ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(961) TUKARAM @ MAJOJ PARAB Vs. STATE[BOMBAY HIGH COURT (GOA BENCH)] 12-03-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 482 — Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 — Quashing of FIR and Charge Sheet — Bhajan Lal Test — Where the allegations made in the First Information Report (FIR) or the complaint, and the consequent charge sheet, even if taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused, the High Court is justified in exercising its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution re
India Law Library Docid # 2424322

(962) JAIKISHAN NARANG, HUF THROUGH ITS KARTA MR. KIRAN DEEPAK NAGPAL AND OTHERS AND ALLIANCE LOGISTICS Vs. SURENDRA ENGINEERING CORPORATION LTD. (IN LIQUIDATION) AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 12-03-2025
Companies Act, 1956 — Section 446 — Jurisdiction of Company Court — Landlord’s Application for Possession — The Company Court possesses wide jurisdiction under Section 446 of the Companies Act, 1956, to entertain and decide an application filed by a landlord seeking recovery of possession of premises held under monthly tenancy by a company in liquidation — This power includes examining whether the premises are required for the beneficial winding up of the company — Invoking this section constitu
India Law Library Docid # 2424324

(963) VIRAL NARENDRA GOSALIA Vs. THE SENIOR INTELLIGENCE OFFICER DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF GOODS AND SERVICES TAX INTELLIGENCE[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 12-03-2025
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) — Section 35(3) (Corresponding to Cr.P.C. S. 41-A) — Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act) — Sections 69, 132 — Arrest for Offences Punishable Upto Seven Years — Mandatory Notice of Appearance — The requirement under Section 35(3) of BNSS (S. 41-A Cr.P.C.) to issue a notice of appearance to a person accused of a cognizable offence punishable with imprisonment up to seven years applies to arrests made under Section 69 of the CGST Act f
India Law Library Docid # 2424349

(964) DURGADEVI VENKATESAN, PANCHAYAT PRESIDENT Vs. THIRU BASKARA PANDIAN, I.A.S., DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANNAMALAI DISTRICT.[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 12-03-2025
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 — Section 11 — Willful Disobedience — Effect of Filing Appeal Without Stay — Failure by an authority (District Collector) to comply with a High Court order (quashing withdrawal of Panchayat President’s cheque signing power) during the period when compliance was possible (between the date of the order and the date the petitioner was subsequently removed from office), despite representations and contempt notice, constitutes willful disobedience — The mere filing of a w
India Law Library Docid # 2424435

(965) VGN PROJECTS ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. M/S.VGK BUILDERS PVT. LTD.[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 12-03-2025
Trade Marks Act, 1999 — Sections 28(3), 35 — Infringement Suit between Registered Proprietors — Defence of Bona Fide Use of Predecessor’s Name — Where both the plaintiff (‘VGN’) and the defendant (‘VGK’) are registered proprietors of their respective marks in relevant classes (albeit defendant’s registration is under challenge), Section 28(3) precludes the plaintiff from claiming exclusive rights merely based on registration against the defendant — Furthermore, where the defendant demonstrates h
India Law Library Docid # 2424466

(966) K.SUBRAMANIAM (DECEASED) BY LRS AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 12-03-2025
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (Old Act) — Sections 11, 12(2), 30, 31 — Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (New Act) — Section 24(2) — Lapse of Acquisition — Conditions — Payment/Tender of Compensation — Taking of Possession — For land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Old Act to lapse under Section 24(2) of the New Act, both conditions, namely, (i) physical possession of the land has not been taken, and (ii) compensat
India Law Library Docid # 2424467

(967) PAUL GEORGE Vs. EMARIN PAUL ALIAS UNNIMOL[KERALA HIGH COURT] 12-03-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 125(4) — Maintenance — Wife living separately without sufficient reason — Where clear evidence establishes that the wife left the matrimonial home without any sufficient reason and failed to prove allegations of ill-treatment, she is disentitled to claim maintenance under Section 125(4) Cr.P.C.
India Law Library Docid # 2424567

(968) ANIL KUMAR Vs. AJI AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 12-03-2025
Kerala Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1959 — Sections 25(b), 37(1), 37(2), 50 — Valuation of Suit for Declaration of Share — A suit seeking only a declaration of a fractional share in property, without an explicit prayer for partition and separate possession, should be valued under Section 25(b) (declaration) — Section 37 (partition suits) is not applicable merely because the property is jointly owned.
India Law Library Docid # 2424568

(969) P.M. ISMAIL Vs. ABBAS AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 12-03-2025
Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 — Section 11(3) — Bona Fide Need — Landlord as Best Judge — The landlord is the best judge of their bona fide requirement — Neither the tenant nor the Court can dictate that the landlord should modify or utilize other vacant premises in their possession, particularly if such premises require structural alterations or are otherwise unsuitable for the proposed need.
India Law Library Docid # 2424569

