(321) M/S B.K. ENGINEERING ENTERPRISES Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 16-12-2025 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Sections 34 and 37 — Jurisdiction to hear objections — Seat of Arbitration — Judicial review — The question of jurisdiction of the concerned court to hear objections under Sections 34/37 of the Act is settled — The determination of the "seat" of arbitration acts akin to an exclusive jurisdiction clause, vesting the courts at the designated seat with sole jurisdiction to India Law Library Docid # 2437777
(322) STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. ASHARAF ALIBHAI SANDHI AND OTHERS[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 16-12-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 378 — Appeal against acquittal — Scope of interference — Acquittal under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 306, and 114 of Indian Penal Code (IPC) — Appellate court must give proper weight and consideration to the trial court's view regarding witness credibility, presumption of innocence, benefit of doubt, and the slowness in overturning a plausible finding of fact by the Judge who observed the witnesses — If the main grounds for acquittal are reasonable an India Law Library Docid # 2437807
(323) STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. LAKHA LAKHMAN ODEDARA[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 16-12-2025 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) — Sections 20(b), 22, 27, and 42(2) — Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) — Section 378 — Appeal against acquittal — Scope of interference — Acquittal upheld where the prosecution failed to prove compliance with mandatory requirements, including those of Section 42(2) of the NDPS Act, and prosecution witnesses turned hostile or contradicted India Law Library Docid # 2437808
(324) REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR Vs. RAJESH R CHAUDHARY, BAMS[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 16-12-2025 Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Regulation and Prevention of Misuse) Act, 1994 — Sections 23 and 25 — Offence alleging illegal possession of sonography machine by Ayurvedic Doctor — Appeal against acquittal — Prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt — Discrepancies in evidence regarding the location of seizure (residence vs. hospital) and mandatory search and seizure procedures under Rule 12 of India Law Library Docid # 2437809
(325) DHULABHAI MOHANBHAI THAKARDA AND OTHERS Vs. RATANBEN WD/O DHULABHAI MADHABHAI AND OTHERS[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 16-12-2025 Limitation Act, 1963 — Sections 6 and 8 — Article 60 — Suit to set aside transfer of property by guardian of a minor — Limitation Period — Cessation of Disability — The limitation period for a suit by a ward (minor) to set aside a transfer of property made by a guardian is three years from the date the ward attains majority, as per Article 60(a) of the Limitation Act — While Section 6 generally allows suits to be filed after the cessation of India Law Library Docid # 2437810
(326) KALPESH ARUNBHAI JOSHI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT AND OTHERS[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 16-12-2025 Gujarat Land Revenue Code, 1879 — Rule 108 (RTS Proceedings) — Scope of Authority — Gujarat Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1947 (Fragmentation Act) — Revenue authorities exercising power under the Land Revenue Code (RTS proceedings) are restricted to making and correcting fiscal entries in the revenue records; they cannot adjudicate the validity of a transaction under another India Law Library Docid # 2437811
(327) PRAKASH RATILAL BHAIDASWALA(BHAIDASNA) AND ANOTHER Vs. RAJESH MANSUKHLAL KHADAWALA AND OTHERS[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 16-12-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 100 — Second Appeal — Scope of Interference with Concurrent Findings of Fact — The High Court must avoid interfering with concurrent findings of fact by the Courts below unless warranted by compelling reasons, such as findings being contrary to mandatory law, settled position of law (Apex Court pronouncements), based on inadmissible evidence, or without evidence — The India Law Library Docid # 2437812
(328) SHIVANG ASHWINBHAI BHATT Vs. MAHIMA SHIVANG BHATT[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 16-12-2025 Family Courts Act, 1984 — Section 7 (1) Explanation (c) — Jurisdiction of Family Court — Scope — Family Court has jurisdiction over suits or proceedings between parties to a marriage concerning the property of the parties or either of them — The jurisdiction extends to properties of spouses or either of them, irrespective of whether the claim arises during the subsistence of the marriage or otherwise — Section 7 India Law Library Docid # 2437813
(329) STATE OF U.P. Vs. AJMAL BEG ETC[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-12-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 304-B and 498-A) — Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (DPA, 1961) — Sections 3 and 4 — Dowry Death — Appeal against acquittal — Setting aside High Court's acquittal and restoring Trial Court's conviction — Essential ingredients of Section 304-B IPC established by consistent prosecution evidence regarding dowry demand (motorcycle, TV, and cash) and continuous India Law Library Docid # 2436870
(330) THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND OTHERS Vs. MILKIYAT SINGH AND OTHERS ETC.[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-12-2025 Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002 — Section 103 — Cooperative societies functioning immediately before reorganisation of States — Object and scope of ‘deemed conversion’ — Section 103 does not automatically convert a cooperative society registered under a State Act into a multi-State cooperative society merely due to State reorganisation (e.g., bifurcation of Uttar Pradesh into Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand) — The conversion under Section 103 depends on whether the 'objects' India Law Library Docid # 2436871
