ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(381) PRAKASH LAL KHERA Vs. STATE AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 02-04-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 482 — Quashing of Summoning Order — Scope — The High Court, exercising powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., can quash a summoning order if the allegations in the complaint and the pre-summoning evidence, taken at face value, do not disclose the essential ingredients of the offence alleged against the accused, or where initiating proceedings would amount to an abuse of process.
India Law Library Docid # 2424957

(382) M/S SEASPRAY SHIPPING CO LTD. Vs. STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD.[DELHI HIGH COURT] 02-04-2025
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Sections 34 & 37 — Scope of Interference — International Commercial Arbitration Award — Public Policy — Judicial review of an award in an international commercial arbitration under Sections 34 and 37 is extremely limited — Interference is permissible only on grounds specified in Section 34(2), primarily contravention of the “fundamental policy of Indian law” (narrowly construed post-2015 amendment) or conflict with basic notions of morality or justice — T
India Law Library Docid # 2424958

(383) MOHD ANSAR SIDDIQUI Vs. VARUN SACHDEVA[DELHI HIGH COURT] 02-04-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order XII Rule 6 — Judgment on Admissions — Scope — Judgment on admissions under Order XII Rule 6 CPC can be passed not only on clear and unequivocal admissions but also where the defence raised is ex facie specious, untenable, moonshine, or illusory — The court is justified in considering the pleadings (written statement) to ascertain if any triable issue or legally tenable defence arises, failing which a decree can be passed without relegating the matter to
India Law Library Docid # 2424959

(384) UDAYA KUMAR KAMATH Vs. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 02-04-2025
Succession Act, 1925 — Section 63 & Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 68 — Proof of Due Execution of Will — To obtain probate, the propounder must prove the due and valid execution of the Will in accordance with Section 63 of the Succession Act, 1925 — This requires proving not only the testator’s signature/mark but also proper attestation by at least two witnesses — As mandated by Section 68 of the Evidence Act, 1872, at least one attesting witness (if alive, capable, and subject to court process) m
India Law Library Docid # 2424960

(385) RAMA DEVI Vs. UNION OF INDIA[DELHI HIGH COURT] 02-04-2025
Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 — Sections 13 & 15 [Railways Act, 1989 — Sections 123(c), 124A] — Untoward Incident — Bona Fide Passenger — The initial burden lies upon the claimant seeking compensation under Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989, to establish that the deceased/injured was a bona fide passenger travelling on the train in question at the time of the alleged untoward incident.
India Law Library Docid # 2424961

(386) MUKESH KUMAR Vs. NATIONAL POWER TRAINING INSTITUTE AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 02-04-2025
Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 — Sections 75 & 76 — Powers and Functions of Chief Commissioner (CCPD) — Binding Nature of Recommendations — Unlike the repealed Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995, Section 76 of the 2016 Act mandates that the concerned authority shall take necessary action upon a recommendation made by the CCPD under Section 75(1)(b) regarding deprivation of rights or safeguards for Persons with Disabilities (PwDs) — However, this mandate is subject to the proviso
India Law Library Docid # 2424962

(387) SHAIK MADAR MIAH Vs. THE STATE OF AP.[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 02-04-2025
Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 32(1) — Dying Declaration — Multiple Declarations — Reliability and Consistency — Where the prosecution case hinges solely on multiple dying declarations made by the deceased, but there exist material contradictions and inconsistencies between these declarations (regarding the immediate motive, the sequence of events, and who brought the deceased to the hospital), and there is a complete absence of any other independent or corroborative evidence pointing towards the
India Law Library Docid # 2424963

(388) SUMAN SHARMA Vs. MAHENDER SHARMA[DELHI HIGH COURT] 02-04-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 340 — Inquiry into Perjury — Expediency in Interest of Justice — For a court to initiate proceedings under Section 340 Cr.P.C. (leading to a complaint for perjury under S. 195), it must form a considered opinion that it is expedient in the interests of justice to conduct an inquiry — Prosecution for perjury is not mandatory for every incorrect or false statement made in court proceedings.
India Law Library Docid # 2425001

(389) RAJ SINGH Vs. M/S M.R. TRADING CO.[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 02-04-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 14 Rule 2 — Preliminary Issue — Scope of — Mixed Questions of Law and Fact — The jurisdiction conferred upon a Court under Order 14 Rule 2(2) CPC to try an issue as a preliminary issue is limited to pure questions of law relating to (a) the jurisdiction of the Court, or (b) a bar to the suit created by any law for the time being in force — The Code confers no jurisdiction upon the Court to try a suit on mixed issues of law and fact as a preliminary issue
India Law Library Docid # 2425033

