(941) DILIP KUMAR AND OTHERS Vs. MOHD. SHAKIL KHAN AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 03-09-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 115 — Revisionary powers — Suit abated due to death of a plaintiff — Trial court wrongly dismissed the suit as abated without properly conducting inquiry under Order 22 Rule 5 CPC — Such dismissal is an error of jurisdiction and law, thus revisable. India Law Library Docid # 2433271
(942) GUHA SINGH Vs. SMT. KIRAN JANGDE[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 03-09-2025 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1)(i) and (ia) — Divorce — Cruelty — Desertion — Marriage solemnized on 11.02.2010, one daughter born, parties residing separately since 2011 — Husband sought divorce on grounds of cruelty and desertion by wife — Wife filed cases under Section 498-A IPC and Domestic Violence Act, husband and family acquitted in criminal case — Wife denied husband’s allegations of her non-cooperative attitude and disrespect to his parents — Wife alleged demand for dowry and India Law Library Docid # 2433272
(943) SMT. KEJIYA BAI SINCE DEAD THROUGH LRS. Vs. ASHWANI KUMAR SAHU AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 03-09-2025 Hindu Succession Act, 1956 — Section 6 (as amended in 2005) — Coparcenary property — Daughter's right — Daughters become coparceners by birth with same rights and liabilities as sons. India Law Library Docid # 2433273
(944) HERO ECOTECH LIMITED AND OTHERS Vs. HERO CYCLES LIMITED AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 03-09-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 39 Rule 2A — Consequence of disobedience or breach of injunction — Procedure — Application filed under Order 39 Rule 2A must be registered as a miscellaneous judicial case as per Rule 459(a)(xii) of the Patna High Court Civil Court Rules — Trial court order initiating contempt proceedings without instituting a separate miscellaneous case and without following prescribed procedure is bad in India Law Library Docid # 2433107
(945) LALITESHWAR KUMAR SINHA Vs. THE WELFARE HOUSING COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 03-09-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 22 Rule 4(2) — Right of substituted defendant to file defence — While a substituted defendant has the right to file a defence appropriate to their character as a legal representative of the deceased, this right must be exercised within the time limits prescribed by Order VIII Rule 1 of the Code for filing a written statement. India Law Library Docid # 2433108
(946) TRACTORS AND FARM EQUIPMENT LIMITED Vs. STANDARD CORPORATION INDIA LIMITED TRACTOR DIVISION[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 03-09-2025 Copyright Act, 1957 — Section 14(c)(i) — Artistic work — Reproduction in material form — Depiction in three dimensions of a two-dimensional work — Claim that defendant produced tractor parts by copying plaintiff's drawings — While indirect copying is covered, mere reproduction of parts from drawings does not automatically constitute infringement if functional aspects and prescribed standards are involve India Law Library Docid # 2433110
(947) MD. NISANUL ISLAM BARBHUIYA @ LISANUL BARBHUIYA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM AND ANOTHER[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 03-09-2025 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 10 — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 354A(i)(iii) — Conviction of appellant for offences under POCSO Act and IPC — Appeal against conviction — Appreciation of evidence — Discrepancies in victim's testimony and FIR — Father's evidence not implicating appellant for sexual assault — Inconsistencies affecting reliability of victim's statement — Benefit of doubt India Law Library Docid # 2433124
(948) MD. JIAUR RAHMAN @ KALA AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF ASSAM[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 03-09-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 376 read with Section 511 — Attempt to commit rape — Revisional powers of High Court — High Court in revision can exercise powers of an Appellate Court under Section 401 Cr.PC and can alter sentence if lower court's decision is perverse, illegal, or based on incorrect application of law — Revisional powers are not for re-appreciation of evidence but to ascertain correctness or legality of lower court's findings — Interference only warranted if findings are wholly India Law Library Docid # 2433125
(949) SHRI DILIPBHAI LAXMANBHAI KANANI AND ANOTHER Vs. SHRI KSHITIJBHAI MANUBHAI PATEL AND OTHERS[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 03-09-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 43 Rule 1(r) — Appeal from Order — Scope of Appellate Interference in discretionary orders — An appellate court’s power to interfere with a trial court’s discretionary order granting or refusing an interlocutory injunction is limited. Interference is only permissible in exceptional circumstances, such as when the discretion exercised is arbitrary, capricious, or perverse, or when the trial court has ignored established legal principles. The appellate court shou India Law Library Docid # 2433129
(950) R. SESHASAYEE AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF ODISHA AND OTHERS[ORISSA HIGH COURT] 03-09-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Quashing of proceedings — Second complaint on same facts after previous dismissal and confirmation in revision amounts to abuse of process — Earlier complaint dismissed on merits, not on technical grounds — Filing fresh complaint, even with company as accused, does not revive dismissed claims against directors — Criminal process India Law Library Docid # 2433159
