(941) SHAMMA JAHAN Vs. NAZEER SIDDHIBHAI PATTANI[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 03-03-2025 Family Courts Act, 1984 — Section 7 and 19 — Muslim Marriage Act, 1954 — Sections 2(ii), 2(iv) and 2(ix) — A High Court can grant a decree of divorce by consent based on an amicable settlement (MoU) in an appeal, especially when the marriage has irretrievably broken down. India Law Library Docid # 2423271
(942) MAHMMAD IDRISH GAFURBHAI SADA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT AND OTHERS[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 03-03-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 216 — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 307 — Power to alter or add to any charge with the Court at any stage of the trial before the judgment is pronounced — The High Court clarifies that while the Court has this inherent power, it can consider information and evidence brought to its attention by the complainant or victim through an application — The Court is expected to independently assess the available evidence on record to determine if a prima f India Law Library Docid # 2423261
(943) HARSH Vs. SHASHWAT HOME LLP AND OTHERS[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 03-03-2025 Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 — Sections 60(2), 64(1) and 76 — Apportionment of settled compensation to the LARRA — Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority (LARRA) derives its jurisdiction to adjudicate disputes related to compensation, as outlined in Section 60(2), solely upon a reference made by the Collector India Law Library Docid # 2423262
(944) DR. S.G.R.PRAKASH Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[TELENGANA HIGH COURT] 03-03-2025 Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 — Section 20(4) — Treatment of Absence Period for Employees with Disabilities — Court can intervene if employer's treatment of absence period is unjust, especially under the Act, 2016. India Law Library Docid # 2423369
(945) VATTIKUTI BHARATHI AND OTHERS Vs. JANGILI KRISHNAM RAJU AND OTHERS[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 03-03-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 173 — Appellate courts in motor accident claims cases will review the adequacy of compensation awarded by the MACT, scrutinizing the evidence regarding the deceased's income and applying established principles and precedents, including deductions for personal expenses and additions for future prospects, to arrive at a just compensation. India Law Library Docid # 2423412
(946) BORODA INGTI @ MIKIR AND ANOTHER Vs. MRS JOYMATI BALA INGTI AND OTHERS[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 03-03-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 6 Rule 17 and Section 151 — Limitation Act, 1963 — Article 59 — Revision petition challenging the Trial Court's rejection of an application for amendment of the plaint in a suit seeking declaration of tenancy rights and recovery of possession — The High Court allowed the amendment, noting that while the amendment related to old events, the question of limitation under Article 59, would be determined during the trial — The challenge to the sale deed and mutation India Law Library Docid # 2423439
(947) SRI BHIM KANTA DUTTA AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF ASSAM[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 03-03-2025 Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 304 Part II, 34 and 299 — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 209, 313, 164 and 161 — Appeal against the conviction for culpable homicide not amounting to murder — The High Court set aside the conviction, finding inconsistencies between the oral testimonies of eyewitnesses regarding the assault and the medical evidence (post-mortem report) which indicated the cause of death as cardiac arrest with no external or internal injuries — The court noted that whil India Law Library Docid # 2423440
(948) THE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. SRI BIKASH GHOSH AND ANOTHER[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 03-03-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Sections 173 and 163A — Appeal against the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's award — The High Court allowed the appeal, holding that a permissive user or borrower of a vehicle steps into the shoes of the owner and cannot maintain a claim for compensation under Section 163A against the owner or the insurance company of the same vehicle for injuries sustained in an accident involving the borrowed vehicle alone. India Law Library Docid # 2423441
(949) THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs. BANJIT KUMAR[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 03-03-2025 Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 — Sections 2(e) 4 and 5 — The High Court heard a Petition filed by the Union of India, challenging an order of the Additional District Judge that had set aside an eviction order passed by the Estate Officer, N.F. Railway — The High Court observed that the Estate Officer's power to evict unauthorized occupants under the Act, 1971, specifically Sections 4 and 5, applies only to public premises as defined in Section 2(e) of the Act — Th India Law Library Docid # 2423442
(950) SMTI SOBITA RONGPHARI Vs. M/S SUPERLITE AAC BLOCKS INDUSTRIES AND ORS[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 03-03-2025 Assam Land and Revenue Regulations, 1886 — Section 167 — The High Court heard an appeal against an interim injunction order passed by the Civil Judge in Title — The High Court observed that the Trial Court had passed the injunction without discussing the three golden principles for granting an injunction (prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury) and without considering the question of the suit's maintainability under Section 167 — The High Court, while noting that an app India Law Library Docid # 2423443
