(381) M. SUBBIAH Vs. ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES AND OTHERSq[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025 Service Law — Disciplinary Proceedings vs. Criminal Proceedings — Standard of Proof — Effect of Acquittal — Acquittal in criminal proceedings based on the same charges does not automatically lead to exoneration in departmental disciplinary proceedings — The standard of proof differs significantly: disciplinary proceedings require proof based on preponderance of probabilities, whereas criminal proceedings require proof beyond India Law Library Docid # 2424418
(382) S.K.S. RESORTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025 Tamil Nadu District Municipalities (Hill Stations) Building Rules, 1993 — Rule 27-B — Powers of District Collector — Recommendations of Committee for Architectural and Aesthetic Aspects (AAA) — The District Collector, as the approving authority under Rule 27-B, possesses the independent power to either approve or reject the recommendations received from the AAA Committee regarding building plan applications in hill stations — The recommendations of the AAA Committee are not binding on the Collec India Law Library Docid # 2424419
(383) V. THIRUPATHY Vs. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025 Registration Act, 1908 — Section 22-A — Tamil Nadu Regularization of Unapproved Layouts and Plots Rules, 2017 — Rule 15(b) — Prohibition on Registration of Unapproved Plots — Cut-off Date — Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908, read harmoniously with Rule 15(b) of the 2017 Rules and the clarification issued by the First Bench order dated 15.06.2017 in W.M.P.No.15656 of 2017, prohibits the registration of unapproved layout plots sold or intended for use as house sites after the cut-off date India Law Library Docid # 2424420
(384) BALAMURUGAN (NOW CONFINED AS LIFE CONVICT IN PALAYAMKOTTAI CENTRAL PRISON) Vs. THE STATE[MADRAS HIGH COURT (MADURAI BENCH)] 24-03-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 300 Exception 1, 302, 304 Part I — Culpable Homicide not Amounting to Murder — Sudden Intervention & Loss of Self-Control — Where the accused, following a quarrel with PW1, pursued her with a weapon (‘aruval’) and fatally attacked the deceased (PW1’s grandfather) upon the latter’s sudden intervention to protect PW1, the act, although demonstrating transferred malice, falls within Exception 1 to Section 300 IPC — The sudden intervention acted as a grave provocati India Law Library Docid # 2424460
(385) MARUDHU PANDI Vs. THE STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE[MADRAS HIGH COURT (MADURAI BENCH)] 24-03-2025 Evidence Act, 1872 — Appreciation of Evidence — Eyewitness Testimony — Relatives and Neighbours — Reliability — Testimony of eyewitnesses (PW1-PW4, PW16), including close relatives (husband, granddaughter) and neighbours, regarding a daytime murder involving a known accused, is considered reliable and natural when their presence at the scene is probable and their accounts regarding the assault are consistent and corroborated by other evidence, despite minor defence suggestions of India Law Library Docid # 2424461
(386) TELIZ REALTORS AND OTHERS Vs. JTL PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025 Commercial Courts Act, 2015 — Section 2(1)(c) — Commercial Dispute — Definition — A dispute arising from alleged fraud, misrepresentation, and embezzlement of funds, where the defendant induced the plaintiff to part with money under the guise of a non-existent joint venture or construction project with no intention to perform, does not constitute a ‘commercial dispute’ under Sections 2(1)(c)(vi) (construction contracts) or 2(1)(c)(xi) (joint venture agreements) India Law Library Docid # 2424577
(387) P.J. FRANCIS Vs. C.D. JOSE[KERALA HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025 Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 — Section 5 — Fixation of Fair Rent — Factors — Fair rent fixation must consider not only the location’s importance and potential rent of comparable buildings but also specific factors like the age and condition of the tenanted building, accessibility, lack of amenities and other circumstances affecting its rental value. Arbitrary or excessively high enhancement causing undue hardship is impermissible. India Law Library Docid # 2424578
(388) UMER ALI Vs. STATE OF KERALA[KERALA HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025 Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 65B — Admissibility of Electronic Evidence — Secondary Evidence — A copy of an electronic record (CCTV footage copied from a DVR onto a DVD) constitutes secondary evidence and is inadmissible unless accompanied by the mandatory certificate under Section 65B(4) India Law Library Docid # 2424579
(389) ARJUN MADOU DUGI Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025 Passports Act, 1967 — Sections 3 and 12(1)(b) — Applicability to Foreign Citizens — Section 3, read with its Explanation, prohibits departure from India without a valid passport or travel document, including a valid foreign passport — Consequently, Section 12(1)(b), which penalizes contravention of Section 3, applies even to foreign citizens attempting to depart India using an invalid or tampered foreign passport. India Law Library Docid # 2424580
(390) SARASWATHIAMMA AND OTHERS Vs. MANUEL AND ANOTHER[KERALA HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 21 Rule 32(5) — Execution of Prohibitory Injunction — Restoration — The Executing Court has the power under Order 21 Rule 32(5) to direct restoration of the property to its original condition, including reconstruction of structures like boundary fences destroyed by the judgment debtor in violation of a decree for permanent prohibitory injunction, by the decree holder or a person appointed by the court, at the cost of the judgment debtor. India Law Library Docid # 2424581
