(301) SENIOR GENERAL MANAGER (CELLULAR) THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER MR. MRUGESHKUMAR JAYANTILAL SHAH AND OTHERS Vs. RAJAT SINGH[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 26-03-2025 Service Law — Disciplinary Proceedings — Unauthorized Absence — Wilfulness — While unauthorized absence from duty does not always equate to wilful absence, especially if caused by compelling circumstances beyond the employee's control, the principle requiring the disciplinary authority to establish wilfulness (Krushna Kant B Parmar) is not an absolute rule — In cases of prolonged unauthorized absence, particularly where leave applications were rejected or not sanctioned, and the employee fails t India Law Library Docid # 2424138
(302) GOPAL KRISHNA Vs. ANANDPALSINGH S/O GYANPALSINGH DECEASED THROUGH LRS DEEPAK SINGH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 26-03-2025 Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Section 58(c) — Mortgage by Conditional Sale — Interpretation of Document — A document titled "Shartiya Frokhtnama" containing an explicit condition for reconveyance upon repayment of the consideration amount within a specified period (five years) constitutes a mortgage by conditional sale under S. 58(c), not an outright sale — The interpretation considers the specific terms embedded within the document itself, the legal maxim "once a India Law Library Docid # 2424139
(303) KEWAL SINGH KANG AND OTHERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 26-03-2025 Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — Condonation of Delay — Sufficient Cause — Liberal Approach vs. Negligence & Lack of Bona Fides — While Section 5 of the Limitation Act empowers courts to condone delay upon demonstration of “sufficient cause” and generally calls for a liberal, justice-oriented approach, this discretion cannot be exercised arbitrarily or to revive stale claims where negligence, inaction, or lack of bona fides is apparent — The acceptability of the explanation, not merely the len India Law Library Docid # 2424173
(304) MOHAMMAD SALIM AND OTHERS Vs. ABDUL KAYYUM AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 26-03-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 8 Rule 1A(3) — Registration Act, 1908 — Sections 17 & 49 Proviso — Admissibility of Unregistered Partition Deed — Collateral Purpose — While Order VIII Rule 1A(3) CPC requires a defendant to produce documents relied upon with the written statement, and mandates leave of court for later production, such leave may be granted even at a subsequent stage — An unregistered partition deed, though compulsorily registrable under Section 17 of the Registration Act and in India Law Library Docid # 2424174
(305) KAMAL MEENA Vs. STATE[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 26-03-2025 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 7, Section 13 — Essential Ingredients — Demand and Acceptance — Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt — To sustain a conviction under Section 7 (read with Section 13) of the PC Act, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt the twin essential ingredients: (i) demand of illegal gratification by the accused public servant, and (ii) subsequent acceptance of the same by the accused — This proof can be based on direct evidence India Law Library Docid # 2424157
(306) TEJARAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 26-03-2025 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (as amended by Act 16 of 2018) — Section 17A — Requirement of Prior Approval for Investigation — Stage of Challenge — Framing of Charge — The requirement under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, for obtaining previous approval from the competent authority before conducting any enquiry, inquiry, or investigation into an offence alleged against a public servant relatable to official functions or duties, while mandatory for initiating such acti India Law Library Docid # 2424166
(307) JODHPUR VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD. AND ANOTHER Vs. ANJEEV KUMAR AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 26-03-2025 Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 — Section 22-C(8) — Electricity Act, 2003 — Section 135 — Jurisdiction of Permanent Lok Adalat — Offence of Electricity Theft — The jurisdiction of a Permanent Lok Adalat established under Chapter VI-A of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, is expressly barred by Section 22-C(8) from deciding any matter relating to an offence not compoundable under any law — Where the dispute arises India Law Library Docid # 2424223
(308) PRAHLAD SAHAI MEENA Vs. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ADMN. KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES COMMISSION AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 26-03-2025 Service Law — Regularization — Consideration Pursuant to Final Court Orders — Estoppel — Educational Qualification — After judicial directions to consider an employee’s case for regularization attain finality (having been upheld up to the Supreme Court), the employer is precluded from denying or withdrawing regularization by belatedly invoking the employee’s alleged lack of prescribed educational qualifications as an afterthought, especially where this ground was not raised during previous exten India Law Library Docid # 2424210
(309) UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs. THE BOARD OF REVENUE RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 26-03-2025 Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971 — Sections 9, 10 & 15 — Jurisdiction of Revenue Courts — Barred — Where proceedings for eviction from public premises are initiated by the Estate Officer under the Act of 1971, Section 15 explicitly bars the jurisdiction of any court, including Revenue Courts established under the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955, to entertain any suit or proceeding challenging the eviction order — The exclusive remedy against an order passed by the Estat India Law Library Docid # 2424258
(310) SACHIN DHONDIRAM CHAVAN Vs. TRUPTI SACHIN CHAVAN[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 26-03-2025 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13-B — Divorce by Mutual Consent — Withdrawal of Consent — Distinction between Original and Converted Petitions — A distinction exists regarding the unilateral withdrawal of consent in petitions for divorce by mutual consent under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — While consent can generally be withdrawn unilaterally in a petition originally filed under Section 13-B until the decree is passed, the situation differs if the petition was initially India Law Library Docid # 2424278
