(381) KESHAV CHANDER SHARMA AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 18-09-2026 Service Law — Seniority — Catch-up Rule — Promotion under reservation — Senior general category candidates in feeder cadre were promoted to promotional post of Assistant Engineer after junior reserved category candidates, but before the junior candidates were further promoted to the next higher post of Executive Engineer — Applying Constitution Bench ruling in Ajit Singh (II) v. State of Punjab, senior general category candidates regain their seniority over reserved candidates upon reaching India Law Library Docid # 2453076
(382) M/S MORAL PHARMACEUTICALS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 18-09-2026 Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 — Sections 2(91), 3, 4 and 5 — Assignment of functions of 'Proper Officer' — Validity of Circular Nos. 3/3/2017-GST, 31/05/2018-GST and 169/01/2022-GST — Petitioner challenged competence of Board to assign functions of proper officer to Central Tax Officers, relying on Canon India — Held, Canon India arose under the Customs Act where officers were not officers of customs — Under CGST Act, officers are indisputably officers of central tax appointed under S India Law Library Docid # 2453126
(383) RAKESH KUMAR Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 18-09-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 154 — Successive FIRs — Test of sameness — Permissibility of second FIR — Settled law establishes that no second FIR can be registered in respect of the same incident, occurrence, or incidents forming part of the same transaction. Merely citing different penal provisions or filing at different police stations does not establish a distinct transaction. Subsequent information must be investigated as part of the first FIR. A second FIR is permissible o India Law Library Docid # 2453146
(384) SACHIDANAND CHAUBEY AND ANOTHER Vs. NIRMALA DEVI[PATNA HIGH COURT] 18-09-2026 Bihar Building (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 1982 — Section 14(8) — Scope of revisional jurisdiction — Nature and limits — Revisional power under the proviso to Section 14(8), though wider than Section 115 CPC, cannot be exercised as an appellate power to reappreciate evidence or substitute factual findings — High Court's examination is confined to satisfying itself whether the decision is according to law and does not suffer from perversity, misreading of evidence, or gross miscarriage India Law Library Docid # 2453154
(385) ZAHOOR AHMAD DAR Vs. MYMOONA AND OTHERS[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT AT SRINAGAR] 18-09-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 6 Rule 17 — Amendment of Pleadings — Bar under proviso — Suit for ejectment — Plaintiff sought amendment to incorporate the relief of mesne profits prior to framing of issues — Defendant contended that written statement was already filed and the amendment belatedly expanded the suit — Held, the trial of a suit does not commence until issues are framed — As the application was preferred prior to commencement of trial, the restriction under the proviso requ India Law Library Docid # 2453104
(386) PRITAM SINGH OBEROI Vs. UT OF J&K AND OTHERS[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT AT SRINAGAR] 18-09-2026 Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 — Applicability to reduction of allotted plot size — Petitioner claimed compensation under the 2013 Act for a 306 sq. ft. shortfall resulting from realignment of an allotted residential plot — Held, the case pertained purely to allotment with a reduced area and not compulsory land acquisition governed by the 2013 Act — Having previously sought only a refund of the proportionate price and ac India Law Library Docid # 2453105
(387) FAYAZ AHMAD DAR Vs. UT OF J&K AND OTHERS[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT AT SRINAGAR] 18-09-2026 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 — Jammu and Kashmir Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1988 — Section 4(1) — Writ petition against show cause notice — Premature challenge — Petitioner challenged a show cause notice issued under Section 4(1) proposing his eviction from public hospital premises, along with a past consideration order — Held, the statutory legal course of action intended under the Act must be permitted to take effect — Petitioner possesses ample oppo India Law Library Docid # 2453106
(388) FIRDOUS AHMAD MIR Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF J AND K (HOME) AND OTHERS[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT AT SRINAGAR] 18-09-2026 Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 — Preventive detention — Application of mind — Inadequacy of ordinary law — Detenu challenged detention on grounds of non-application of mind and failure to show that normal law failed to deter him — Detenu was involved in four NDPS FIRs and resumed illicit trafficking even after prior detention and grant of bail — Repeated criminal indulgence and clandestine illicit activities demonstrated that ordinary statut India Law Library Docid # 2453107
(389) QAWAM-UD-DIN SHAH AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF J&K AND OTHERS[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT AT SRINAGAR] 18-09-2026 Jammu and Kashmir State Evacuees (Administration of Property) Act, 2006 (1949 A.D.) — Rights of Guardian — Claim over Minor's Property — Land mutated in favour of minor represented by his uncle as legal guardian — Predecessors of petitioners possessed land alleging minor disappeared in 1942 — Held, petitioners have no right or title in property mutated in minor's name — A guardian is legally prohibited from raising any plea that conflicts with the welfare and interests of the minor — Uncle or hi India Law Library Docid # 2453109
(390) CICL, YYY, (REAL NAME WITHHELD) Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND ANOTHER[PATNA HIGH COURT] 18-09-2026 Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 — Section 12 — Grant of bail to child in conflict with law — Nature and gravity of offence — Section 12 overrides the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and applies equally to all juveniles, including those aged between 16 to 18 years accused of heinous offences. Bail to a juvenile is a rule and refusal is an exception. Seriousness or nature of the alleged offence is not a relevant consideration for refusal. Bail can only be denied if re India Law Library Docid # 2453113