(390) HANS RAJ Vs. SURJEETO DEVI AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 02-04-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 41 Rule 27 — Additional Evidence in Second Appeal — Rejection Criteria — Due Diligence & Essentiality — An application for producing additional evidence at the second appeal stage under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC is liable to be dismissed where the applicant fails to establish that despite due diligence, the evidence, which was within their knowledge, could not be produced before the Trial Court or the First Appellate Court — The applicant must provide a plausible ex
India Law Library Docid # 2425034

(391) PUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LTD. AND OTHERS Vs. RAM SINGH, EX. ASSISTANT LINEMAN[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 02-04-2025
Service Law — Disciplinary Proceedings — Double Jeopardy — Constitution of India, Art. 20(2) — Subsequent Dismissal based on Criminal Conviction — Imposition of a second, harsher penalty (dismissal from service) based solely on a subsequent criminal conviction, arising from the same incident/conduct for which a final, lesser penalty (stoppage of increments) has already been imposed and accepted following a departmental enquiry, amounts to subjecting the employee to double jeopardy for the same c
India Law Library Docid # 2425035

(392) AMARJIT KAUR Vs. HARINDER SINGH AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 02-04-2025
Evidence Act, 1872 — Sections 35, 74, 76, 77, 82 — Proof of Parentage — Public Documents — Admissibility and Evidentiary Value — Documents such as an application for foreign citizenship made by a parent for a minor child explicitly stating parentage (Ex.P1), marriage registration certificates detailing parental lineage (Ex.P2, P7), and passport entries (Ex.P5, P6), when produced in original or as properly admissible copies, are relevant under Section 35 and possess significant evidentiary value
India Law Library Docid # 2425036

(393) SHILA DEVI ALIAS SHEELA DEVI Vs. RAM DATT[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 02-04-2025
Succession Act, 1925 — Section 63 — Evidence Act, 1872 — Sections 68, 101 — Proof of Will — Suspicious Circumstances — Onus Probandi — The propounder of a Will bears the onus not only of proving its due execution according to law but also of removing any legitimate suspicion surrounding its execution — Factors such as the execution of the Will shortly before the testator’s death, the presence and active participation of the beneficiary during the execution and registration process, the failure o
India Law Library Docid # 2425037

(394) DILBAGH SINGH Vs. MANAGING COMMITTEE, GURU NANAK NATIONAL COLLEGE, NAKODAR AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 02-04-2025
Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 115 — Estoppel — Acceptance of Consolidated Salary — Ad-hoc/Temporary Employment — An employee appointed on a temporary/ad-hoc basis on a specified consolidated salary, who accepts such salary throughout the tenure of employment without protest or objection, may be estopped from later claiming salary arrears based on parity with regular employees or on the basis of University/Government rules, especially when the terms of appointment letters clearly stipulate payment
India Law Library Docid # 2425088

(395) PRITHI AND OTHERS Vs. SATYA NARAIN[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 02-04-2025
Evidence Act, 1872 — Sections 101-103 — Suit for Permanent Injunction — Burden of Proof — Proof of Possession — In a suit for permanent injunction based on possession, the plaintiff must succeed on the strength of their own case and cannot rely on the weaknesses of the defendant’s case — The burden lies squarely on the plaintiff to establish their settled possession over the suit property at the time of filing the suit through cogent and reliable evidence — Contradictory stands taken by the plai
India Law Library Docid # 2425089

(396) SOM NATH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 02-04-2025
Criminal Law — Circumstantial Evidence — Standard of Proof — Panchsheel Principles — In a case resting solely on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution bears the heavy burden of establishing a chain of evidence so complete that it is inconsistent with the innocence of the accused and points unerringly towards their guilt — Each circumstance must be fully established (“must be” or “should be,” not merely “may be”) — The established facts must exclude every possible hypothesis except the guilt o
India Law Library Docid # 2425090

(397) UMA DEY AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 02-04-2025
Criminal Law — Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt — Duty of Prosecution — Circumstantial Evidence — The fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence requires the prosecution to prove the charges against the accused beyond all reasonable doubt — In cases based on circumstantial evidence, the chain of circumstances must be complete and unerringly point towards the guilt of the accused, excluding any hypothesis consistent with their innocence — Poor investigation does not absolve the prosecution of t
India Law Library Docid # 2425208

(398) 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

(399) 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

(400) 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