ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(841) EMCIPI ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD. Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 18-03-2025
Administrative Law — Resolution of Dispute — Consent Order — Expired Licence and Completion Certificate — A complex dispute involving non—issuance of completion certificates for commercial towers due to an expired licence, outstanding dues, and issues with a collaborator, can be resolved through a consent arrangement facilitated by the Court, balancing the interests of the licensee, the Authority, and occupants (Para 5, 8, 11, 12 of 21.01.2025 order; Para 12 of final order)
India Law Library Docid # 2424529

(842) LIN-O-MATIC GRAPHIC INDUSTRIES Vs. TRULINES TECHNOLOGIES AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 18-03-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 482 — Interference with Investigation — Expert Opinion — The High Court’s power under Section 482 CrPC should not ordinarily be used to direct the Investigating Officer (IO) on the specific course of investigation, such as mandating the procurement of a second expert opinion when
India Law Library Docid # 2424534

(843) RAMA SINGH Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 18-03-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 319 — Consideration of Evidence/Material — Post—Application Developments — When deciding an application under Section 319 CrPC, the trial court must consider all lawfully collected ‘material’ or ‘evidence’ available on record at the time of forming its opinion, including material such as a supplementary investigation report under S.
India Law Library Docid # 2424542

(844) KHUSHWINDER SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 18-03-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Ss. 200, 202 & 482 — Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — Ss. 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) & 14A — Penal Code, 1860 — S. 506 — Quashing of proceedings — Abuse of process of law — Complaint filed by former retail outlet dealer (Respondent No. 2) against officers of Petroleum Company (Appellants) alleging offences u/s 3(1)(r)(s) SC/ST Act and S. 506 IPC, subsequent to suspension/cancellation of dealership licence — Magistrate issued summo
India Law Library Docid # 2424600

(845) BISHNU PRIYA BARAL AND OTHERS Vs. THE IFFICO-TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 18-03-2025
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — S. 166 — Compensation — Fatal Accident — Assessment of Deceased's Income — Truck Driver — Claimants (LRs of deceased co-driver, aged 36) sought compensation claiming monthly income of Rs. 20,000/- but failed to produce evidence — Tribunal assessed notional income at Rs. 6,000/- per month — High Court upheld this assessment — Supreme Court found Rs. 6,000/- too low for a truck driver and Rs. 20,000/- unsubstantiated — Income assessed at Rs. 12,000/- per month considerin
India Law Library Docid # 2424601

(846) GHANSHYAM DAS RUNGTA FOUNDATION THROUGH SECRETARY DR. SOURABH RUNGTA AND OTHERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 18-03-2025
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 96(2)(xxxiii) — Chhattisgarh Motor Vehicles Rules, 1994 — Rule 76-B(16) — Power to Fix Age Limit for School Buses — The State Government, in exercise of its rule-making power under Section 96(2)(xxxiii) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (“any other matter which is to be or may be prescribed”), is competent to prescribe conditions for the grant of a school bus permit, including fixing a maximum age limit for vehicles used as school buses —Such a condition relates
India Law Library Docid # 2424706

(847) MANOJ KUMAR SONI Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 18-03-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 197 — Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 19 — Sanction for Prosecution — Public Servant — Act in Discharge of Official Duty — Protection under Section 197 CrPC and Section 19 PC Act is available to a public servant accused of offences alleged to have been committed while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of official duty — Where the allegation is that the public servant issued directions related to clearing bills of certain rice miller
India Law Library Docid # 2424707

(848) BASAVATARAKAM MEMORIAL MEDICAL TRUST Vs. NANDAMURI LAKSHMI PARVATHI[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 18-03-2025
A. Evidence Act, 1872 — S.68 & Succession Act, 1925 — S.63 — Proof of Will — Attestation Requirement — A Will must be proved by examining at least one attesting witness if available, as mandated by S.68 of the Evidence Act, which specifies the mode of proof for compulsorily attestable documents like Wills (S.63 Succession Act). (Paras 3, 15, 17)

B. Evidence Act, 1872 — S.69 — Proof of Will when No Attesting Witness Found — Foundational Requirement — Section 69 provides an alternative mode of p
India Law Library Docid # 2424750

(849) NENAVATH JAGAN Vs. THE GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 18-03-2025
Forest Laws — Reserved Forest Land — Jurisdiction of Revenue Authorities — Grant of Pattas — Land declared and notified as Reserved Forest vests with the Forest Department — Revenue authorities lack jurisdiction or competence to assign such land or grant pattas thereon, even if the land was previously leased for cultivation or allotted for rehabilitation purposes under a Government Order (G.O.Ms.No.2771)
India Law Library Docid # 2424752

(850) MOLUGURI DIVYA Vs. HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 18-03-2025
Service Law — Appointment — Erroneous Selection — Local vs. Non-Local Candidate — Where a candidate applies under the non-local category but is inadvertently selected and appointed against a post reserved for the local category, despite possessing lower merit than other eligible candidates (both open category and local category replacements), such an appointment is irregular or illegal ab initio.
India Law Library Docid # 2424767

