ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(981) JABBAR ALI Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA[TRIPURA HIGH COURT] 28-02-2025
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Section 36-A(4) — The statutory right to bail under Section 36-A(4) of the NDPS Act for non-completion of investigation within 180 days is inchoate until availed, and filing a Public Prosecutor's report seeking an extension before the accused avails this right extinguishes it — A writ petition challenging orders extending the detention of an accused under the NDPS Act was partially allowed, setting aside the order that refused to decide the
India Law Library Docid # 2423475

(982) TAHIR ALI AND OTHERS Vs. ANHAR MIAH AND OTHERS[TRIPURA HIGH COURT] 28-02-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Sections 11, 96 and 100 — Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 17 — Registration Act, 1908 — Section 87 — Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 40 — The principle of res judicata prevents reopening issues already heard and finally decided by a competent court in a former suit between the same parties or those claiming under them — Also, procedural defects in registration do not invalidate a deed executed in good faith — An appeal against concurrent dismissal of a suit challenging s
India Law Library Docid # 2423476

(983) M/S. TEA MECH (INDIA) AND ANOTHER Vs. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANOTHER[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 28-02-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 210 — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 406, 408 and 420 — Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 — Dishonour of cheque — Proceedings under Section 138 are distinct from a case registered under Sections 406/408/420 IPC for criminal breach of trust and cheating, even if there are overlapping factual elements, thus Section 210 Cr.PC is not applicable to stay the former based on the latter — The High Court dismissed a petition seeking to set as
India Law Library Docid # 2423461

(984) SUMAN TOPPO UDALGURI Vs. THE STATE OF ASSAM[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 28-02-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 313 — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 302 and 448 — Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 25 — A conviction based solely on circumstantial evidence requires a complete and unbroken chain of circumstances excluding all reasonable hypotheses of innocence, and the accused must be properly examined under Section 313 Cr.PC regarding all incriminating evidence — The High Court allowed a criminal appeal, setting aside the judgment of conviction under Sections 302
India Law Library Docid # 2423462

(985) SUMIT LAL DEY Vs. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND OTHERS[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 28-02-2025
Assam Police Manual Part-III — Rule 66 — Assam Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1964 — Rules 9 and Rule 9(2) — Mere negligence in the performance of duty may not automatically constitute misconduct warranting disciplinary penalty, and a show-cause notice containing definite charges and allegations can initiate departmental proceedings — The High Court allowed a writ appeal, setting aside the judgment of the learned Single Judge and consequently quashing the disciplinary penalty of withhol
India Law Library Docid # 2423463

(986) DR. MEKHULSHIM TONTANGA MARING Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[MANIPUR HIGH COURT] 28-02-2025
NEET-PG, 2023 Regulations — The High Court considered the adjustment of PG medical admissions to accommodate two candidates in a situation with a disputed initial admission and a subsequently vacant seat, ultimately directing the Union of India to consider the adjustment in the interest of justice and to avoid seat wastage — An applicant challenged the cancellation of his admission to a PG Medical (Surgery) seat at JNIMS while another candidate with lower marks was admitted — Subsequently, an Al
India Law Library Docid # 2423523

(987) MS ANUPAM Vs. STATE OF MANIPUR AND OTHERS[MANIPUR HIGH COURT] 28-02-2025
Assam Rifles Act, 2006 — Section 102 — Assam Rifles Rules, 2010 — The High Court upheld the transfer of a criminal case against an Assam Rifles Jawan to an Assam Rifles Court (Court-martial), finding no procedural irregularities or malafide in the decisions of the lower courts, as the Assam Rifles authorities validly exercised their discretion under the Assam Rifles Act, 2006 regarding concurrent jurisdiction — A petition was filed by an IPS officer to quash orders of the Judicial Magistrate and
India Law Library Docid # 2423525

(988) ELANGBAM NIRMALA CHANU AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF MANIPUR AND OTHERS[MANIPUR HIGH COURT] 28-02-2025
Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — Condonation of Delay — An application for condonation of delay filed by a party who was not part of the original writ proceedings is generally considered premature and may not be entertained before the applicant is granted leave to file a third-party appeal, establishing their locus standi — Several applicants, who were not parties to the original writ petition, filed a miscellaneous case seeking condonation of delay in filing a writ appeal — The respondents ra
India Law Library Docid # 2423526

(989) NAMITA BOSE Vs. SATYANARAIN PRASAD CHOURASIA[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 28-02-2025
Jharkhand Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 2000 — Sections 11(1)(C) and 14(8) — Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 100 — Maintainability of Second Appeal — The Second Appeal is not maintainable in view of the provisions made under Section 14(8) of the Act, 2000, which bars appeal against an order for recovery of possession made in accordance with the procedure specified in this section.
India Law Library Docid # 2423576

(990) SHYAM SUNDER CHOUDHARY @ SHYAM CHOUDHRY AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND OTHERS[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 28-02-2025
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 307, 342, 323, 325 and 34 — To establish an offence of attempt to murder under Section 307, the prosecution must prove both the intention or knowledge of committing murder and an act done towards its commission — The High Court partly allowed two criminal appeals, setting aside the conviction and sentence of the appellants under Section 307, while upholding their conviction under Sections 342/34, 323/34, and 325/34 of the I.P.C — The court found that although t
India Law Library Docid # 2423609

