(61) STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Vs. DEVKUMAR SURYAWANSHI AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 05-01-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 378 — Appeal against acquittal — Scope of interference — Appellate court must consider whether the trial court’s view is a possible one, particularly when evidence on record has been analyzed — An order of acquittal strengthens the presumption of innocence in favor of the accused (double presumption) — Appellate court must be relatively slow in reversing an India Law Library Docid # 2437912
(62) KARIMAN (DIED) THROUGH LR AND OTHERS Vs. JAINATH (DIED) THROUGH LRS: AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 05-01-2026 Limitation Act, 1963 — Article 65 — Suit for Possession of Immovable Property based on Title — Limitation Period — Adverse Possession — The limitation period for a suit for possession of immovable property based on title is twelve years, commencing from the date when the defendant's possession becomes adverse to the plaintiff (Article 65) — Where the plaintiff became aware that the defendant was in India Law Library Docid # 2437913
(63) M.A. RAFI (DEAD ) THROUGH LRS. AND OTHERS Vs. EJAZURRAHMAN AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 05-01-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 100 — Second Appeal — Concurrent Findings of Fact — The concurrent finding of both the Trial Court and the First Appellate Court, holding that the plaintiffs failed to prove their plea of ownership based on an oral Hiba (gift), cannot be interfered with in a Second Appeal unless found to be perverse. India Law Library Docid # 2437914
(64) RAMANUJ SHARMA AND OTHERS Vs. THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION BHILAI THROUGH ITS COMMISSIONER AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 05-01-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 96 — First Appeal — Setting aside of Trial Court Judgment — Declaration of Title, Possession, Demolition and Injunction — Property declared surplus under Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (ULCRA) — Challenge to ULCRA orders: Status and Effect after Repeal — Where ULCRA proceedings were challenged pre-Repeal Act, and subsequent India Law Library Docid # 2437915
(65) LAKSHAY JAIN Vs. STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI[DELHI HIGH COURT] 05-01-2026 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS) — Sections 20/22/25/29 — Regular Bail — Successive Bail Application — Maintainability — A court can entertain successive bail applications only upon a demonstrable change in circumstances that was not available or considered at the time of dismissal of the earlier application. India Law Library Docid # 2437886
(66) PARVESH MANN @ SAGAR MANN Vs. STATE NCT OF DELHI[DELHI HIGH COURT] 05-01-2026 Criminal Procedure — Judgment — Pronouncement of Judgment after conclusion of trial — Transfer of Judicial Officers — Duty of transferred officer to pronounce reserved judgments/orders — Where final arguments concluded and matter reserved for judgment by Predecessor Judge, who was subsequently transferred — Administrative orders mandated transferred officer to pronounce reserved judgments/orders within 2-3 weeks, notwithstanding transfer — Order by Successor Judge directing re-hearing of final India Law Library Docid # 2437887
(67) SHRI SARVESH PURI Vs. SHRI RISHAB KUMAR[DELHI HIGH COURT] 05-01-2026 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 read with Section 138(b) — Dishonor of Cheque — Statutory Notice — Timelines — Section 138(b) mandates the payee to issue a legal demand notice to the drawer within thirty days of receiving information about the cheque's dishonor from the bank — Failure to issue the legal notice within the statutory 30-day period renders the notice invalid and prevents the cause of action under Section 138 from crystallizing — Where the cheque was dishonored on May India Law Library Docid # 2437888
(68) TALAT KOUSER AND OTHERS Vs. UT OF J&K AND OTHERS[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT AT JAMMU] 05-01-2026 Land Acquisition — Writ of Mandamus for Payment of Compensation — State Land Acquisition Act — Right to Property (Article 300-A of Constitution of India) — Petitioners sought payment of assessed compensation (Rs. 8,97,000/-) plus interest for 1.4 kanals of land acquired under an award dated 08.09.2014 for national highway widening — Non-payment resulted from default by Indenting Departments (PW(R&B) India Law Library Docid # 2437939
(69) IRFAN ALI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 05-01-2026 Rajasthan Contractual Hiring to Civil Service Posts Rules, 2022 — Eligibility for Absorption/Engagement — Machine with Man/Computer Operator — Petitioner sought appointment/absorption under Rules of 2022 based on existing service as Computer Operator — Eligibility mandated appointment under Mukhyamantri Nishulk Nirogi Rajasthan Yojana (Dava) (MNDY Scheme) — Petitioner failed to provide appointment India Law Library Docid # 2437940
(70) GANGESHWAR LAL SHRIVASTAVA AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 05-01-2026 Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) — Sections 318(4), 316(2), 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) — Quashing of FIR/Criminal Proceedings — Grounds for quashing — Allegations of siphoning, diversion, and misappropriation of funds entrusted for film production — Whether dispute is civil (breach of contract) or criminal (criminal breach of trust) — Court not to conduct mini-trial or evaluate veracity of evidence at threshold — FIR and India Law Library Docid # 2437946
