ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(401) USHA RANI Vs. SHAKUNTLA AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025
Specific Relief Act, 1963 — Section 16(c) — Readiness and Willingness — Pleading and Proof — In a suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell, the plaintiff must not only plead but also affirmatively prove continuous readiness and willingness to perform their part of the contract, from the date of the contract through to the date of hearing — This requires demonstrating not just the intention but also the capacity, including financial means, to complete the transaction — The burden of
India Law Library Docid # 2425120

(402) SANDEEP KAUR Vs. ANGREJ SINGH[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1)(ia) — Mental Cruelty — False and Baseless Allegations — Levelling false, baseless, vague, and uncorroborated allegations against the spouse and their family members, including complaints to authorities (like police/SSP) alleging harassment, dowry demand, or misappropriation of istridhan, which remain unsubstantiated during enquiry or trial, constitutes mental cruelty – Specifically, making unsubstantiated allegations against the character of the
India Law Library Docid # 2425121

(403) SATYAN DUA Vs. ESS ESS BATHROOM PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Compensation — Assessment — Injury Claim — Notional Income for Student — For assessing loss of income/future loss of income for a student claimant (18 years old) with no prior income proof, courts can determine a just notional monthly income based on the facts, potential, and judicial precedents, considering factors like educational background and the severity of injuries impacting future earning capacity.
India Law Library Docid # 2425122

(404) SUCHA SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) — Section 319 (Now Section 351, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) — Power to Summon Additional Accused — Standard of Proof Required — The power vested under Section 319 Cr.P.C. is an extraordinary power, discretionary in nature, and intended to be exercised sparingly only in cases where the circumstances clearly justify it — The standard of proof required for summoning a person as an additional accused under this section is significantly higher tha
India Law Library Docid # 2425175

(405) THE GURDASPUR CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD. Vs. KIRPAL SINGH AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025
Civil Procedure — Review — Scope and Limitations — Distinction from Appeal — The jurisdiction of the Court in a review petition is exceedingly limited and circumscribed — Review proceedings are not an appeal in disguise and cannot be entertained merely on the ground that the original judgment sought to be reviewed is incorrect or erroneous on merits — A rehearing of the matter or an attempt to re-argue the case is impermissible under the garb of review — The remedy against an incorrect judgment
India Law Library Docid # 2425176

(406) UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs. SOURAV BISWAS[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 24-03-2025
Service Law — Armed Forces — Disability Pension — Attributability/Aggravation — Entitlement Rules for Casualty Pensionary Awards, 2008 — Injury during BPET — An injury (Spondylolisthesis L4-L5) sustained by a soldier while participating in a mandatory Battle Physical Efficiency Test (BPET) conducted in a designated ‘field area’ is considered attributable to and aggravated by military service under the Entitlement Rules, 2008, especially when the genesis of the subsequent diagnosed
India Law Library Docid # 2425213

(407) STATE OF H.P. AND OTHERS Vs. M/S. INDORAMA INDIA PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 22-03-2025
Review Petition — A review petition is not an appeal and is maintainable only for errors apparent on the face of the record or discovery of new evidence — High Court dismissed a review petition filed by the State seeking review of a judgment regarding the necessity of a fresh instrument for the transfer of leasehold rights upon sanction of a Scheme of Arrangement by the NCLT, holding that the grounds raised did not constitute an error apparent on the face of the record, especially given that the
India Law Library Docid # 2423795

(408) KAMAL AANJNA Vs. NIRBHAY SINGH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 22-03-2025
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 173 — Appeal for Enhancement — Permanent Disability — Appeal preferred by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for grievous injuries including multiple fractures (femur, nasal bone, ankle, radius) and head injury sustained in a motor accident, leading to permanent disability.
India Law Library Docid # 2424151

(409) STATE OF KARANTAKA AND OTHERS Vs. B.G. PRAKASH KUMAR AND OTHERS[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 22-03-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Sections 227, 239 — Discharge of Accused — Stage for Consideration — Post Framing of Charge — The stage for considering discharge of an accused under Section 227 (Sessions trial) or Section 239 (Magistrate trial - warrant case) is prior to the framing of charges — Once charges have been framed, the trial court lacks the power under these sections or any other provision of the Code to discharge the accused — Following the framing of charge, the trial must proceed t
India Law Library Docid # 2424358

(410) SHYAMLAL AND OTHERS Vs. RAMBAI AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 22-03-2025
Stamp Act, 1899 — Section 33 & Section 48B (Chhattisgarh State Amendment) — Power to Impound Document — Limitation — The duty and power of a Court under Section 33 of the Stamp Act to examine and impound an instrument that appears insufficiently stamped upon its production is distinct from, and not curtailed by, the limitation period prescribed under the proviso to Section 48B (State Amendment) which restricts the Collector’s power to initiate action regarding deficiency noticed from a copy afte
India Law Library Docid # 2424702

(411) MANISH GAWALE Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 22-03-2025
Penal Code, 1860 — Section 306 read with Section 107 — Abetment of Suicide — Ingredients — Instigation or Intentional Aid — To establish the offence of abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused instigated the deceased to commit suicide or engaged in a conspiracy, or intentionally aided the commission of suicide by an act or illegal omission, as defined under Section 107 IPC — There must be clear mens rea and a positive act by t
India Law Library Docid # 2424703