(991) KAMLESHWAR THAKUR AND OTHERS Vs. ANGAD THAKUR AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 28-02-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 151 and Order 6 Rule 17 — Amendments to pleadings after the commencement of trial are not allowed unless the court concludes that the party could not have raised the matter earlier despite due diligence, as per the proviso to Order 6 Rule 17 — The High Court upheld the trial court's rejection of the plaintiffs' application for amendment of the plaint in a partition suit, which was filed after the framing of issues, closure of evidence, and part-arguments, bec
India Law Library Docid # 2423631

(992) UPENDRA MANJHI AND OTHER Vs. PRAKASH MANJHI AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 28-02-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 6 Rule 17 — After the trial has commenced, an application for amendment of pleadings shall not be allowed unless the court is satisfied that the party could not have raised the matter before the trial began despite due diligence, as stated in the proviso to Order 6 Rule 17 — The High Court affirmed the trial court's order rejecting the plaintiffs' amendment petition in a partition suit, which was filed after the plaintiffs had presented their evidence and the d
India Law Library Docid # 2423632

(993) ANIL KUMAR PATHAK AND OTHERS Vs. UMESH BHAGAT AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 28-02-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 1 Rule 10(2) — A party can only be impleaded in a suit if they are a necessary or proper party for the effective and complete adjudication of the matter, and the plaintiff as dominus litis cannot be compelled to sue someone against their wishes unless these conditions are met — The High Court set aside a trial court order allowing the impleadment of intervenors in a title suit, finding that they were neither necessary nor proper parties as no relief was sought
India Law Library Docid # 2423650

(994) PEER RATTAN NATH MAHANT SH. SHIV JI MAHARAJ PEER KHO, JAMMU. AND OTHERS Vs. WAZIR ONKAR SINGH AND OTHERS[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT AT JAMMU] 28-02-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 21 Rule 99, Order 21 Rule 100, Order 21 Rule 101 , Order 21 Rule 103 — Civil Procedure Code, Amendment Act of 1976 — Section 97 — Post the 1976 amendment to the CPC, objections to the execution of a decree for immovable property, including those raised by third parties like tenants claiming independent rights, must be adjudicated by the executing court itself under Order 21 Rule 101, rather than through a separate suit, regardless of whether the cause of action
India Law Library Docid # 2423764

(995) BAJAJ ALLIANZ LIFE INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. SHRADHA PADMAJA AWASTHI AND OTHERS[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (LUCKNOW BENCH)] 28-02-2025
Insurance Act, 1938 — Sections 42, 42-D and 114-A — Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority (Protection of Policyholders Interest) Regulations, 2002 — Regulation 3(4), 4(1) and 4(4) — Insurance contracts are based on the principle of utmost good faith (uberrima fides), requiring the insured to make full and true disclosure of all material facts, and insurers have a statutory duty under IRDA regulations to provide all material information to the insured — Non-compliance by the insurer can
India Law Library Docid # 2423730

(996) M/S MAHINDRA AND MAHINDRA FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD. Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 28-02-2025
U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 — Section 16 — Once the Commissioner under the Act, 1986, makes a reference to the competent court regarding attached property, they become functus officio and cannot pass further orders on release applications, which should be directed to the court.
India Law Library Docid # 2423731

(997) PRIYANKA BHARTI Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 28-02-2025
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — Section 299 — Mere insult to religion is insufficient — The act must be done with a deliberate and malicious intention to outrage the religious feelings of a class of citizens — Quashing of FIR — Concerning the tearing of pages from the “Manusmriti” during a live TV debate — The court refused to quash the FIR, finding that the act prima facie revealed a malicious and deliberate intention to outrage religious feelings — It relied on Supreme Court judgments clarifying tha
India Law Library Docid # 2423732

(998) JUGGI LAL Vs. GURU PRASAD[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (LUCKNOW BENCH)] 28-02-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 100 — Succession Act, 1925 — Section 63 — Findings of fact recorded by two subordinate courts are typically not interfered with in a second appeal unless they are shown to be perverse — This second appeal was filed against the concurrent judgments of the trial court and the lower appellate court which decreed the plaintiff-respondent’s suit for cancellation of a Will Deed — The High Court upheld the findings of the lower courts regarding the parentage of the
India Law Library Docid # 2423733

(999) NAZIR AHMAD NATH Vs. MST. AISHA AND OTHERS[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT] 28-02-2025
Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Section 54 — If a registered sale deed was available on record but the appellate court made an observation that the sale deed was unregistered, it would constitute an error apparent on the face of the record, which could be a ground for seeking a review of the impugned judgment — The High Court disposed of a revision petition by granting liberty to the petitioner to file a review petition before the learned Principal District Judge, Anantnag — The appellate court
India Law Library Docid # 2423845

(1000) RAJ BALA AND ANOTHER Vs. HARDEEP SINGH AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 28-02-2025
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Enhancement of Compensation — Assessment Principles — Income Assessment — Multiplier — Future Prospects — Personal Deductions — Conventional Heads — Just Compensation — Appeal filed by claimants seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by MACT for death in a motor accident — Tribunal assessed income at Rs. 4,000/month, applied multiplier of 11, deducted 1/3rd for personal expenses, omitted future prospects, and awarded inadequate/no sums under conventi
India Law Library Docid # 2423880