(681) RANJEET SINGH Vs. RADHESHYAM AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 11-03-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 100 — Second Appeal — Substantial Question of Law — Scope of Interference — The jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 100 CPC is confined to appeals involving a substantial question of law — The High Court generally should not interfere with findings of fact arrived at by the first appellate court, which is the final court of fact, unless its conclusions are found to be erroneous being contrary to mandatory provisions of law, based on inadmissible evid India Law Library Docid # 2424087
(682) BHARAT SINGH PATEL AND OTHERS Vs. ANTAR SINGH GOUR AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 11-03-2025 Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) — Section 34 — Bar on Civil Court Jurisdiction — Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act creates an express bar on the jurisdiction of Civil Courts to entertain any suit or proceeding concerning matters which the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT) or the Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) is empowered to determine under the Act — No injunction can be granted by a Civil Court regarding actions taken or to India Law Library Docid # 2424120
(683) REKHA KANWAR AND OTHERS Vs. MOHAN RAM @ BHALLU AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 11-03-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Compensation — Determination of Income — Absence of Documentary Proof — Owner-Driver — In assessing compensation for the death of a self-employed person, such as an owner-driver, the Tribunal or Court should not mechanically adopt minimum wages merely due to the absence of strict documentary proof of income — Where evidence establishes the deceased’s age, ownership of a vehicle (supported by Registration Certificate and Driving License), and engagement in the India Law Library Docid # 2424179
(684) MADHU SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 11-03-2025 Penal Code, 1860 — Section 306, 107 — Abetment of Suicide — Quashing of FIR (Section 482 CrPC) — For establishing an offence under Section 306 IPC, there must be clear evidence of direct or indirect acts of instigation, intentional aiding, or conspiracy by the accused, demonstrating a mens rea to push the deceased towards suicide — Such acts must be proximate to the time of suicide — Mere allegations of harassment, disputes, or annoying conduct, without positive action compelling the India Law Library Docid # 2424165
(685) MAMTA MEENA Vs. AMAN KUMAR DHARWAL AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 11-03-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 173 — Appeal against MACT Award — Scope — Consideration of an appeal preferred by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, where the challenge is confined solely to the quantum of compensation, with the finding on negligence not being disputed by the appellant. India Law Library Docid # 2424215
(686) GAS AUTHORITY OF INDIA LIMITED Vs. M/S MAHIMA REAL ESTATE (P) LIMITED[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 11-03-2025 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Execution of Award — Jurisdiction — Transfer Certificate — An executing court possesses jurisdiction to entertain and decide an execution application for an arbitration award if the property related to the underlying dispute, or assets for execution, are situated within its territorial jurisdiction. India Law Library Docid # 2424217
(687) SHANKAR LAL SONI AND OTHERS Vs. PRAHLAD GURJAR AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 11-03-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 173 — Appeal for Enhancement of Compensation — Appeal preferred by claimants seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for the death of the deceased in a motor vehicle accident. India Law Library Docid # 2424219
(688) JHABAR SINGH JAT Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 11-03-2025 Service Law — Transfer — Scope of Judicial Review — Administrative Exigency — Judicial review of transfer orders is limited and minimal — Courts should not interfere with transfers made in the public interest and for administrative reasons unless the order is vitiated by mala fides or is made in violation of any mandatory statutory Rule — Administrative authorities are best placed to determine postings based on operational requirements and efficiency. India Law Library Docid # 2424208
(689) SUHAS DAMODAR SATHE Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 11-03-2025 Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958 — Section 2(g), Article 5(g-a), Article 25 (Explanation I) — Conveyance vs. Development Agreement — Determination for Stamp Duty — The determination of whether an instrument is a ‘Development Agreement’ chargeable under Article 5(g-a) or a ‘Conveyance’ under Article 25 (read with Explanation I) of Schedule I to the Maharashtra Stamp Act depends on the substance of the transaction and the rights transferred, rather than the nomenclature used by the parties — If the ins India Law Library Docid # 2424291
(690) AVINASH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 11-03-2025 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) — Section 187(3) — Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) — Section 111 — Organized Crime — Invocation of Offence — Effect on Statutory Bail Period — Judicial Scrutiny — The invocation of the offence of organized crime under Section 111 BNS, which carries a higher punishment including life imprisonment, automatically extends the period for completion of investigation and filing of the final report from sixty days to ninety days under Section 187(3) BN India Law Library Docid # 2424342
