ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(1) SAMAR DEBANGSI Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 25-04-2025
Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 354 & 376 read with 511 — Outraging Modesty & Attempt to Commit Rape — Proof and Appreciation of Evidence — Appeal against conviction under Ss. 354 & 376/511 IPC — Court analysed evidence of prosecutrix (PW1) and other prosecution witnesses regarding the incident in a sugarcane field — Considered issues of delay in FIR, inconsistencies between FIR and deposition, non-exhibition of injury report, non-seizure of clothes by IO, and alleged land dispute motive
India Law Library Docid # 2425160

(2) GOVINDA KRISHNA GUPTA AND OTHERS Vs. SIBA PADA DAS AND OTHERS[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 25-04-2025
Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Section 58(c) — Mortgage by Conditional Sale vs. Sale with Condition of Repurchase — Distinction — A transaction where a sale deed is executed and a separate, contemporaneous agreement for reconveyance is executed between the parties does not constitute a mortgage by conditional sale under Section 58(c) of the TPA, especially in view of the Proviso added by Act 20 of 1929 which requires the condition of repurchase to be embodied in the same document that effects
India Law Library Docid # 2425161

(3) MOHAMMAD KHAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 23-04-2025
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) — Section 483 [Corresponding to Section 439 Cr.P.C.] — Bail — Considerations — Allegation of Conspiracy vs. Specific Overt Act — Statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. — In evaluating a bail application under Section 483 BNSS for offences including Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 331(8), 115(2), 103(1) and 61(2)(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), the Court considers the specific role attributed to the accused. Where the primary allegation is of co
India Law Library Docid # 2425050

(4) IN THE GOODS OF - SHRIMATI RAMA DATTA GUPTA (DEC)[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 23-04-2025
Succession Act, 1925 — S. 63 — Evidence Act, 1872 — Ss. 68, 69 — Proof of Will — Uncontested Probate Proceedings — Requirement of Proof in Solemn Form — Even where a probate application remains uncontested (no caveat filed), the propounder is obligated to prove the due execution and attestation of the Will in solemn form, satisfying the mandatory requirements of Section 63 of the Succession Act, 1925 and Section 68 or Section 69 of the Evidence Act, 1872
India Law Library Docid # 2425159

(5) SITAL PRASAD SHAW @ GUPTA AND ANOTHER Vs. ASHISH BHATTACHARYA AND ANOTHER[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 23-04-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Sections 401 & 482 — Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1966 — Section 3(a) — Quashing of Proceedings — Delay — Abuse of Process — Criminal Revision application filed seeking quashing of proceedings under Section 3(a) of the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, pending since 1982 (approximately 43 years) — Held, continuation of prosecution after such inordinate delay, largely unattributable to the accused, constitutes a sheer abuse of
India Law Library Docid # 2425162

(6) M/S DEEPAK AND CO THROUGH ITS PARTNER SMT POONAM PORWAL Vs. INDIAN RAILWAY CATERING AND TOURISM CORPORATION LIMITED THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR AND ANOTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 22-04-2025
Tender — Integrity Pact (Annexure ‘G’) — Deficiency — Absence of Witness Signatures — Rectification Post Bid Opening — Permissibility — Discussion on whether permitting a bidder (Respondent No. 2) to rectify the deficiency of missing witness signatures on the submitted Integrity Pact (Annexure ‘G’) after the opening of financial bids vitiates the tender process. Consideration of the nature of the Integrity Pact as a document signifying compliance in anticipation of the award, rather than purely
India Law Library Docid # 2424862

(7) DALBIR SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S. KRISAM PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 22-04-2025
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 8 — Arbitrability of Disputes — Scope of Judicial Review Post-Amendments (2015 & 2019) — Kompetenz-Kompetenz — Following the legislative amendments of 2015 and 2019, the scope of judicial scrutiny under Section 8 of the Act at the referral stage is extremely limited — The court’s role is primarily to conduct a prima facie review to ascertain the existence of a valid arbitration agreement — Issues relating to the arbitrability of the dispute are, a
India Law Library Docid # 2425084

(8) HARYANA AGRO-INDUSTRIES CORPORATION LTD. Vs. M/S. DEVI DAYAL SACHIN KUMAR AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 22-04-2025
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Sections 34 & 37 — Limitation Act, 1963 — Contract Act, 1872 — Arbitration Claim — Bar of Limitation.

Arbitration proceedings initiated significantly beyond the limitation period prescribed both within the governing agreement and under the general law of limitation are liable to be rejected as time-barred — An arbitral award dismissing a claim on the ground of limitation, where the delay is undisputed and substantial is generally not liable to be interf
India Law Library Docid # 2425085

(9) HABEEN ALIAS HABIN ALIAS HABIB Vs. STATE OF HARYANA[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 22-04-2025
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) — Section 483 [(as invoked in the order)] — Regular Bail — Factors for Grant — Haryana Gauvansh Sanrakshan & Gausamvardhan Act, 2015 / IPC S. 120-B. - In exercising jurisdiction invoked under Section 483 BNSS for grant of regular bail concerning offences under the Haryana Gauvansh Sanrakshan & Gausamvardhan Act, 2015 (Sections 3/13(1), 8/13(3)) and Section 120-B IPC, the Court considered the cumulative effect of several factors: (i) the period of c
India Law Library Docid # 2425086

(10) KULDEEP Vs. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANOTHER[DELHI HIGH COURT] 21-04-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — S. 397 — Revisional Jurisdiction — Scope against Conviction — Discussion on the limited scope of the High Court's revisional jurisdiction under S. 397 Cr.P.C. when examining concurrent findings of conviction by the Trial Court and the Appellate Court — The revisional court's role is primarily confined to satisfying itself as to the correctness, legality, or propriety of the findings, sentence, or order and the regularity of the proceedings of the lower courts — Th
India Law Library Docid # 2424863

