(521) DAYAL DAS JOGESH DAS JV Vs. STATE OF ASSAM AND OTHERS[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 19-08-2026 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 — Tender Process — Financial Pre-qualification — Interpretation of Clause 4.3(h) — Non-submission of Profit and Loss Account — Exemption under Income Tax Act, 1961 — The petitioner challenged the technical responsiveness of respondent No. 4 for failing to submit profit and loss statements for two financial years. The High Court held that the phrase "such as" in Clause 4.3(h) is illustrative, not mandatory. Since respondent No. 4's annual turnover for tho India Law Library Docid # 2450540
(522) FAIZUR RAHMAN LASKAR Vs. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND OTHERS[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 19-08-2026 National Highways Act, 1956 — Section 3H(4) — Dispute as to entitlement and apportionment of compensation — Scope and jurisdiction of Reference Court — Held, Section 3H(4) confers jurisdiction on the Principal Civil Court to incidentally determine underlying questions of title in order to decide who is lawfully entitled to receive compensation or its apportionment — The expression "person to whom the amount is payable" includes adjudication of rival title claims — Scheme of Section 3H avoids for India Law Library Docid # 2450543
(523) PAWAN KEJRIWAL @ PAWAN KR. KEJRIWAL AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ANOTHER[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 19-08-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 323 and 506 — Quashing of order taking cognizance — Allegations in complaint — Complainant alleged petitioners threatened him to adduce false evidence in a title suit and issued a legal notice demanding compensation — Magistrate took cognizance under Sections 323 and 506 IPC — Petitioners sought quashing of cognizance order on ground that allegations even if accepted in entirety do not disclose ingredients of India Law Library Docid # 2449537
(524) PRADEEP LAXMIDAS THAKKER Vs. YOGESH JAGJIVANDAS SUCHAK AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 19-08-2026 Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 — Section 15(3) — Eviction on ground of default — Mandatory statutory deposit — Tenant filed application to deposit arrears within 90 days of summons but failed to deposit within the time granted by court — Belated second application filed without satisfactory explanation — Held, merely filing an application within 90 days does not protect tenant from eviction if statutory conditions under Section 15(3) are not strictly complied with — Tenant was in default of India Law Library Docid # 2450181
(525) ANUP VIKAL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 19-08-2026 Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 — Section 18 read with Section 13(2) — Maintainability of Appeal — Threshold rejection by Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) — ICC informed complainant that allegations lacked a sexual element and refused inquiry — Issue whether such communication constitutes an appealable "recommendation" — Held, any decision by ICC ruling that a complaint lacks sexual element, even without formal inquiry under Section 11 India Law Library Docid # 2450182
(526) DR. ALKA KRISHNARAO CHOUGALE Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 19-08-2026 Service Law — Age of Superannuation — Appointment order stipulated retirement age as 62 years based on Government Resolution dated 5 March 2011 — Retrospective reduction of retirement age to 60 years relying on subsequent Government Resolution dated 12 July 2016 — Held, appointment condition fixing superannuation age created a vested right — Administrative authority cannot unilaterally reduce retirement age or alter service conditions retrospectively without prior notice — Premature retirement a India Law Library Docid # 2450183
(527) HAZEL MERCANTILE LIMITED AND OTHERS Vs. INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY BOARD OF INDIA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 19-08-2026 Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — Sections 5(13)(e), 196(1)(c), 196(1)(t) and 240(2)(d) — IBBI (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016 — Regulations 31(ba) and 31A — Power of IBBI to levy regulatory fee — Validity of Regulation 31A — IBBI regulatory mandate is not restricted merely to regulating insolvency professionals, agencies, and information utilities — IBBI performs executive, quasi-judicial, and quasi-legislative functions governing the entire Corporat India Law Library Docid # 2450184
(528) BIJU Vs. STATE OF KERALA[KERALA HIGH COURT] 19-08-2026 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 324 and 326 — Plea of Alibi — Standard of proof — Accused claimed he was admitted to hospital prior to the occurrence, relying on a discharge slip and testimony of an auto driver — Held, when a plea of alibi is raised as a defence, the accused must establish it with extreme certainty, excluding any hypothesis of presence at the place of occurrence — Mere probability does not suffice — Evidence showed the accused was taken to hospital only after the occurrence — India Law Library Docid # 2450313
(529) XXXXX Vs. XXXXX AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 19-08-2026 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 528 — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Quashing of criminal proceedings — Scope of inherent jurisdiction — Inherent power is extraordinary in nature and must be exercised sparingly, cautiously, and only to prevent abuse of process or secure ends of justice — Quashing is warranted if allegations in FIS or complaint taken at face value disclose no offence — Court while exercising inherent jurisdiction cannot appreciate evidence India Law Library Docid # 2450344
(530) D.MANOHARAN AND ANOTHER Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 19-08-2026 Building and Other Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1996 — Section 2(1)(d) — Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Cess Act, 1996 — Section 3 — Applicability of Cess Act to water supply projects — Contracts involving laying of pipelines, supply, erection, testing, and commissioning of water distribution systems — Definition of "building or other construction work" under Section 2(1)(d) specifically encompasses "water works" and "pipelines" India Law Library Docid # 2450350