(951) DEVENDRA KUMAR SETHIA Vs. INTERGLOBE AVIATION LTD. AND OTHERS[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 03-03-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 96 and 151 — The High Court heard a First Appeal challenging the trial court's dismissal of suit for lack of privity of contract — The appellant had provided cargo handling services at Guwahati Airport, initially engaged by Star Consortium (proforma respondent no.2), who had a work order from Indigo — The appellant later submitted bills directly to Indigo, and Indigo also returned some vehicles to the appellant — Despite these actions, the High Court, citing India Law Library Docid # 2423444
(952) THE BRANCH MANAGER, SBI GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. SONGMIT LEPCHA AND OTHERS[SIKKIM HIGH COURT] 03-03-2025 Motor Accident Claims — In motor accident claims involving the death of a bachelor with dependent family members, the deduction for personal and living expenses from the loss of earnings may be restricted to one-third based on Supreme Court precedent, and compensation for filial consortium to dependent family members should be awarded as per established norms — The High Court modified the compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT) in a motor accident case — The court adju India Law Library Docid # 2423536
(953) GOPAL SINGH @ GOPAL KUMAR SINGH Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 03-03-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) —Sections 376, 316 and 375 — Consensual physical relationship with a woman above the age of sixteen years does not constitute rape under Section 375 as it stood at the time of the alleged offence, and charges under Section 316 I.P.C. for causing the death of a quick unborn child require sufficient proof — The High Court allowed the criminal appeal, setting aside conviction and sentence under Sections 376 and 316 — The court found that the prosecutrix was above 16 years of India Law Library Docid # 2423574
(954) NILIMA KERKETTA Vs. PAULUSH MINZ AND OTHERS[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 03-03-2025 Specific Relief Act, 1963 — Section 31 — Limitation Act, 1963 — Sections 56 and 59 — A sale deed executed through impersonation of the vendor is a nullity and does not require a specific challenge in a suit for declaration of title by the true owner — The High Court dismissed an appeal against concurrent findings of lower courts which had decreed the plaintiff's suit for declaration of title and possession of land — The court held that a sale deed executed through impersonation is void ab initio India Law Library Docid # 2423575
(955) MANOJ KUMAR SINGH Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHER[PATNA HIGH COURT] 03-03-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Quashing of Cognizance Order due to Oblique Motive — A High Court can quash a cognizance order if it finds that the proceedings are a result of an oblique and ulterior motive, particularly when the dispute is primarily of a commercial nature. India Law Library Docid # 2423595
(956) AGYA RAM Vs. JOINT DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION AND OTHERS[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (LUCKNOW BENCH)] 03-03-2025 U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 — Under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act and Rules, entries in revenue records regarding possession must be made according to the prescribed procedure in the Land Records Manual to have evidentiary value, and the doctrine of family settlement requires a bona fide dispute, a voluntary agreement, and pre-existing claims or interests in the property — These writ petitions, consolidated due to common facts and law, challenged orders passed under the U.P India Law Library Docid # 2423729
(957) PARVAIZ AHMAD FASHOO Vs. U.T OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT AT SRINAGAR] 03-03-2025 Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 — Section 3 — Detention — A preventive detention order based on stale FIRs with no live link to the present apprehension and issued after an unexplained and unreasonable delay between the proposal and the order is legally unsustainable as it undermines the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority — The Division Bench allowed a Letters Patent Appeal and quashed a detention order under the Act, 1988, ho India Law Library Docid # 2423791
(958) RAJ KUMAR Vs. GURJANT SINGH AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 03-03-2025 Civil Procedure Code, Order 9 Rule 9 — Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 and Art. 122 — Restoration of Suit — Sufficient Cause & Limitation: Dismissal of a time-barred application for restoration of a suit dismissed for default upheld where plaintiff failed to establish “sufficient cause” under S. 5 and O.9 R.9. Factors negating sufficient cause included: (i) failure to properly prove medical grounds (only photocopies marked, no doctor examined); (ii) evidence indicating plaintiff’s mobility shor India Law Library Docid # 2423888
(959) UDHAM SINGH (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS Vs. BALWANT SINGH[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 03-03-2025 Hindu Law — Ancestral Property — Determination of Character — Mitakshara Law — To establish that property is ancestral under Mitakshara law, it must be proved that the property was inherited by the grandfather of the plaintiff from his father — The essential test is whether the property has been held in the family for three generations of male descent. India Law Library Docid # 2423889
(960) PATEL INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS Vs. PARAMJIT KAUR AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 03-03-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Insurance — Recovery Rights — Fake Driving Licence — Owner’s Due Diligence — An insurance company cannot recover compensation from the owner of a vehicle solely on the ground that the driver possessed a fake driving licence, unless the insurer proves the owner failed to exercise due diligence in verifying the driver’s competence and the apparent genuineness of the licence before employing him — IFFCO TOKIO General Insurance Company Ltd. held liable despite fake licence India Law Library Docid # 2423890