(71) ANKIT KUMAR MEENA AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 05-01-2026 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 244(1), Fifth Schedule, and Article 243-ZC(1) — Scheduled Areas — Application of State Municipal Law — Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009 — Sections 3 and 329 — Inclusion of Scheduled Area within Municipal Limits — The constitutional scheme does not create an absolute constitutional embargo on the application of State legislation in Scheduled Areas; general laws, enacted under State legislative competence (Entry 5, List II, Seventh Schedule) continue to appl India Law Library Docid # 2437947
(72) ANITA ASHOK MAPUSKAR AND OTHERS Vs. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER OF MUMBAI AND ANOTHER[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 05-01-2026 Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 — Section 53 — Show Cause Notice — Legality and Vagueness — Notice issued under Section 53(1) read with Section 52(1)(h) and (d) of MRTP Act alleging unauthorized development of residential structures — Notice appeared incongruous, vaguely alleging unauthorized India Law Library Docid # 2437961
(73) DR. MADHURIMA PANDEY AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 02-01-2026 Constitution of India, 1950 — Writ Petition — Maintainability — Private Educational Institutions — Termination of services/Service Disputes — Disputes arising from an ordinary contract of service between an employee and a private educational institution are not amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, as they lack a 'public law element' — Even if the institution performs a India Law Library Docid # 2437910
(74) SANTOSH Vs. ROSHANI[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 02-01-2026 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 24 — Maintenance pendente lite and expenses of proceedings — Non-compliance with order — Termination of matrimonial proceedings — Whether a matrimonial proceeding under the Act of 1955 can be terminated by the Court for non-compliance with an order under Section 24 granting interim maintenance/cost of proceedings? — Matrimonial court cannot India Law Library Docid # 2437911
(75) V.K. CONSTRUCTION AND ANOTHER Vs. TEJ VEER AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 26-12-2025 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act) — Section 138, Section 148 — BNSS, 2023 — Section 528 (read with Section 430 and Section 395) — Suspension of Sentence pending appeal — Condition of depositing 20% compensation amount — Appellate Court's power — The imposition of a condition to deposit 20% of the compensation amount under Section 148 of India Law Library Docid # 2437792
(76) A.O. SMITH CORPORATION AND ANOTHER Vs. STAR SMITH EXPORT PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER[DELHI HIGH COURT] 24-12-2025 Trade Marks Act, 1999 — Section 29(5) — Trade Mark Infringement — Passing Off — Interim Injunction — Use of registered trade mark as a trade name or part of trade name — Relief sought against Impugned Trade Name (Star Smith Export Pvt. Ltd.) and Impugned Domain Name (http://www.starsmith.in/) — Already established that 'SMITH' is dominant part of Plaintiffs' (A.O. SMITH CORPORATION AND ANR.) Trade Marks and Impugned Trade Marks are deceptively similar, and India Law Library Docid # 2437315
(77) NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. MAHESHWARI DEVI AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 24-12-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 (Claim Petition for Negligence) and Section 163A (Structured Formula Compensation) — Negligence — Determining Factor — When Claim Under Section 166 Fails to Prove Negligence — Tribunal finding that deceased motorcyclist failed to prove rash/negligent driving by truck driver because truck was stationary and hit from behind — Held, such finding is inconsistent with law (Archit Saini) — Improper or wrongful parking of a vehicle is India Law Library Docid # 2437316
(78) STATE Vs. KAMAL[DELHI HIGH COURT] 24-12-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Appeal Against Acquittal — Standard of Review — Scope of Interference — An order of acquittal cannot be set aside merely because a different view is possible — The Appellant-State must demonstrate illegality or perversity in the findings, or that the conclusion ignores material evidence — Absent such demonstration, the High Court will not interfere with the reasoned judgment of the Trial Court. India Law Library Docid # 2437317
(79) DR D K MODI Vs. V K MODI AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 24-12-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 7 Rule 11 — Rejection of Plaint — Scope — A plaint can only be rejected if it fails to disclose a cause of action, based strictly on the grounds listed under Order 7 Rule 11, and not on matters concerning the merits of the case or the eventual relief India Law Library Docid # 2437318
(80) MAMTA DAS Vs. PUNEET DAS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 24-12-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 47 Rule 1 — Review Jurisdiction — Scope — Review is maintainable only for error apparent on the face of the record, discovery of new and important matter, or for any other sufficient reason analogous to the foregoing — It is not a forum for re-agitating the matter on merits, seeking a rehearing of issues already adjudicated, or India Law Library Docid # 2437319