(331) MANOJBHAI JETHABHAI PARMAR (ROHIT) Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-12-2025 Criminal Law — Conviction based on Circumstantial Evidence — Appreciation of Evidence — Principles Governing Circumstantial Evidence — A conviction based entirely on circumstantial evidence must satisfy five conditions: (1) Circumstances must be fully established; (2) Facts established must be consistent only with the hypothesis of guilt; (3) Circumstances must be conclusive in nature and tendency; (4) They must exclude every possible hypothesis except guilt; (5) Chain of evidence must India Law Library Docid # 2436872
(332) MOIDEENKUTTY Vs. ABRAHAM GEORGE[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-12-2025 Agreement to Sell — Breach of Contract — Refund of Advance — Suppression of Material Fact — Reversal of Trial Court decree by High Court — High Court relying solely on a fleeting admission in cross-examination of plaintiff regarding prior knowledge (August 25, 2008) of mortgage on property, despite agreement being executed later (September 10, 2008) and parties admitting to no prior interaction before September 2008 — Supreme Court held reliance on such solitary, abstract India Law Library Docid # 2436873
(333) DANESH SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. HAR PYARI (DEAD) THR. LRS. AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-12-2025 Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Section 52 — Doctrine of Lis Pendens — Scope and Applicability — Transfer of mortgaged property pendente lite (after institution of suit by bank for recovery/foreclosure but before execution/attachment) is hit by Section 52 — Lack of knowledge of proceedings or possession of No Encumbrance Certificate does not constitute a valid defence against lis pendens, as the doctrine is India Law Library Docid # 2436874
(334) DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (IT)-I, MUMBAI. Vs. M/S. AMERICAN EXPRESS BANK LTD.[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-12-2025 Income Tax Act, 1961 — Sections 37(1), 44C — Deduction of Head Office Expenditure in case of Non-Residents — Interpretation of Section 44C and 'Head Office Expenditure' — Distinction between ‘Common’ and ‘Exclusive’ Expenditure — Section 44C, being a special provision with a non-obstante clause, governs the quantum of allowable deduction for any expenditure incurred by a non-resident assessee that qualifies as 'head office expenditure' — The definition of 'head office India Law Library Docid # 2436875
(335) NAYAN BHOWMICK Vs. APARNA CHAKRABORTY[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-12-2025 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Sections 13(1)(i-a) and 13(1)(i-b) — Divorce — Desertion and Cruelty — Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage — Where parties have been living separately for a long period (24 years in this case) without any prospect of reconciliation, this long period of separation amounts to mental cruelty to both parties, justifying dissolution of marriage — The marriage is deemed to have broken down irretrievably — Fact that spouses hold strongly views and refuse to accommodate India Law Library Docid # 2436876
(336) M/S NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. NEERU DEVI AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-12-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Compensation — Assessment of income of deceased — Standard of proof — Where claimants assert a high monthly income (Rs. 95,000/-) for the deceased (a transport contractor owning two trucks), which exceeds the taxable limit, failure to produce Income Tax Returns (ITR) is highly relevant and undermines the claim — The contention that high EMI payments (approx. Rs. India Law Library Docid # 2436877
(337) DEVENDRA KUMAR TRIPATHI AND OTHERS Vs. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-12-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Compensation for Death of a Child — Calculation of Compensation — Deceased 14-year-old schoolboy — Principles adopted for calculating compensation for death of child — Notional monthly income adopted based on Minimum Wages Act, 1948 for a Class B city (Rs. 5400/- per month) — Addition of 40% for future prospects — Multiplier of 15 adopted based on Reshma India Law Library Docid # 2436878
(338) KASHMIRI LAL (SINCE DECEASED) THROUGH LRS AND ANOTHER Vs. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, HOSHIARPUR AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 15-12-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 26 Rule 9 — Commission to make local investigation — Appointment of Local Commissioner for demarcation of suit land — Suit for possession and injunction based on alleged encroachment (construction of road) by Municipal Corporation on plaintiff's joint land (15 Marlas out of 20 Kanals 12 Marlas) — Denial of encroachment by respondents, asserting India Law Library Docid # 2437071
(339) GURMEET SINGH GILL ALIAS GURMEET SINGH BUKKANWAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 15-12-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 227 — Discharge — Framing of Charge — Principles governing the stage of framing charge — Only prima facie case needs to be established by the prosecution at the stage of framing charge — The golden rule of criminal jurisprudence requiring proof beyond all reasonable doubts does not apply at this stage — Probative value of material evidence cannot be gone India Law Library Docid # 2437072
(340) SUKHWINDER KAUR CHHABRA Vs. SATISH KUMAR AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 15-12-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Motor Accident Claims — Appeal for Enhancement of Compensation — Injury Cases — The object of awarding compensation is to fully and adequately restore the claimant to the position prior to the accident, covering physical injury and loss of ability to lead a full life, enjoy amenities, and earn income — Compensation heads include Pecuniary Damages (treatment expenses, loss of earnings, future medical expenses) and Non-pecuniary India Law Library Docid # 2437073