(391) NADIR LALANI Vs. SMT. RESHMA PIRANI AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 36 — Enforcement of Award — Non-Arbitrable Disputes — Child Custody — Matters relating to child custody are non-arbitrable as a matter of public policy and fall within the exclusive domain of courts — Consequently, an application under Section 36 of the Act seeking enforcement of an arbitration award or agreement dealing with child custody is not maintainable India Law Library Docid # 2424701
(392) LOUIS SUNNA UZOMA PETERSON ZUMBA Vs. UNION OF INDIA[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) — Section 37 — Bail in cases involving Commercial Quantity — Twin Conditions — Section 37 imposes stringent conditions for grant of bail where commercial quantity is involved — The Court must have reasonable grounds to believe (i) that the accused is not guilty of the offence, and (ii) that the accused is not likely to commit any offence while on bail — These conditions are cumulative and mandatory India Law Library Docid # 2424764
(393) CHETUKURI MADHAVA REDDY Vs. MANDA SAVITHRAMMA AND ANOTHER[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025 Specific Relief Act, 1963 — Section 34 — Suit for Declaration of Title — Burden of Proof — In a suit for declaration of title, the plaintiff must succeed based on the strength of their own title and not on the weakness of the defendant’s case — The onus lies heavily on the plaintiff to adduce sufficient evidence to discharge this burden. India Law Library Docid # 2424746
(394) SYED HIDAYAT MOHIUDDIN KHAN AND ANOTHER Vs. SMT JAMAL BEE AND OTHERS[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025 Wakf Act, 1995 — Lease of Wakf Property — Subsequent Lease during Litigation — Effect — Granting of a fresh lease by the Wakf Board to the tenant’s heir during the pendency of eviction proceedings based on termination of the original tenancy fundamentally alters the cause of action, rendering the validity of the original termination notice less critical. India Law Library Docid # 2424774
(395) ANGARA MOSQUE Vs. SREENIVASA RICE MILL AND OTHERS[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025 Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 101 — Burden of Proof — Suit for Declaration of Title — In a suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession, the plaintiff must succeed based on the strength of their own title and not on the weakness, if any, of the defendant’s case — The initial burden lies squarely on the plaintiff to adduce sufficient evidence to establish a clear title. India Law Library Docid # 2424810
(396) THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR, ESI CORP. VIJAYAWADA AND ANOTHER AND OTHERS Vs. IMMISETTY VENKATESWARLU[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025 Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 — Section 2(12) and Section 1(4) — Initial Applicability — Definition of ‘Factory’ — Employee Threshold — For the Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 (ESI Act) to apply to an establishment for the first time under Section 1(4), the establishment must meet the definition of a ‘factory’ as provided in Section 2(12) of the Act — As per the definition amended in 1989, this requires the employment of ten or more persons currently or on any day of the preceding tw India Law Library Docid # 2424819
(397) PRATAP C. JOSISHER, AND OTHERS Vs. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND OTHERS[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025 Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 — Sections 5(3) & 5(5) — Appeal — Maintainability — An order passed by the Mandal Revenue Officer under Section 5(3) amending entries in the record of rights is appealable under Section 5(5) before the Revenue Divisional Officer, who is obligated to entertain and decide the appeal on merits, considering the legality and correctness of the MRO’s order based on material available as on the date of that order. India Law Library Docid # 2424912
(398) HABBAN SHAH Vs. SHERUDDIN[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025 Specific Relief Act, 1963 — Section 28 — Execution of Decree — Specific Performance — Time Limit for Deposit — Effect of Appeal and Interim Orders — When a decree for specific performance grants the plaintiff-decree holder (DH) a specific time to deposit the balance sale consideration, but the defendant-judgment debtor (JD) files an appeal before the expiry of this period and obtains interim orders (restraint/status quo) preventing execution or deposit, the failure of the DH to deposit within th India Law Library Docid # 2425087
(399) SURAJ PARKASH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025 Service Law — Efficiency Bar — Crossing Based on Integrity — Effect of Adverse ACR — Applicability of Specific Instructions — In service jurisprudence concerning the crossing of an efficiency bar, where specific government instructions address the consequence of an adverse report against integrity, such specific instructions prevail over general instructions regarding inefficiency — Under instructions providing that an employee with an adverse report on integrity should not cross the efficiency India Law Library Docid # 2425091
(400) PRATAP SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs. DEVENDER SAINI[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025 Punjab Courts Act, 1918 — Section 41 — Second Appeal — Scope of Interference — Question of Law vs. Question of Fact — The jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 41 of the Punjab Courts Act, 1918, in a second appeal is confined to interfering only when the decision is contrary to law or established custom/usage having the force of law, or where the lower court has failed to determine a material issue of law or custom/usage — The appeal cannot be entertained merely on the ground of an errone India Law Library Docid # 2425092