(391) PIDILITE INDUSTRIES LIMITED Vs. THE CHAIRMAN, COMMERCIAL TAX TRIBUNAL AND ANOTHER[UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] 18-09-2026 Uttarakhand Value Added Tax Act — Schedule II-B, Entry No. 96 — Classification of goods — Dr. Fixit Pidicrete URP and Dr. Fixit Super Latex (SBR Latex) — Scope of the term "Rubber" — The word "rubber" in Entry No. 96 is unqualified by the word "natural" and contains no words of exclusion — Absence of express exclusion indicates legislative intent not to confine the entry to natural rubber — SBR (Styrene Butadiene Rubber) is synthetic rubber in latex form and falls squarely within the generic exp India Law Library Docid # 2453173
(392) RITA BISWAS AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ANOTHER[UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] 18-09-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 323, 498A, 504, 506 — Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — Sections 3 and 4 — Matrimonial dispute — Quashing of criminal proceedings — Allegations of torture and harassment for dowry — Parties amicably resolved disputes before Daily Lok Adalat during pendency of petition — Counsel for both sides and State consenting to closure — Held, as dispute emanated from matrimonial discord and stands settled, no useful purpose India Law Library Docid # 2453174
(393) SUNITA JATAV Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ANOTHER[UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] 18-09-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Quashing of criminal proceedings — Matrimonial dispute — Settlement — Criminal proceedings initiated against applicant arose from a matrimonial dispute between her son and complainant daughter-in-law — Parties amicably resolved differences and initiated divorce proceedings to part ways — Complainant confirmed settlement and expressed desire not to prosecute applicant — Held, continuation of trial where the matrimonial dispute has been settled India Law Library Docid # 2453175
(394) LAXMAN SINGH Vs. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND OTHERS[UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] 18-09-2026 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Sections 166 and 173 — Claim for enhancement of compensation — Proof of medical expenses — Appellant sustained injuries in a motor accident and sought enhanced compensation alleging non-grant of expenses for CT scan, attendant charges, and other medical bills — Held, claimant failed to place on record any bill or documentary evidence establishing expenses incurred for CT scan or other medical treatments beyond what was already proved — Additional compensation cannot be India Law Library Docid # 2453176
(395) SUMIT GUPTA AND ANOTHER Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 18-09-2026 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Sections 166 and 168 — Assessment of compensation — Death of earning person — Tribunal assessed monthly income at Rs. 10,000/- based on income tax returns — Age of deceased between 44 and 45 years — Claimants held entitled to 25% addition towards future prospects under Pranay Sethi — Multiplier of 14 applied as per Sarla Verma — Deduction towards personal expenses fixed at 1/3rd for two dependents — Amounts awarded under conventional heads along with parental consortiu India Law Library Docid # 2453197
(396) VED AND OTHERS Vs. AASRAM AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 18-09-2026 Family Arrangement — Proof of oral family settlement — Non-examination of material witness — Permissibility in law versus proof of fact — An oral family arrangement is legally permissible, but its factum must be proved through cogent evidence — Plaintiffs claimed exclusive allotment of disputed land under an oral partition effected by their grandfather, but produced no document or revenue entries reflecting the alleged division — Land continuously recorded as joint — Father of plaintiffs, being India Law Library Docid # 2453201
(397) GURNAM SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs. DALVINDER SINGH AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 18-09-2026 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Sections 166 and 168 — Death of minor children — Assessment of compensation — Tribunal awarded lump-sum compensation without assessing potential income or applying multiplier — Held, potential income of non-earning minors must be determined per minimum wages of an unskilled worker prevalent at the time of accident — A 40% addition is mandated for future prospects with a 50% deduction towards personal expenses — Multiplier system applied based on age groups: multiplier India Law Library Docid # 2453203
(398) MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, NANGAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 18-09-2026 Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 — Section 3(2) — Concept of "Building" — Test of functional integration — Distinction between building housing machinery and an installation forming part of plant and machinery — Ammonia Gas Storage Tank equipped with refrigeration machinery, compressors, and pressure-control systems — Held, the installation performed an active industrial function intrinsically connected with ammonia manufacturing — The mere fact that it was permanently erected on land with substantial India Law Library Docid # 2453206
(399) BHARTI AND OTHERS Vs. SATYAWAN AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 18-09-2026 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 149 — Driving Licence — LMV licence driving transport vehicle — Recovery rights — Driver held an LMV licence without separate transport endorsement — Following Mukund Dewangan and Constitution Bench in Bajaj Allianz v. Rambha Devi, held that an LMV licence holder is competent to drive a transport vehicle not exceeding 7,500 kg gross vehicle weight without a separate endorsement — Lack of endorsement does not constitute breach of insurance policy — Tribunal erre India Law Library Docid # 2453207
(400) JOGINDER SINGH (DECEASED) THROUGH LR Vs. THE LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 18-09-2026 Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — Section 54 — Condonation of delay — Delay of 5831 days in filing appeal against award — Liberal approach in land acquisition cases — Beneficial nature of land acquisition jurisprudence requires that delay should not deny landowners just and reasonable compensation for lost property — Constitutional right to property under Article 300A must be protected against hyper-technical dismissals — Discretion under limitation law should advan India Law Library Docid # 2453208