(412) HARPREET SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. KAVITA CHAUDHARY[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 21-03-2025
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 452, 511, 503, 504, 350, 34 and 211 — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 204(2) — The requirement of filing a list of prosecution witnesses under Section 204(2) of the Cr.P.C. is generally directory, and the absence of such a list does not automatically vitiate the summoning order unless a failure of justice has occurred — High Court dismissed a petition seeking to quash criminal proceedings initiated upon a complaint, holding that the learned Magist
India Law Library Docid # 2423796

(413) AMIT CHOPRA AND OTHERS Vs. JITENDER KUMAR AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 21-03-2025
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Compensation — Fatal Accident — Enhancement — Deceased aged 44 ½ years, Permanent Employee (Bank Clerk-cum-Cashier) — Tribunal applied correct multiplier (14) but erred in deducting 1/3rd instead of 1/4th for personal expenses (implicitly assuming 4-6 dependents) and failed to award future prospects & adequate conventional heads — Held, applying principles from Sarla Verma
India Law Library Docid # 2423956

(414) KAMALJIT KAUR AND OTHERS Vs. NARINDERJIT SINGH AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 21-03-2025
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Compensation — Fatal Accident — Enhancement — Deceased aged 52 years, Permanent Employee (JBT Teacher) — Tribunal applied incorrect multiplier (6 instead of 11) and incorrect deduction for personal expenses (1/3rd instead of 1/4th) — Failed to award future prospects and adequate conventional heads — Held, applying principles laid down in Sarla Verma (2009) and Pranay Sethi (2017), correct multiplier is 11; deduction for personal expenses is 1/4th; future
India Law Library Docid # 2423957

(415) SHAKUNTALA AND OTHERS Vs. MURTI DEVI AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 21-03-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 39 Rules 1 and 2, Section 104, Order 43 Rule 1 — Temporary Injunction — Trinity Test — Necessity of Reasoning — Grant of temporary injunction requires the court to satisfy the well-established 'trinity test' — An impugned order granting injunction restraining defendants from construction and alienation, which lacks reasoning on how the plaintiffs established a prima facie case regarding their
India Law Library Docid # 2423971

(416) NARINDER KUMAR Vs. USHA RANI TUTEJA AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 21-03-2025
Succession Act, 1925 — Section 63 — Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 68 — Probate Proceedings — Proof of Will — Suspicious Circumstances — Onus on Propounder — The propounder seeking probate bears the onus of proving due execution of the Will as per S. 63 of the Succession Act and S. 68 of the Evidence Act — Crucially, the propounder must dispel all legitimate suspicious circumstances surrounding the execution to the satisfaction of the court's conscience — Failure to remove such doubts
India Law Library Docid # 2423972

(417) SHRI VIKRAMBHAI PATEL Vs. M/S PRAVEEN GROUP OF CONSTRUCTIONS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 21-03-2025
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 482 — Maintainability — Second Petition — A subsequent petition under Section 482 CrPC challenging an order is not maintainable if the same ground was raised or available to be raised in a prior petition under Section 482 CrPC which was dismissed as withdrawn/not pressed — Permitting successive petitions on grounds available earlier constitutes an abuse of process, preventing parties from raising pleas in instalments. (Bhisham Lal Verma; Vinod Kumar, IA
India Law Library Docid # 2424152

(418) NAVNEET SHAH Vs. MOOL CHAND AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 21-03-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 9 Rule 13 — Setting Aside Ex Parte Decree — Irregularity in Service vs. Knowledge of Proceedings — An ex parte decree cannot be set aside solely on the ground of irregularity in the service of summons if the Court is convinced, based on material on record, that the defendant had knowledge of the suit proceedings and could have appeared — Even if the applicant under Order 9 Rule 13 establishes some irregularity in service, the application is liable to be dismiss
India Law Library Docid # 2424153

(419) ABHIJEET BENIWAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 21-03-2025
Passports Act, 1967 — Sections 6(2)(f), 10, 22 — Passports Rules, 1980 — Rule 12 — Passport Renewal — Pendency of Criminal Case — Gazette Notification G.S.R. 570(E) — The mere pendency of a criminal case does not automatically restrict the issuance or renewal of a passport to a period less than the standard 10 years prescribed by Rule 12. Gazette Notification G.S.R. 570(E) dated 25.08.1993, which permits shorter validity contingent on court orders, does not override the
India Law Library Docid # 2424164

(420) MR. SUNIL ABRAHAM Vs. MS. REETH ABRAHAM[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 21-03-2025
Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 17, Section 21 — Admission in Pleadings — Effect of Withdrawal of Petition — Evidentiary Value — An admission made in pleadings, such as a joint petition for mutual consent divorce, generally binds the maker — The subsequent withdrawal of the petition does not automatically efface the contents or destroy the evidentiary effect of the admission contained therein — However, an admission is not conclusive proof and can be explained away by its maker — Its weight depends
India Law Library Docid # 2424341