ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(921) RAHUL BABANRAO BHAD Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA[BOMBAY HIGH COURT (NAGPUR BENCH)] 04-03-2025
Evidence Act, 1872 — S. 3, S. 101 — Appreciation of Evidence — Eyewitness Testimony — Reliability — Testimony of a sole alleged eyewitness (PW5) found unreliable and lacking confidence due to
India Law Library Docid # 2424305

(922) SRI B C PRASAD AND OTHERS Vs. THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR AND DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF STAMPS GANDHINAGAR REGISTRATION DISTRICT AND OTHERS[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 04-03-2025
Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957 — Section 46A(1) — Recovery of Stamp Duty Not Levied or Short Levied — Limitation Period for Initiating Proceedings — Section 46A(1) of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957, prescribes a limitation period for initiating proceedings (by serving a show cause notice) to recover stamp duty that was not levied or was short levied on an instrument — Under normal circumstances, such proceedings must be initiated within five years from the date the duty became payable
India Law Library Docid # 2424347

(923) B.R. ACHARYA Vs. A. ANIL KUMAR PAI[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 04-03-2025
Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (SEBI Act) — Sections 12(1), 15F, 26 — Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 409, 420 — Applicability of SEBI Act vs. IPC — Unregistered/Unlicensed Person — The provisions of the SEBI Act, particularly those imposing penalties on stock brokers (Section 15F) and governing cognizance of offences under the Act (Section 26, requiring a complaint by the Board), apply primarily to persons registered under Section 12(1) of the Act (stock brokers, sub-brokers, inte
India Law Library Docid # 2424351

(924) KARTIK RADIA Vs. M/S. BDO INDIA LLP AND ANOTHER[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 04-03-2025
Limited Liability Partnership Act, 2008 — Sections 2(1)(o), 23(1), 23(4), First Schedule (Items 1 & 14) — Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 11 — Arbitration Agreement in LLP Agreement — LLP as Party — Privity — Purposive Interpretation — An arbitration agreement contained within a Limited Liability Partnership (LLP) Agreement, executed by the partners inter se, can cover disputes involving the LLP itself, even if the LLP is not formally a signatory to the agreement — An LLP is int
India Law Library Docid # 2424365

(925) THE MANAGEMENT OF BHARAT EARTH MOVERS LTD. Vs. THE GENERAL SECRETARY, BHARATH EARTH MOVERS EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION AND OTHERS[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 04-03-2025
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 — Section 9A — Industrial Disputes (Karnataka) Rules, 1957 — Rule 35, Rule 36 (Omitted) — Form E — Notice of Change in Service Conditions — Mode of Service — Individual Notice vs. Display and Union Notice — Section 9A of the Act requires notice of change in service conditions to be given to workmen “in the prescribed manner” — Rule 35 of the Karnataka Rules prescribes this manner, requiring display of the notice (in Form E) on the notice board at the main entrance a
India Law Library Docid # 2424379

(926) UTTARADI MUTT Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT (DHARWAD BENCH)] 04-03-2025
Administrative Law — Police Powers — Interference in Civil/Religious Disputes — Judicial Orders — Limits of Jurisdiction — Police authorities are expected to maintain neutrality and refrain from interfering in purely civil or religious disputes between private parties, particularly when the matter is sub-judice or governed by judicial orders (including appeal periods post-judgment or status quo orders) — Actions such as directing a party in long-standing possession (pursuant to prior decrees, pe
India Law Library Docid # 2424436

(927) MOULALI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT (DHARWAD BENCH)] 04-03-2025
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 — Sections 187(3) & 193(2) — Statutory / Default Bail — Calculation of Period — Date of Filing Charge Sheet — For determining the availability of statutory/default bail under Section 187(3) BNSS, the charge sheet is considered “filed” when it is presented to and received by the competent court/Judge, as evidenced by the Judge’s endorsement and date on the charge sheet itself — The subsequent date of ministerial acts like checking, verification, reg
India Law Library Docid # 2424437

(928) HANAMANT DUNDAPPA NARALE AND OTHERS Vs. PANDURANG AND OTHERS[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT (KALABURAGI BENCH)] 04-03-2025
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Sections 165 & 166 — Nature of Negligence — Actionable vs. Culpable — Proof — Claims for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act are founded on the principle of actionable negligence, requiring proof of a breach of duty of care causing injury or damage — This standard is distinct from culpable negligence, which involves a higher degree of fault (gross breach, recklessness) relevant for criminal prosecution — For awarding compensation under the Act, establishing the v
India Law Library Docid # 2424440

(929) VASUKI AND OTHERS Vs. GANESAN AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 04-03-2025
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Compensation — Contributory Negligence — Absence of Driving Licence — The mere non-possession of a valid driving licence by the deceased victim at the time of the accident, per se, does not automatically lead to a finding of contributory negligence — To fasten contributory negligence, there must be positive evidence to show that the victim drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner or otherwise contributed to the cause of the accident — In the absen
India Law Library Docid # 2424477