(531) PRINCY N.V. Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 19-08-2026 Divorce Act, 1869 — Section 3(3) — Interpretation of Statutes — Rule against surplusage — Definition of "District Court" — Appellant-wife left matrimonial home due to domestic violence and resided at Wayanad, while marriage was solemnized and parties last resided together at Kasaragod — Family Court rejected divorce petition for lack of territorial jurisdiction — Held, interpreting the second limb of Section 3(3) ("husband and wife reside") as identical to the third limb ("last resided together" India Law Library Docid # 2450355
(532) O.T. ALEXANDER Vs. GENERAL SECRETARY, INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX LABOUR UNION (INTUC) AND ANOTHER[KERALA HIGH COURT] 19-08-2026 Constitution of India, 1950 — Articles 226 and 227 — Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 — Section 2(s) — Maintainability of Writ Petition — Challenge to Preliminary Order — Preliminary issue on whether employee is a 'workman' — Management filed writ petition challenging preliminary order of Labour Court holding employee as a 'workman' — Held, writ petition challenging preliminary or interlocutory orders of Labour Court is not maintainable — High Court under Article 226 should not entertain challenges India Law Library Docid # 2450365
(533) O.T. ALEXANDER Vs. GENERAL SECRETARY, INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX LABOUR UNION (INTUC) AND ANOTHER[KERALA HIGH COURT] 19-08-2026 Constitution of India, 1950 — Articles 226 and 227 — Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 — Section 2(s) — Writ Petition challenging Preliminary Order — Maintainability — Labour Court rejected Management's preliminary application challenging maintainability of reference on the ground that employee was not a "workman" — Management filed writ petition against the preliminary order — Held, a Writ Petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution is not maintainable against a preliminary order passed by t India Law Library Docid # 2450367
(534) M.P. STATE MINING CORPORATION LTD. Vs. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 19-08-2026 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 147 — Motor Insurance — Package Policy — Extent of Insurer's Liability — Occupants of Private Vehicle — Policy termed as Comprehensive/Package Policy does not automatically infer unlimited liability towards occupants — Extent of liability depends strictly on terms of policy and premium paid — Where insured paid specific additional premium limiting passenger coverage to Rs. 1,00,000 per person, insurer cannot be held liable to pay entire compensation in absence India Law Library Docid # 2450508
(535) SHAILENDRA KUMAR MISHRA AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 19-08-2026 Service Law — Recruitment — Cancellation of Selection Process — Unsubstantiated Complaints — University cancelled the entire selection process for Class-III and Class-IV posts citing complaints and communications from investigative agencies — Held, mere receipt of complaints or information queries from agencies like EOW or Lokayukta without specific findings of large-scale malpractice, manipulation, or systemic irregularities cannot justify en masse cancellation of a completed selection process. India Law Library Docid # 2450517
(536) SHAILENDRA KUMAR MISHRA AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 19-08-2026 Service Law — Cancellation of recruitment process — University cancelled entire recruitment process for Class-III and Class-IV posts after declaration of results, citing complaints and pending enquiries before EOW and Lokayukta — Scrutiny committee report recorded no specific findings of mass irregularities or systemic failure — Held, cancellation of a complete selection process cannot be sustained merely on vague allegations, unsubstantiated complaints, or arbitrary decisions — Power to cancel India Law Library Docid # 2450518
(537) NAMSANI RAJU Vs. THE STATE OF TELANGANA[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 19-08-2026 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 482 — Abetment of suicide — Anticipatory bail — Alleged non-return of money and vehicle — Deceased committed suicide by consuming pesticide due to financial distress — Held, mere failure to return money or property, without any specific overt or positive act demonstrating instigation, aiding, or compelling the deceased to commit suicide, does not prima facie constitute abetment — Material on record failed to disclose specific act of instigation India Law Library Docid # 2450126
(538) CHINNAMMAL AND OTHERS Vs. S. ESWARI AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT (MADURAI BENCH)] 19-08-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 20 Rule 4(2) and Order 8 Rule 10 — Ex parte decree — Requirements of a valid judgment — Suit for specific performance decreed ex parte without reasons — Held, even where the defendant is set ex parte or fails to file a written statement, the Court must apply its mind to the pleadings, assess the necessity and sufficiency of evidence, and determine the points arising for consideration — An ex parte judgment must satisfy Order 20 Rule 4(2) of CPC and state India Law Library Docid # 2451137
(539) MUSTAFA Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ANOTHER[MADRAS HIGH COURT (MADURAI BENCH)] 19-08-2026 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 406 and 420 — Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 528 — Simultaneous invocation of criminal breach of trust and cheating at FIR stage — Quashing of FIR — Petitioner contended that Sections 406 and 420 IPC are mutually destructive and cannot co-exist — Held, whether the accused harboured an intention to cheat at inception can be determined only upon conclusion of investigation — Invocation of both provisions at threshold in the FIR does not furnish India Law Library Docid # 2451141
(540) A.ZAKIR HUSSAIN Vs. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TAMIL NADU STATE WAKF BOARD AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT (MADURAI BENCH)] 19-08-2026 Waqf Act, 1995 — Sections 64(4) and 83 — Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 — Removal and appointment of Muthavalli — Efficacious alternate remedy — Maintainability of writ petition — Appellant challenged a consequential order following his removal as Muthavalli and the appointment of third respondent — Learned Single Judge dismissed writ petition directing petitioner to approach competent forum — Held, the Waqf Tribunal under Section 83 is the proper statutory forum to decide any dispute India Law Library Docid # 2451164