(311) MORRIES ENERGIES LIMITED Vs. SUMIT AGARWAL AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 26-03-2025 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 141 — Vicarious Liability of Directors/Officers — Requirements — For fastening vicarious liability on a director or officer of a company accused of an offence under Section 138, the complainant must establish that such person falls under either sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of Section 141 — Sub-section (1) requires the person to be “in charge of, and responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company” at the time the offence India Law Library Docid # 2424298
(312) SMT. S.SAVITHRAMMA Vs. SMT.S.PADMAVATHAMMA AND OTHERS[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 26-03-2025 Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 85 — Presumption as to Powers of Attorney — Execution and Authentication by Notary Public — Section 85 creates a mandatory presumption (“shall presume”) regarding the due execution and authentication of a document purporting to be a power of attorney, provided it is executed before and authenticated by a Notary Public (or other specified authorities) — Once the original notarized power of attorney is produced, the burden shifts to the party disputing its validity to India Law Library Docid # 2424356
(313) N.S. KRISHNAMOORTHI AND OTHERS Vs. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KRISHNAGIRI DISTRICT AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 26-03-2025 Land Law — Grama Natham — Nature and Ownership — Occupied vs. Unoccupied — Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 (Act III of 1905) — Section 2 — Grama Natham land, historically set apart for village habitation, does not automatically vest with the Government under Section 2 of Act III of 1905 if it is occupied as a house-site or backyard — Such occupied Natham, where occupation has been longstanding and recognized through transactions, is considered the private property of the occupant — Only u India Law Library Docid # 2424458
(314) T.C. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR (DIED) Vs. BIJU RAMESH AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 26-03-2025 Limitation Act, 1963 — Article 59 — Suit to Cancel or Set Aside Instrument — Commencement of Limitation Period for Executant — For a suit seeking cancellation or setting aside of an instrument (or a declaration that it is sham, which is akin to setting aside) governed by Article 59 of the Limitation Act, the limitation period is three years — When the suit is filed by the executant of the instrument, the time from which the period begins to run (“when the facts entitling the plaintiff to have th India Law Library Docid # 2424587
(315) A.K. SAMSUDDIN AND OTHERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTEHRS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 26-03-2025 Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) — Section 3 — Offence of Money Laundering — Continuing Offence — Article 20(1) Constitution of India, 1950 — Retrospectivity — The offence of money laundering under Section 3 of the PMLA is a continuing offence — Criminal proceedings under Section 3 are maintainable even if the predicate (scheduled) offence was committed before the PMLA came into force or before the specific predicate offence was included in the Schedule to the PMLA, provided that India Law Library Docid # 2424588
(316) SUNHER PUDO AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 26-03-2025 Penal Code, 1860 — Section 149 — Unlawful Assembly — Vicarious Liability in Naxal Attack — In cases involving offences committed by members of an unlawful assembly, such as a Naxalite attack resulting in murder, Section 149 IPC imposes vicarious liability — Proof that an accused was present as a member of the unlawful assembly sharing the common object (which can be inferred from circumstances like being armed, presence near the scene, and collective actions like shouting slogans post-incident) India Law Library Docid # 2424684
(317) BHANU PRATAP SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 26-03-2025 Chhattisgarh Rajya Anusuchit Janjati Ayog (Sanshodhan) Adhiniyam, 2020 — Section 4(1) — Appointment at the Pleasure of Government — Removal — Where an appointment to a statutory post, such as Chairperson or Member of the Chhattisgarh Rajya Anusuchit Janjati Ayog, is explicitly made “during the pleasure of the State Government” as per Section 4(1) of the Adhiniyam, 2020, and the appointment order itself reflects this condition, the holder of the office can be removed at any time by the Government India Law Library Docid # 2424698
(318) UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs. M/S JAGDALPUR MOTORS THROUGH DIRECTOR, SHRI NIRAJ SHARMA AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 26-03-2025 Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 — Section 140 — Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 — Rules 117 & 120A — Transitional Credit (CENVAT) — Revision of FORM GST TRAN-1 — The right to carry forward accumulated CENVAT credit from the pre-GST regime into the GST regime is a vested right, akin to property under Article 300A of the Constitution — Rule 120A of the Central GST Rules explicitly permits a registered person to revise the electronically submitted FORM GST TRAN-1 declaration onc India Law Library Docid # 2424699
(319) MANDAVA SRINVIAS RAO Vs. EDUPUGANTI UDDANDI RAMA RAO[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 26-03-2025 Specific Relief Act, 1963 — Section 28(1) — Extension of time for payment — Judicial Discretion — While the Court retains jurisdiction post-decree in a specific performance suit and possesses discretion under Section 28(1) to extend the time for payment of purchase money, such discretion must be exercised judiciously, based on sound legal principles and satisfactory reasons, not as a matter of course or arbitrarily. India Law Library Docid # 2424761
(320) XXXX Vs. XXXX[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 26-03-2025 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 11 & Section 5(i) — Void Marriage — Bigamy — A marriage solemnized between two Hindus is void ab initio if either party had a spouse living at the time of the marriage, unless the case falls under the exception of a valid customary divorce. India Law Library Docid # 2424745