(930) UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON Vs. ASSISTANT CONTROLLER OF PATENTS AND DESIGNS AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 04-03-2025
Patents Act, 1970 — Section 16(1) — Divisional Application — Filing by Applicant’s Choice — Requirement of Plurality of Invention — Section 16(1) of the Patents Act, 1970 permits a patent applicant to file a divisional application suo motu (“if he so desires”) at any time before the grant of the parent patent, even without an objection from the Controller regarding lack of unity of invention — However, the substantive requirement for a valid divisional application is that the claims of the compl
India Law Library Docid # 2424478

(931) Y. BABU Vs. INSPECTOR OF POLICE[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 04-03-2025
Criminal Procedure — Bail and Anticipatory Bail Applications — Listing Procedure — High Court Practice — Applications from Same FIR vs. Successive Applications — Effect of Roster Change — Supreme Court Clarification — Following the clarification by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Shekhar Prasad Mahto v. The Registrar General, Jharkhand High Court, the governing principle for listing bail/anticipatory bail applications is primarily based on ensuring consistency when dealing with matters arising from
India Law Library Docid # 2424479

(932) MS. SHRIYA UPPATI Vs. THE STATE OF TELANGANA[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 04-03-2025
Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 — Section 23(1) — Cancellation of Gift Deed — Conditions Precedent — Necessity of Explicit Condition in Deed — For invoking Section 23(1) to declare a transfer (like a gift deed) void, two pre-requisites must be fulfilled: (i) the transfer must have been made subject to an explicit condition that the transferee shall provide basic amenities and physical needs to the transferor (senior citizen), and (ii) the transferee must have ref
India Law Library Docid # 2424756

(933) DASARI CHANDU @ CHANDRA Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 04-03-2025
Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34 — Common Intention — To invoke Section 34 IPC, the prosecution must establish a pre-arranged plan and prior meeting of minds among all accused — Mere presence at the scene, particularly without attribution of specific overt acts contributing to the commission of the crime, is insufficient to infer common intention, especially when eyewitness accounts primarily implicate other accused in the actual commission of the act
India Law Library Docid # 2424785

(934) SUNIL ANNA KAKADE AND OTHERS Vs. LAXMI BALU KAKADE AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 03-03-2025
Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 — Partition — Ancestral property — A mere recording of names in a revenue record without following due procedure under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966, does not conclusively prove partition of ancestral property
India Law Library Docid # 2423094

(935) SUO MOTU PROCEEDINGS INITIATED ON THE COMMUNICATION RECEIVED FROM THE MEMBER SECRETARY Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 03-03-2025
Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 — To eradicate child marriage among tribal communities, a multifaceted approach is necessary, involving community-based awareness and support programs, sensitization efforts, and coordination among government agencies, NGOs, and legal services authorities, as directed by the Court to protect the rights and well-being of children.
India Law Library Docid # 2423169

(936) PREETHA RADHAKRISHNAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND ANOTHER[KERALA HIGH COURT] 03-03-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 439(2) and 437(5) — Willful violation of bail conditions, such as failing to surrender passports for an extended period, justifies bail cancellation, which can be exercised by a Magistrate under Section 437(5) Cr.P.C., even if the petition is filed under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C.
India Law Library Docid # 2423170

(937) UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs. A.MOHANDAS AND ANOTHER[KERALA HIGH COURT] 03-03-2025
Department of Posts (Group D Posts) Recruitment Rules, 2002 — Rules 3 and 4 — Tribunal's Order Quashed for Erroneous Interpretation of Recruitment Rules — The High Court set aside the Central Administrative Tribunal's order, which had directed the Department of Posts to promote the applicants to
India Law Library Docid # 2423171

(938) DR.NARAYANAN P.V. Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND ANOTHER[KERALA HIGH COURT] 03-03-2025
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Sections 7 and 8 — Settlement between Accused and Victim not Grounds for Quashment in Serious Offences — The Court relied on Supreme Court decisions to hold that, in serious offences like those under the POCSO Act, a settlement
India Law Library Docid # 2423172

(939) R.S.BIJU Vs. KOUSALYA AMMA AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 03-03-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 96 — Regular First Appeal not Maintainable against Dismissal for Non-Prosecution – The High Court held that a Regular First Appeal under Section 96 is not maintainable against an order dismissing a suit for non-prosecution/default.
India Law Library Docid # 2423173

(940) RANA BHAVIK JAGDISHCHANDRA Vs. RANA DARSHANA ARVINDKUMAR[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 03-03-2025
Family Courts Act, 1984 — Section 19 — Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 — A child custody appeal under the Family Courts Act, 1984, can be resolved and disposed of based on a mutually agreed settlement between the parties.
India Law Library Docid # 2423267