(11) RAMESH SUNEJA Vs. UNION OF INDIA[DELHI HIGH COURT] 21-04-2025
Railways Act, 1989 — Ss. 123(c), 124-A — Untoward Incident — Accidental Fall from Train vs. Attempt to Alight — Bona Fide Passenger — Consideration of whether a fall from a moving train resulting in injury to a bona fide passenger constitutes an “untoward incident” under S. 123(c) liable for compensation under S. 124-A. Analysis contrasting the claimant’s consistent account of falling due to a push/jostling in an overcrowded compartment near a station with the Railways’ defence that it was an at
India Law Library Docid # 2424864

(12) DR. ABHISHEK AGGARWAL AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 21-04-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) — Section 311 — Power to Summon Material Witness or Recall/Re-examine — Scope and Principles — The power under Section 311 Cr.P.C. is wide but must be exercised judiciously, with caution and circumspection, only to meet the ends of justice. Its objective is to discover the truth or obtain proper proof of facts essential for a just decision, not to fill up lacunae in the prosecution case resulting in prejudice to the accused or as an abuse of process. The c
India Law Library Docid # 2425047

(13) AMARJIT KAUR AND OTHERS Vs. JAGJIT SINGH AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 21-04-2025
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Just Compensation — Assessment — Overall Award vs. Component-wise Errors — While assessing appeals seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, the appellate court must consider the overall ‘justness’ of the compensation awarded — Even if the Tribunal commits errors in calculating individual components enhancement is not warranted if the total compensation awarded is already adequate, just, or even excessive when view
India Law Library Docid # 2425081

(14) NEERAJ KUMAR Vs. NARINDER SINGH AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 21-04-2025
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Sections 138 and 147 — Compounding of Offence — At Revisional Stage — Effect of Settlement and Payment — An offence under Section 138 of the NI Act, being primarily compensatory in nature with the punitive element aimed at enforcing the compensatory aspect, is compoundable under Section 147 of the Act — Where the parties, during the pendency of a criminal revision petition challenging concurrent conviction under Section 138, arrive at a settlement and
India Law Library Docid # 2425082

(15) SARABJIT SINGH @ JATT @ AMAN Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 21-04-2025
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) — Section 37 — Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 21 — Bail in Commercial Quantity Case — Prolonged Pre-Trial Incarceration — Prolonged pre-trial incarceration generally militates against the fundamental right to life and personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution — In such circumstances, the conditional liberty of the accused may override the statutory embargo created under Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of the NDPS
India Law Library Docid # 2425083

(16) M/S LAMBA EXPORTS PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S KRISTAN AUTO[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 21-04-2025
Commercial Courts Act, 2015 — Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 11 Rules 1(1), 1(7)(c)(i), 1(10) — Disclosure of Documents — Use Solely for Cross-Examination — Requirement of Leave — Under the stringent disclosure regime mandated by Order 11 CPC for Commercial Courts, a defendant is required by Rule 1(1) to file a list and photocopies of all documents in its power, possession, control, or custody pertaining to the suit along with the written statement or counterclaim — While Order 11 Rule
India Law Library Docid # 2425118

(17) KARAN SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. RAGHBIR AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 21-04-2025
Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1913 — Section 5(b) — ‘Waste Land’ — Inclusion of ‘Sailab’ Land — Effect of Reclamation by Vendee — Land consistently recorded in revenue records as ‘Sailab’ (flooded or kept moist by river action), even if classified as cultivable waste land under administrative or legal frameworks (including interpretations based on the Punjab Land Record Manual, National Wasteland Development Board definitions, and Punjab Land Revenue Act provisions), falls within the ambit of the Expl
India Law Library Docid # 2425119

(18) SRI SRI ISWAR RAMESWARSHIB THAKUR Vs. NIRMAL KANTI GANGULY AND OTHERS[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 21-04-2025
Evidence Act, 1872 — S. 114 Ill.(g) — Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — O. III Rr. 1, 2 — Evidence by Power of Attorney (POA) Holder — Scope and Admissibility — Adverse Inference — A POA holder is empowered to 'act' on behalf of the principal, which includes acts done in exercise of the power granted, but does not extend to deposing in place of the principal on matters within the principal's exclusive personal knowledge — A POA holder cannot testify about the principal's state of mind, or when and ho
India Law Library Docid # 2425163

(19) TALARI SATYANARAYANA Vs. TALARI VANA KAMESWARAMMA AND OTHERS[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 17-04-2025
Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Sections 122, 123 & Gift vs. Will — Interpretation of Document — A registered document, described as a “settlement deed,” which confers property out of love and affection, reserves a life interest for the donor (including enjoyment of income and liability for taxes) while restricting her right to alienate, and grants a vested remainder right to the donee (plaintiff/son) with possession postponed until the donor’s death, constitutes a valid gift settlement deed (i
India Law Library Docid # 2424825

(20) APSRTC, AMARAVATHI Vs. N.SOUNDARYA AND OTHERS[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 17-04-2025
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Negligence — Appreciation of Evidence — Eyewitness Testimony vs. Police Reports In motor accident claims adjudicated under Section 166, the determination of negligence is based on the principle of preponderance of probabilities — Direct testimony of an eyewitness (PW.2) regarding the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle holds greater evidentiary value than police investigation documents such as the FIR (Ex.A1), altered FIR (Ex.A2), or charg
India Law Library Docid # 2424829