ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(361) 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

(362) SHREE P. A. PAREKH AND ANOTHER Vs. MAHARASHTRA POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD AND ANOTHER[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 02-04-2025
Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 — Section 21 — Procedure for Taking Effluent Samples — Mandatory Requirements — Section 21 of the Water Act lays down a mandatory procedure for taking effluent samples for analysis, which includes serving notice, dividing the sample into two parts in the presence of the occupier/agent, sealing and marking both parts, sending one part to the prescribed Board laboratory, and, importantly, sending the second part to a laboratory specified under
India Law Library Docid # 2424300

(363) RANGRAO MAHADU PETHKAR (DECEASED, THROUGH HEIR & LR) Vs. SADASHIV MARUTI VIBHUTE (SINCE DECEASED THROUGH HEIRS AND L.RS.) AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 02-04-2025
Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 — Sections 14, 43A & Notification thereunder — Termination of Tenancy for Sugarcane Cultivation — For agricultural lands leased out for sugarcane cultivation, governed by Section 43A of the Tenancy Act, the termination of tenancy due to default in payment of rent requires compliance with the procedure specified in the Notification issued under Section 43A(3), read with Section 14 — This involves the landlord giving the tenant three months’ wri
India Law Library Docid # 2424276

(364) JUNED @ JISHAN Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT (NAGPUR BENCH)] 02-04-2025
Penal Code, 1860 — Section 376 — Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 114, Illustration (b) — Appreciation of Evidence — Testimony of Rape Victim — The testimony of a victim of sexual assault is accorded significant weight, comparable to that of an injured witness — Corroboration is not an indispensable requirement for conviction if her evidence inspires confidence and is found reliable — The court must evaluate her testimony with sensitivity, mindful that she is a victim, not an accomplice — Minor cont
India Law Library Docid # 2424310

(365) SHRI. MASAIDEVI VIVIDH KARYAKARI SAHAKARI SEVA SANSTHA MARYADIT WAREWADI Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-04-2025
Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 — Sections 4 & 6 — Economic Viability — Pre-requisite for Registration — A conjoint reading of the proviso to Section 4 and Section 6(1) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, makes it clear that economic viability is a fundamental pre-requisite and basic condition for the grant of registration to a new Primary Agricultural Credit Co-operative Society (PACCS) — No society shall be registered if it is likely to be
India Law Library Docid # 2424337

(366) 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(d) — Rejection of Plaint — Barred by Limitation — A plaint can and should be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11(d) CPC if, upon a meaningful reading of the plaint itself, it is evident that the suit is hopelessly barred by limitation While limitation is often a mixed question of law and fact, where the plaint’s averments, read with documents relied upon and judicially noticeable facts (like revenue records indicating prior partition and registered sale d
India Law Library Docid # 2424338

(367) 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

(368) 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

(369) GEORGE POTHAN AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 02-04-2025
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — Appeals — Maintainability — State has locus standi to file appeal against enhancement of compensation even if acquisition is for the benefit of a statutory body (requisitioning authority), as the primary liability to pay compensation rests with the State invoking eminent domain.

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — Market Value Determination — Role of LAO’s Assessment — If the Land Acquisition Officer considers and discards certain sale instances (claimant’s own purchase d
India Law Library Docid # 2424594

(370) CANARA BANK BRANCH OFFICE Vs. SREEKUMARI K AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 02-04-2025
Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 18 — Effect of Acknowledgment in Writing — A fresh period of limitation commences from the date an acknowledgment of liability is signed by the party against whom a right is claimed, provided it is made before the expiration of the prescribed period — Where successive acknowledgments were executed before the expiry of the initial and extended limitation periods respectively, the suit filed based on the last acknowledgment is within time.
India Law Library Docid # 2424636

(371) 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

(372) SMT. SAVITRI BAI AND OTHERS Vs. INDERKUMAR GABEL AND ANOTHER[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 02-04-2025
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Maxim ‘actio personalis moritur cum persona’ — Survival of Claim for Personal Injuries upon Claimant’s Death — Loss to Estate — A claim petition filed under Section 166 of the MV Act for personal injuries sustained in a motor accident abates upon the death of the injured claimant (if the death is unrelated to the accident injuries), in accordance with the maxim ‘actio personalis moritur cum persona’ — However, the claim survives to the extent of pecuniary
India Law Library Docid # 2424721

