(921) MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI Vs. GAGAN NARANG AND OTHERS ETC.[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025 Electricity Act, 2003 — Sections 63 and 86(1)(b) — Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL) erred in restricting the applicability of Section 63 of the Electricity Act, 2003, to only distribution licensees or generating companies — The Supreme Court held that a plain reading of Section 63 does not impose such a restriction — The court also stated that Section 63 should India Law Library Docid # 2421317
(922) BERNARD FRANCIS JOSEPH VAZ AND OTHERS Vs. GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025 Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 — Sections 28 and 30 — Land Acquisition — Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) does not have the power to shift the date for determining the market value of land from the date of the preliminary notification to a later date — This power is reserved for the High Courts and the Supreme Court, which can exercise it only in exceptional circumstances under Article 226 and Articles 32/142 of the Constitution, respectively. India Law Library Docid # 2421318
(923) M/S NARESH POTTERIES Vs. M/S AARTI INDUSTRIES AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 — Complainant in Cases Involving Companies — De Jure vs. De Facto Complainant — The Court clarified that when a company is the payee, it is the de jure complainant — The de facto complainant, who represents the company, can be an employee authorized by a resolution or a power of attorney. India Law Library Docid # 2421319
(924) LEELA AND OTHERS Vs. MURUGANANTHAM AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025 Succession Act, 1925 — Section 63 — Validity of Will — The plaintiffs, children from the first wife of ‘B’, sought partition and allotment of 5/7th share of properties — The defendants, children from the second wife, claimed based on an unregistered Will dated 06.04.1990 — Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to a share in the properties, and whether the Will dated 06.04.1990 is valid — Plaintiffs argued the second wife and her children were illegitimate and not entitled to the properties — Defen India Law Library Docid # 2421322
(925) GOPAL KRISHAN AND OTHERS Vs. DAULAT RAM AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025 Succession Act, 1925 — Section 63(c) — Testator ‘S’ executed a Will favoring appellant; the Will was attested by witnesses, but its validity was questioned by lower courts — Whether the Will complies with Section 63(c) of the Succession Act, 1925, particularly regarding the “direction of the testator” in attestation — Appellants argued that the witness saw ‘S’ sign the Will; respondents contended that the attestation did not meet the "direction of the testator" requirement — The Supreme Court in India Law Library Docid # 2421323
(926) THE STATE, CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Vs. A. SATISH KUMAR AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 7 — Two Central Government employees were accused under Section 7 of the PC Act, with FIRs registered in Kurnool and Ananthapur, Andhra Pradesh, but investigated and charged by CBI in Hyderabad, Telangana, after the 2014 state bifurcation — The High Court of Telangana later transferred the cases to Kurnool — The primary concerns were the CBI's jurisdiction post-bifurcation and the necessity of state consent for investigations — The CBI argued that the India Law Library Docid # 2421324
(927) B. N. JOHN Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 195(1)(a) — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 186 — Lack of Written Complaint — The court emphasized that for an offence under Section 186, a written complaint by a public servant is mandatory as per section 195(1)(a) of the CrPC — In this case, no such complaint was filed before the Judicial Magistrate, making the cognizance of the offence illegal India Law Library Docid # 2421325
(928) NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. SONIGRA JUHI UTTAMCHAND [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025 Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 — Section 168 — Grant of ‘just compensation’ — While assessing compensation for death under the Motor Vehicles Act, a deduction must be made for personal and living expenses, with standard percentages based on the number of dependents, and income for self-employed individuals should be objectively assessed considering future prospects — The Court maintained the enhanced compensation awarded by the High Court, finding it just and adequate when all relevant factors, includ India Law Library Docid # 2421326
(929) DINESH KUMAR MATHUR Vs. STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025 Madhya Pradesh Griha Nirman Mandal Adhiniyam, 1972 — Section 83 — Protection of Public Servants — The court clarifies that actions taken by a public servant in the course of their official duties, if done in good faith, are protected under Section 83 — This protection is similar to that provided by Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.), which requires prior sanction for the prosecution of a public servant for acts committed in the discharge of their official duty India Law Library Docid # 2421338
(930) ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. RAJANI SAHOO AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025 Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Negligence and Liability — The Supreme Court upheld the findings of the Tribunal and the High Court that the accident was caused by the rash and negligent driving of the truck insured by ICICI Lombard — The Court emphasized that the standard of proof in motor accident cases is based on the preponderance of probabilities, not beyond a reasonable doubt India Law Library Docid # 2421327