(951) ATUL GUPTA Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND[UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] 03-09-2025 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 — Writ Petition — Quashing of Orders — Release of Vehicle — Petitioner sought quashing of orders refusing release of vehicle confiscated in connection with ivory sale — Vehicle detained by forest authorities after apprehension of three persons with ivory — Petitioner, registered owner, sought interim release citing deterioration of vehicle — Orders of respondent authorities rejecting India Law Library Docid # 2432340
(952) DEVENDRA SHARMA Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS[UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] 03-09-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Quashing of proceedings — Abuse of process of court — High Court has inherent power to quash criminal proceedings that are essentially civil in nature to prevent abuse of process or secure ends of justice — Revisional Court correctly quashed summoning order as proceedings were initiated after a civil dispute regarding ownership of a firm was established and a Civil India Law Library Docid # 2432341
(953) NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD Vs. RATAN HALDAR AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 03-09-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 173 — Appeal against award — Remand of case — Award passed by Tribunal exceeded the scope of remand order from the High Court — High Court had remanded the case only for re-examining the extent of disability and its impact on earning capacity, not for re-adjudicating other aspects like liability and recovery rights. India Law Library Docid # 2434303
(954) SUNIL D VIJAN AND ANOTHER Vs. NEERJA GHURA[DELHI HIGH COURT] 03-09-2025 Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 — Section 14(1)(e) and 25B — Eviction petition on grounds of bona fide requirement — Landlord sought eviction of tenants for her son's motor/automobile parts business in premises located in a market hub — Tenants claimed they were paying rent to Evacuee Property Cell and landlord was a stranger, and also claimed adverse possession — Additional Rent Controller (ARC) held India Law Library Docid # 2434304
(955) ANKIT RAJ Vs. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 03-09-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 376 — Rape — False promise of marriage — For rape to be established on the basis of a false promise of marriage, the prosecution must prove that the promise was false from the very beginning and the accused never intended to marry the complainant — A mere breach of promise or failure to marry due to unforeseen circumstances does not amount to rape. India Law Library Docid # 2434305
(956) TONNY Vs. STATE[DELHI HIGH COURT] 03-09-2025 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Sections 4, 6, 8, 29 — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 366, 376, 506 — Appeal against conviction — Child victim's testimony relied upon — Appreciation of child witness evidence — Competency of child witness — Preliminary examination to ascertain understanding of sanctity of evidence and import of questions — Trial Court's satisfaction recorded India Law Library Docid # 2434306
(957) SH. MAHENDER PAL CHHABRA AND ANOTHER Vs. SH. SUBHASH AGGARWAL[DELHI HIGH COURT] 03-09-2025 Specific Relief Act, 1963 — Section 16(c) — Readiness and Willingness — Plaintiff must prove they were always ready and willing to perform their part of the contract — Mere averments are insufficient; conduct and supporting evidence are required — Financial capacity to pay balance consideration, accompanied by actions demonstrating intent to complete the sale, must be proven. India Law Library Docid # 2434307
(958) DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. SMT. SANTOSH MALIK AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 03-09-2025 Limitation Act, 1963 — Article 59 — Suit for cancellation of instrument — Starting point of limitation — Facts entitling plaintiff to seek cancellation — Knowledge of facts — Plaintiff became aware of facts entitling cancellation of Conveyance Deed on 23.03.2017, via a complaint from Defendant No. 3 — Suit filed on 28.03.2025 held to be beyond the prescribed three-year period. India Law Library Docid # 2434310
(959) M/S.SREE ARAVIND STEELS LIMITED AND OTHER Vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, GST AND CENTRAL EXCISE I DIVISION[MADRAS HIGH COURT (MADURAI BENCH)] 02-09-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 173(5) — Applicability — Not applicable to private complaints filed under Special Acts like Central Excise Act, 1944 — Supreme Court held that Section 173(4) and by extension 173(5) are confined to police reports. India Law Library Docid # 2432213
(960) SMT. AMITA VERMA AND OTHERS Vs. NEELAM VERMA AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (GWALIOR BENCH)] 02-09-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 8 Rule 6-A — Counterclaim by Defendant — A defendant can file a counterclaim against the plaintiff for any right or claim based on a cause of action that arose before or after the suit was filed, but critically, before delivering their defence or within the time limited for defence. The Supreme Court has clarified that while there's no embargo on filing after the written statement, the cause of action must be prior to the framing of issues, and courts pos India Law Library Docid # 2432525