(373) B.SRIKANTH AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND OTHERS[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 02-04-2025
Constitution of India — Article 226 — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 482 — Quashing of FIR/Charge Sheet (S. 498A IPC) — Scope of Consideration — Entirety of Circumstances — In proceedings seeking quashing of criminal complaints, particularly those arising from matrimonial disputes, the High Court is not confined merely to the averments in the complaint/FIR — It can and should consider the entirety of the circumstances and background, including subsequent events like divorce proceedings,
India Law Library Docid # 2424836

(374) ANDEM SUDHAKAR REDDY AND ANOTHER Vs. THE STATE OF TELANGANA[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 02-04-2025
Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971 — Section 4(1) — Limitation Act, 1963 — Article 136 — Mutation Based on Court Decree — Time Limits — A person acquiring rights through a court decree must intimate the acquisition to the Tahsildar under Section 4(1) of the ROR Act, 1971, within the prescribed period (originally 90 days, later amended) — Furthermore, seeking implementation or mutation based on a decree, particularly a partition decree, is subject to the limitation period f
India Law Library Docid # 2424840

(375) RACHERLA PADMAVATHAMMA Vs. MARINENI NAGALAKSHMI AND OTHERS[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 02-04-2025
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 227 — Supervisory Jurisdiction — Order Dismissing Order 7 R 11 Application — Invocation of High Court’s supervisory power under Article 227 to examine the legality and correctness of a trial court order dismissing an application filed under Order VII Rule 11 CPC seeking rejection of a plaint.
India Law Library Docid # 2424899

(376) POTHURAJU SUBBA RAO Vs. VELLANKI VENKATADRI AND OTHERS[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 02-04-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order VI Rule 17, Proviso — Amendment of Pleadings Post-Trial Commencement — Due Diligence— The proviso to Order VI Rule 17 significantly restricts the court’s power to allow amendment of pleadings after the trial has commenced Such an amendment shall not be allowed unless the court concludes that the party seeking amendment could not have raised the matter earlier despite exercising due diligence — This principle applies even at the stage of first or second appeal.
India Law Library Docid # 2424903

(377) SACHDEVA LAND AND FINANCE PVT LTD Vs. MS CHAHAT JAIN[DELHI HIGH COURT] 02-04-2025
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 141(1) — Vicarious Liability of Directors — Time of Offence and Resignation — For fastening vicarious liability upon a director under Section 141(1) of the NI Act, it is essential that the person was (i) in charge of, and (ii) responsible for the conduct of the company’s business at the time the offence under Section 138 was committed — A director who has duly resigned from the company prior to the commission of the offence cannot ordinarily be held lia
India Law Library Docid # 2424953

(378) M/S CNR EXPORTS Vs. MOHD. QADEER PROP. OF M/S MEHTAB EXPORT HOUSE[DELHI HIGH COURT] 02-04-2025
Evidence Act, 1872 — Appreciation of Evidence — Suit for Recovery — Sale of Goods — In a suit for recovery based on goods sold and delivered, where the plaintiff establishes supply through invoices, ledger accounts, and communication seeking payment, and the defendant admits receipt but claims return due to defects, the onus is on the defendant to prove the return and the alleged defects with cogent evidence.
India Law Library Docid # 2424954

(379) MOIRANGTHEM ANAND SINGH Vs. NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY (NIA)[DELHI HIGH COURT] 02-04-2025
Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 — Section 43D(5) — Bail — Test for Rejection — Prima Facie Truth — The primary test for denying bail under Section 43D(5) of UAPA is whether the Court, on a perusal of the case diary and the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C., is of the opinion that there are reasonable grounds for believing the accusations against the accused are prima facie true — This requires assessing the totality of material presented by the investigation agency based on broad proba
India Law Library Docid # 2424955

(380) M/S SIDDHARTHA CONSTRUCTION CO. Vs. INDIA TOURISM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND ANOTHER[DELHI HIGH COURT] 02-04-2025
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 12(5) & Seventh Schedule — Ineligibility from Unilateral Appointment — A person whose relationship with the parties or subject matter falls under the Seventh Schedule is ineligible to be appointed as an arbitrator — Furthermore, a person who is themselves ineligible to act as an arbitrator is also ineligible to appoint a sole arbitrator — Any such unilateral appointment by an ineligible person renders the appointment void ab initio.
India Law Library Docid # 2424956