(931) URMILA DIXIT Vs. SUNIL SHARAN DIXIT AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025 Maintenance and Welfare of the Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 — Section 23 — Appellant transferred property to her son under a deed with a condition for his maintenance — The son failed to fulfill this condition, leading to a dispute over the validity of the transfer — Whether the property transfer is void under Section 23(1) of the Act, 2007, due to the son's failure to maintain his mother — Appellant argued that the transfer should be void as the son India Law Library Docid # 2421328
(932) JAYSHREE KANABAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025 Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, 1999 — Sections 3(1)(ii), 3(2), 3(4) and 21(4) — Scope of Bail under MCOCA — The Supreme Court clarifies that when offences under the MCOCA are involved, the court's power to grant bail is strictly governed by Section 21(4) — This section mandates that bail shall not be ordinarily granted unless the special court is satisfied that there are exceptional circumstances justifying such bail India Law Library Docid # 2421329
(933) AJAY SINGH Vs. KHACHERU AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025 U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 — Section 198(4) — A land dispute centered around a plot initially recorded as a 'Johad (Pond)' in 1970 — In 2003, a respondent claimed the land under a disputed patta, claiming it as 'Oosar' land — The appellant argued the land remained a pond — Lower authorities found the patta false and cancelled it, decisions upheld on appeal — The appellant also got an ex-parte decree protecting the pond — The High Court reversed these, ruling the land India Law Library Docid # 2421330
(934) KIM WANSOO Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025 A. Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 406, 420, 323, 504, 506 and 120-B — Quashing of FIR — A criminal appeal was dismissed against a High Court decision that refused to quash an FIR alleging a payment default by a company — The appellant, a foreign Project Manager, argued that the vague allegations did not implicate him or his company directly — The Supreme Court agreed, citing precedents that allow quashing when allegations do not constitute an offence or appear malicious — It found that the FI India Law Library Docid # 2421331
(935) SRI MAHESH Vs. SANGRAM AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025 Hindu Succession Act, 1956 — Section 12(c) — Adoption creates legal ties and inheritance rights, it does not automatically invalidate prior lawful transfers of property by the adoptive parent — Additionally, a valid gift requires not only a deed but also a clear transfer of possession from donor to donee — The courts should carefully examine the evidence to ensure compliance with these requirements before upholding or nullifying property transfers — The High Courts should give due respect to the India Law Library Docid # 2421332
(936) LILIAN COELHO AND OTHERS Vs. MYRA PHILOMENA COALHO [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025 Succession Act, 1925 — Section 63 — Genuineness of the Will — Will is validly executed does not automatically equate to a finding that the will is genuine — Even if a will is proven to be executed according to the law, the court still has the responsibility to consider any suspicious circumstances surrounding the will if they are raised — The court must call upon the propounder to remove such suspicions to satisfy its conscience — The case highlights that a lower court's finding of valid executi India Law Library Docid # 2421333
(937) REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, CHEVELLA DIVISION AND OTHERS Vs. MOHD. SYEED ATHER AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025 Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfer) Act, 1977 — Section 3 — A.P. (Telangana Area, Tenancy and Agricultural Lands) Act, 1950 — Sections 47 and 50-B — Legality of transferring lands assigned under the revised assignment policy of 1958, which prohibited alienation — The appellants argued that the High Court erred by misconstruing the denial of market value collection in the assignment and by not applying the non-alienability clause under the policy — Relying on Gudepu Sailoo and India Law Library Docid # 2421334
(938) M/S MAXIM INDIA INTEGRATED CIRCUIT DESIGN (P) LTD. Vs. ANDAPPA (D) BY LRS AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025 Property Dispute — Dispute over property ownership and tenancy rights — The main issue was the condonation of a 1378-day delay in filing a writ appeal which convoluted the matters — The appellant argued that the delay and subsequent orders were unjust as the tenancy petition had already attained finality — The court found that respondent had not disclosed crucial facts and had manipulated the proceedings — Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside the judgments in the writ appeals. India Law Library Docid # 2421335
(939) NARESH ANEJA @ NARESH KUMAR ANEJA Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 354 and 506 — Appellant and Complainant are directors in a joint concern — Complainant filed a complaint alleging inappropriate behavior and threats brother of the appellant in the workplace — The appellant sought to quash the chargesheet and proceedings under sections 354 and 506 — Whether the charges levied against the appellant are ex-facie made out from the record — Appellant's argues that the allegations are false and motivated by intentions to commit fraud India Law Library Docid # 2421336
(940) SANJAY DUTT AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-01-2025 Punjab Land Preservation Act, 1900 — Sections 4 and 19 — Power to regulate, restrict or prohibit, by general or special order, within notified areas, certain matters — The Supreme Court has quashed a High Court order that rejected a complaint against petitioner for allegedly violating Section 4 — The complaint was filed by a Range Forest Officer, alleging that the appellants illegally uprooted trees and caused environmental damage in a notified area — The central issue is whether the complaint d India Law Library Docid # 2421417