(851) BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED Vs. VEDULA SURAYANARAYANA MURTHY DIED AND OTHERS[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 18-03-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 100 — Scope of Second Appeal — Interference with Concurrent Findings — The jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 100 CPC is strictly confined to cases involving substantial questions of law — The Court cannot re-appreciate evidence or interfere with concurrent findings of fact recorded by the courts below unless such findings are demonstrated to be erroneous due to being contrary to mandatory provisions of law, contrary to law pronounced by the Apex Co
India Law Library Docid # 2424821

(852) BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED Vs. VEDULA ESWARUDU AND OTHERS[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 18-03-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 100 — Second Appeal — Scope of Interference — The High Court’s jurisdiction in a second appeal is confined to substantial questions of law It cannot interfere with concurrent findings of fact arrived at by the courts below unless such findings are vitiated by non-consideration of vital evidence, are based on inadmissible evidence or no evidence, or are contrary to mandatory provisions of law or settled legal principles.
India Law Library Docid # 2424809

(853) SHAIK MABU Vs. THE STATE OF AP REP BY ITS PP HYD[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 18-03-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Sections 397 & 401 — Revisional Jurisdiction — Scope against Concurrent Findings — The High Court, exercising its revisional jurisdiction, should ordinarily refrain from interfering with concurrent findings of fact recorded by the trial court and the first appellate court, especially concerning conviction — Re-appreciation of evidence is generally impermissible unless there is a manifest illegality, perversity in the findings, non-consideration of material evidenc
India Law Library Docid # 2424805

(854) ATASI SAHA AND ANOTHER Vs. SOMNATH SARKAR[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 18-03-2025
Specific Relief Act, 1963 — S. 34 & Suit for Possession — Maintainability — Requirement of Declaration of Title when Title is Clouded — A suit filed for recovery of possession simpliciter is not maintainable in its present form when the plaintiff’s title to the suit property is clouded by the defendant’s assertion of title, particularly through actions like mutation of names based on an instrument and execution/reliance on a registered deed concerning the property — In such circumstances, the pr
India Law Library Docid # 2425218

(855) M/S. TRADE CENTRE Vs. MAGEBE BRIDGE PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 18-03-2025
Partnership Act, 1932 — S. 58, S. 69(2) — Evidence Act, 1872 — S. 114(e) — Maintainability of Suit by Partnership Firm — Requirement of Registration — Date of Registration vs. Date of Transaction — Proof of Registration — For a suit filed by a partnership firm to enforce a right arising from a contract to be maintainable under Section 69(2) of the Partnership Act, 1932, the firm must be registered on the date of institution of the suit — Registration is not required to have occurred during the p
India Law Library Docid # 2425219

(856) AUTHUM INVESTMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED Vs. ASHDAN PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED AND OTHERS[NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI] 17-03-2025
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons), Regulations 2016 — Regulation 39(1-B) — Adjudicating Authority cannot interfere with the Committee of Creditors' (CoC) commercial wisdom to reject a resolution plan received after the stipulated timeline, as Regulation 39(1B) of the CIRP Regulations, 2016, prohibits the consideration of such plans — This appeal challenged an order of the Adjudicating Authority directing the CoC to consider a resoluti
India Law Library Docid # 2423550

(857) STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. SANTOSHI HYVOLT ELECTRICALS PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS[NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI] 17-03-2025
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons), Regulations 2016 — Regulation 18 — Once a resolution plan approved by the Committee of Creditors (CoC) is submitted to the Adjudicating Authority for approval, the CoC cannot request its remittance back for reconsideration, even if subsequent events affect its viability — The State Bank of India appealed against the Adjudicating Authority's rejection of its application seeking to remit a CoC-approved
India Law Library Docid # 2423551

(858) KIRAN RAJU PENUMACHA Vs. TEJUSWINI CHOWDHURY[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-03-2025
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 26 — Custody of children — Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 — Custody of Minor Children — In deciding custody cases, courts must prioritize the child's welfare, considering factors beyond physical comforts, including moral and ethical values, and the child's ordinary comfort, contentment, health, education, and favorable surroundings.
India Law Library Docid # 2423552

(859) SHIVALEELA AND OTHERS Vs. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-03-2025
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Assessment of Deceased's Income — In motor accident claims, the court should consider all evidence, including bank records, loan documents, and testimony, to accurately assess the deceased's monthly income from various sources
India Law Library Docid # 2423553

(860) MADIVALAPPA Vs. MAHARASHTRA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-03-2025
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 173 — Multiplier for ‘Loss of Future Earnings’ — The appropriate multiplier for a 24-year-old claimant is ‘18’, as per the judgment in Sarla Verma v Delhi Transport Corporation, to calculate ‘loss of future earnings’.
India Law Library Docid # 2423554