(970) VISWANATHAN AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF KERALA[KERALA HIGH COURT] 12-03-2025
Penal Code, 1860 — Section 299 & 300 — Culpable Homicide/Murder — Act on Believed-to-be Lifeless Body — If an accused, after inflicting an injury, genuinely believes the victim to be dead and then performs a second act (like disposing of the body) which actually causes death, the mens rea (intention/knowledge) required for culpable homicide under S.299 is absent for the second act, as it was directed towards a perceived lifeless body. The accused cannot be convicted of murder (S.300) or culpable
India Law Library Docid # 2424570

(971) MOH. IFTEKHAR RAZA Vs. RATNESH JAIN[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 12-03-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 391 — Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 — Acquittal Appeal — Additional Evidence — Filling Lacuna vs. Just Adjudication — In an appeal against acquittal under Section 138 of the NI Act, the appellate court’s power under Section 391 CrPC to take additional evidence should be exercised when necessary for a just and proper adjudication and to prevent failure of justice — Where oral evidence regarding the underlying transaction exists on record, a
India Law Library Docid # 2424685

(972) NANKU OGRE Vs. SHRAVAN CHAUHAN[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 12-03-2025
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 & 139 — Presumption — Rebuttal — Disputed Signature — Evidence of Bank Manager vs. Expert Opinion — Once the issuance of a cheque is established, the presumption under Section 139 NI Act arises that it was issued for discharge of a debt or liability — The burden to rebut this presumption lies on the accused — A mere denial of signature or production of a bank manager, who is not a handwriting expert under Section 45 of the Evidence Act, stating the
India Law Library Docid # 2424709

(973) SRI Y. SRINIVASA RAO Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA AND OTHERS[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 12-03-2025
Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 — Sections 15(1) & 15(1A)(g) — Rule Making Power — Scope of ‘Other Charges’ — The expressions “and for the purpose connected therewith” in S.15(1) and “in particular and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power” in S.15(1A) confer a broad rule-making authority upon the State Government. Section 15(1A)(g) specifically empowers the State to frame rules for fixing and collecting ‘other charges’ in respect of minor minerals,
India Law Library Docid # 2424760

(974) PRADEEP KUMAR AGARWAL Vs. THE STATE OF TELANGANA[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 12-03-2025
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Sections 5(g), 6, 7, 8, 9(l)(m), 10, 16, 17 — Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 376(2)(f)(i)(n), 370(4), 354A and 506 — Conviction — Sufficiency of Evidence
India Law Library Docid # 2424747

(975) MYANA KAVITHA Vs. BRINDAVAN CHITS INDIA PVT. LTD.[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 12-03-2025
Chit Funds Act, 1982 — Section 71 — Execution of Award — An award passed under the Chit Funds Act is executable either as a decree of a Civil Court upon issuance of a certificate by the Registrar, or as arrears of land revenue.
India Law Library Docid # 2424786

(976) SHYAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 12-03-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) — Sections 145 & 146 — Jurisdiction of Executive Magistrate — Pre-requisites — Breach of Peace & Possession Dispute — The jurisdiction of an Executive Magistrate under Sections 145 and 146 Cr.P.C. is contingent upon their satisfaction, based on a police report or other credible information, that a dispute concerning land or water exists which is likely to cause a breach of the peace — This satisfaction must be recorded in writing, stating the grounds — The
India Law Library Docid # 2425052

(977) RAMJI LAL AGARWAL Vs. SOURAV AGARWAL[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 12-03-2025
Family Law — Family Arrangement — Binding Nature — Non-Signatory Member Accepting Benefits — Doctrine of Approbate and Reprobate — Where a defendant, though a major and not a signatory to a Family Agreement (dated 13.01.2017), takes the benefit of provisions under the said agreement (enjoying possession and use of a shop room allotted to his father under the agreement’s schedule), he cannot simultaneously contend that the agreement is not binding on him — Such conduct attracts
India Law Library Docid # 2425155

(978) KUBER @ BIBHAS ROY AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 12-03-2025
Penal Code, 1860 — S. 304 Part II r/w S. 34 — Culpable Homicide not amounting to Murder — Common Intention — Proof and Appreciation of Evidence — Conviction under Section 304 Part II read with Section 34 IPC is sustainable where the prosecution establishes through consistent and credible evidence, particularly from eyewitnesses (including injured witnesses), corroborated by medical evidence (initial injury report and autopsy), that: (i) the accused shared a common intention to assault the deceas
India Law Library Docid # 2425222

(979) MOTAKATLA JHANSI VANI REDDY Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND OTHERS[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 11-03-2025
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) — Section 47 (1) — Arrest — Mandatory requirement — An individual arrested without a warrant must be immediately informed of the grounds for their arrest — Failure to comply with this provision renders any further detention of the person illegal, as emphasized by the High Court.
India Law Library Docid # 2423378

(980) MOTALEB BHUYAN AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF ASSAM AND OTHERS[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 11-03-2025
Constitution of India, Article 226 — Writ Jurisdiction — Interference with Cancellation of GST Registration — The High Court may exercise its jurisdiction under Article 226 to interfere with orders of cancellation of registration under the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (Central Act) and State Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (State Act), particularly when the orders are found to be bad in law and in violation of the provisions of the Acts or the Rules framed thereunder
India Law Library Docid # 2423430