(691) SMT. SUSHEELAMMA Vs. SRI. MUNIYAPPA AND ANOTHER[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 11-03-2025 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — Order 21 Rule 106 — Limitation Act, 1963 — Article 122, Section 5 — Restoration of Execution Petition dismissed for default — Condonation of Delay — Sufficient Cause — An application under Order 21 Rule 106 CPC for setting aside an order dismissing an execution petition for default must be filed within 30 days as prescribed by Article 122 of the Limitation Act — While Section 5 of the Limitation Act allows for condonation of delay beyond this period upon showing “ India Law Library Docid # 2424388
(692) GOOGLE LLC Vs. G. VENKATACHALAM AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 11-03-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order VIII Rule 1 — Commercial Courts Act, 2015 — Filing of Written Statement — Condonation of Delay — Intermediary Liability — Sufficiency of Reasons — In a commercial suit seeking injunction and removal of allegedly defamatory content against multiple defendants including an online intermediary (Google LLC), an application to condone a delay of 156 days in filing the written statement by the intermediary was considered — The reason cited — requirement to secu India Law Library Docid # 2424468
(693) UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD Vs. THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 11-03-2025 Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997 (Act 10/1997) — Section 3(2) — Notice proposing Acquisition — Validity — Pre-decision — Post-decisional Hearing — Natural Justice — Effect of Undertaking in Prior PIL — A show cause notice issued under Section 3(2) of the Act proposing to acquire the petitioner’s land is liable to be quashed as being a fait accompli and amounting only to a post-decisional hearing, where the acquiring body (CMRL) had already given an undertaking bef India Law Library Docid # 2424469
(694) SETHULAKSHMY Vs. SAROJINI AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 11-03-2025 Easement Act, 1882 — Section 22 — Servient Owner’s Right to Shift Easement — Section 22 empowers the servient owner to request the confinement (shifting) of an easement, including a right of way acquired by necessity or prescription, to a determinate part of the servient heritage — This right is exercisable provided the shifting makes the easement least onerous to the servient owner and causes no detriment, prejudice, or inconvenience to the dominant owner. India Law Library Docid # 2424564
(695) DEVANANDH P.P AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 11-03-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 482 — Quashing of Proceedings — Section 498A IPC — Specificity of Allegations — While general and omnibus allegations against distant relatives may warrant quashing in matrimonial disputes, proceedings under Section 498A IPC and connected offences (like 406, 420) cannot be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. if the FIR and statements contain specific, prima facie allegations detailing overt acts of cruelty, demands, or India Law Library Docid # 2424565
(696) MATHUKUTTY Vs. MUKESH KUMAR[KERALA HIGH COURT] 11-03-2025 Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Section 55(6)(b) — Contract for Sale — Return of Advance Money — Buyer’s Charge — Unless the buyer has improperly declined to accept delivery of the property, the buyer is entitled under Section 55(6)(b) to a statutory charge on the property for the advance purchase money paid and interest thereon — If the seller’s conduct contributes to non-performance (reluctance or failure to clear encumbrances/provide clear title), the buyer’s claim for refund prevails over t India Law Library Docid # 2424566
(697) JAMES ABRAHAM Vs. THE STATE OF KERALA[KERALA HIGH COURT] 11-03-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Sections 397-401 — Revisional Jurisdiction — Scope — The High Court’s revisional jurisdiction is supervisory, intended to correct miscarriage of justice — It does not equate to an appeal, and re-appreciation of evidence is not permissible unless concurrent findings are perverse, wholly unreasonable, based on no material, ignore relevant material, or suffer from glaring illegality or impropriety. India Law Library Docid # 2424563
(698) SATRUGHAN Vs. HIRENDRA DAS AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 11-03-2025 Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Section 58(c) — Mortgage by Conditional Sale vs. Sale with Condition of Repurchase — Interpretation of Deed — To determine whether a transaction embodied in a registered deed is a mortgage by conditional sale or an outright sale, the primary consideration is the intention of the parties as reflected in the language used in the deed itself — Where the deed uses terms indicative of absolute transfer (‘vikray’, ‘bikri’, etc.), conveys absolute right, title, and inte India Law Library Docid # 2424686
(699) KRISHNA KUMAR PARIHAR Vs. BHAGWAN SINGH AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 11-03-2025 Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 — Section 170-B — Reversion of Land Transferred by Fraud — Applicability Period — Section 170-B applies only to possession of agricultural land, belonging to a member of an aboriginal tribe, held by a non-tribal person, where such possession originated from a transfer that occurred between 02.10.1959 and 24.10.1980 (commencement date of the 1980 amendment) — If the non-tribal person’s possession commenced prior to 02.10.1959, the obligation under Section 170- India Law Library Docid # 2424687
(700) M/S KRAZYBEE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 11-03-2025 Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) — S.3 & Schedule — Predicate/Scheduled Offence — Necessity for PMLA Proceedings — The commission and existence of a scheduled offence, registered with jurisdictional police or pending enquiry/trial, is a fundamental pre-requisite for initiating or continuing proceedings under Section 3 of the PMLA. India Law Library Docid # 2424726