS AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025
Dispute over a contract for the sale of property — The plaintiffs had sued for specific performance based on an agreement of sale and obtained an ex-parte decree — The defendants' attempt to set aside the ex-parte decree was delayed and ultimately denied — The key legal issue concerns whether the High Court was correct in affirming the Executing Court's order, given that there were pending objections by the defendants, including allegations of forgery and non-payment of the balance of the sale a
India Law Library Docid # 2421534

(806) ANJU DAGAR Vs. VIKAS CHAUDHARY[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025
Matrimonial Law — Transfer Petition — Supreme Court addressed two transfer petitions, one civil and one criminal, related to a marital dispute — The court allowed the wife's petition to transfer the case for dissolution of marriage from the Family Court in Bijnor, Uttar Pradesh, to the competent court in Panchkula, Haryana — This decision was influenced by the distance between the courts, the fact that the wife works as a teacher in Panchkula where her children also attend school, and that her m
India Law Library Docid # 2421535

(807) SHAKUNTALA BHAUSAHEB KUTE AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 420, 408, 409, 465, 467, 468, 471, 477-A read with 34 — Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 1999 — Section 3 — Supreme Court granted anticipatory bail to the appellants — The appellants were family members of the main accused, who was already incarcerated, and had been cooperating with the investigation — The court decided to set aside the High Court's order and granted anticipatory bail based on these circumstance
India Law Library Docid # 2421537

(808) BASYABOINA TANISH AND ANOTHER Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025
Education Law — The appellant was denied promotion to Class X and sought to retake Class IX with accommodations — The Telangana High Court ordered appellant to retake Class IX with CBSE-provided exemptions — The Supreme Court upheld this, directing the CBSE to facilitate appellant’s retake with necessary accommodations, and dismissed the appeal — The school must inform appellant of fees and formalities for the retake.
India Law Library Docid # 2421667

(809) DALJIT SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 174A — An acquittal in the primary offense automatically leads to the closure of all subsequent proceedings under Section 174A IPC, regardless of whether a proclamation was issued post-acquittal — This is based on the principle that an acquittal signifies the legal determination of the accused's innocence in the main charge, thereby rendering any further prosecution under a related but distinct offense, such as failure to appear, as moot and unjustified — The Cou
India Law Library Docid # 2421320

(810) DALIP RAM Vs. THE STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025
Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 — Section 2(g)(ii-a) — Dispute over land ownership — The core issue is whether lands initially classified as Shamlat deh (village common land) should be excluded under Section 2(g)(ii-a) of the 1961 Act due to allotment, transfer, or lease before July 9, 1985 — Petitioners, often in possession, claim ownership
India Law Library Docid # 2421321

(811) MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI Vs. GAGAN NARANG AND OTHERS ETC.[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025
Electricity Act, 2003 — Sections 63 and 86(1)(b) — Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL) erred in restricting the applicability of Section 63 of the Electricity Act, 2003, to only distribution licensees or generating companies — The Supreme Court held that a plain reading of Section 63 does not impose such a restriction — The court also stated that Section 63 should
India Law Library Docid # 2421317

(812) BERNARD FRANCIS JOSEPH VAZ AND OTHERS Vs. GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025
Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 — Sections 28 and 30 — Land Acquisition — Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) does not have the power to shift the date for determining the market value of land from the date of the preliminary notification to a later date — This power is reserved for the High Courts and the Supreme Court, which can exercise it only in exceptional circumstances under Article 226 and Articles 32/142 of the Constitution, respectively.
India Law Library Docid # 2421318

(813) M/S NARESH POTTERIES Vs. M/S AARTI INDUSTRIES AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 — Complainant in Cases Involving Companies — De Jure vs. De Facto Complainant — The Court clarified that when a company is the payee, it is the de jure complainant — The de facto complainant, who represents the company, can be an employee authorized by a resolution or a power of attorney.
India Law Library Docid # 2421319

(814) LEELA AND OTHERS Vs. MURUGANANTHAM AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025
Succession Act, 1925 — Section 63 — Validity of Will — The plaintiffs, children from the first wife of ‘B’, sought partition and allotment of 5/7th share of properties — The defendants, children from the second wife, claimed based on an unregistered Will dated 06.04.1990 — Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to a share in the properties, and whether the Will dated 06.04.1990 is valid — Plaintiffs argued the second wife and her children were illegitimate and not entitled to the properties — Defen
India Law Library Docid # 2421322

(815) GOPAL KRISHAN AND OTHERS Vs. DAULAT RAM AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025
Succession Act, 1925 — Section 63(c) — Testator ‘S’ executed a Will favoring appellant; the Will was attested by witnesses, but its validity was questioned by lower courts — Whether the Will complies with Section 63(c) of the Succession Act, 1925, particularly regarding the “direction of the testator” in attestation — Appellants argued that the witness saw ‘S’ sign the Will; respondents contended that the attestation did not meet the "direction of the testator" requirement — The Supreme Court in
India Law Library Docid # 2421323

(816) THE STATE, CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Vs. A. SATISH KUMAR AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 7 — Two Central Government employees were accused under Section 7 of the PC Act, with FIRs registered in Kurnool and Ananthapur, Andhra Pradesh, but investigated and charged by CBI in Hyderabad, Telangana, after the 2014 state bifurcation — The High Court of Telangana later transferred the cases to Kurnool — The primary concerns were the CBI's jurisdiction post-bifurcation and the necessity of state consent for investigations — The CBI argued that the
India Law Library Docid # 2421324

(817) B. N. JOHN Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 195(1)(a) — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 186 — Lack of Written Complaint — The court emphasized that for an offence under Section 186, a written complaint by a public servant is mandatory as per section 195(1)(a) of the CrPC — In this case, no such complaint was filed before the Judicial Magistrate, making the cognizance of the offence illegal
India Law Library Docid # 2421325

(818) NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. SONIGRA JUHI UTTAMCHAND [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025
Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 — Section 168 — Grant of ‘just compensation’ — While assessing compensation for death under the Motor Vehicles Act, a deduction must be made for personal and living expenses, with standard percentages based on the number of dependents, and income for self-employed individuals should be objectively assessed considering future prospects — The Court maintained the enhanced compensation awarded by the High Court, finding it just and adequate when all relevant factors, includ
India Law Library Docid # 2421326

(819) DINESH KUMAR MATHUR Vs. STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025
Madhya Pradesh Griha Nirman Mandal Adhiniyam, 1972 — Section 83 — Protection of Public Servants — The court clarifies that actions taken by a public servant in the course of their official duties, if done in good faith, are protected under Section 83 — This protection is similar to that provided by Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.), which requires prior sanction for the prosecution of a public servant for acts committed in the discharge of their official duty
India Law Library Docid # 2421338

(820) ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. RAJANI SAHOO AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025
Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Negligence and Liability — The Supreme Court upheld the findings of the Tribunal and the High Court that the accident was caused by the rash and negligent driving of the truck insured by ICICI Lombard — The Court emphasized that the standard of proof in motor accident cases is based on the preponderance of probabilities, not beyond a reasonable doubt
India Law Library Docid # 2421327