(681) MS CLOCK TOWER OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. MUSSOORIE DEHRADUN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY[UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 11(6) and Section 11(8) — Appointment of Presiding Arbitrator — Mandatory procedure post statutory disclosure — Receipt of statutory disclosures from a proposed presiding arbitrator under Section 11(8) must be followed by a formal judicial order of appointment to formally constitute the Arbitral Tribunal. In the absence of a formal appointment order after submission of statutory disclosures, the tribunal is not formally constituted, even if the tr India Law Library Docid # 2453158
(682) HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LIMITED Vs. KWICK LIVING (I) PRIVATE LIMITED[DELHI HIGH COURT] 10-09-2026 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 19(1)(a) — Commercial Disparagement and Commercial Free Speech — Scope of actionable disparagement — A mere derogatory or unfavourable comparison inherent in comparative advertising does not constitute an actionable wrong — Comparative advertising amounts to commercial disparagement in law only when the impugned act contains falsehood, misrepresentation, or deception leading to injury to a competitor's reputation or intellectual property — Unfavourable compa India Law Library Docid # 2451712
(683) MD. YASIN KHAN Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 10-09-2026 Arms Act, 1959 — Sections 13 and 14 — Exercise of discretion by licensing authority — Nature of right to bear arms — Citizens have no fundamental right to bear arms; grant, refusal, or renewal of an arms licence is a statutorily regulated privilege — Discretion exercised by licensing and appellate authorities is not unfettered — Orders passed under Sections 13 and 14 must demonstrate proper application of mind to material on record, including police verification and recommendation reports — Refu India Law Library Docid # 2451864
(684) RANJIT KUMAR JHA @ RANJIT JHA Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR[PATNA HIGH COURT] 10-09-2026 Penal Code, 1860 — Section 302 — Arms Act, 1959 — Sections 25(1-B)A and 27 — Appreciation of evidence — Unreliable and inimical witnesses — Acquittal — Witnesses claiming to have seen the occurrence arrived only after hearing gunshots, rendering them not true eyewitnesses. Serious contradictions existed regarding sequence of arrival and presence at the spot. Key witnesses were deeply inimical to appellant, being accused of murdering his grandfather. Identification in torchlight was doubtful as n India Law Library Docid # 2451873
(685) MANJU DEVI AND ANOTHER Vs. CENTRAL COALFIELDS LIMITED AND OTHERS[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 10-09-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 47 Rule 1 — Scope of review — Precedents not cited during oral argument — Error apparent on face of record — Petitioners sought review of judgment dismissing Letters Patent Appeal, arguing that decisions taking a lenient approach toward delay in compassionate appointment were overlooked — Held, a review is not an appeal in disguise and cannot be exercised to correct decisions on merits. Counsel must actively cite judgments during oral arguments rather tha India Law Library Docid # 2451901
(686) MADAN MOHAN PRASAD Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND OTHERS[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 10-09-2026 Bihar Tenants Holdings (Maintenance of Records) Act, 1973 — Section 11 — Mutation of land — Mode of application — Dynamic interpretation — Petitioner challenged rejection of offline mutation application — Held, statutory interpretation must be dynamic and purposive to accommodate technological advancements — Section 11 mandates filing in a "prescribed form" and non-mention of online applications does not prohibit digital submissions — Modern digitisation brings transparency, eliminates procedura India Law Library Docid # 2451908
(687) THE NEW INDIA INSURANCE COM. LTD Vs. ROOPKANT RAI AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 10-09-2026 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 173(2) — Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 115 — Maintainability of Revision — Bar on appeal — Section 173(2) bars appeal where the disputed amount is below Rs. 1,00,000 — Affected parties cannot circumvent this statutory prohibition by routinely filing revisions under Section 115 CPC — Revisional jurisdiction cannot be exercised as a matter of course — Revision lies only in exceptional circumstances where the award is passed without jurisdiction, in e India Law Library Docid # 2451979
(688) URMILA DEVI LAKHERA AND OTHERS Vs. ASHARAM AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 10-09-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 9 Rule 3, Order 9 Rule 4 and Order 7 Rule 11 — Dismissal of earlier suit — Maintainability of fresh suit — Earlier suit dismissed under Order 9 Rule 3 for non-appearance — Plaintiff filed a subsequent suit for declaration of title, possession, and cancellation of a subsequent sale deed — Held, dismissal under Order 9 Rule 3 does not operate as a bar to instituting a fresh suit — Order 9 Rule 4 explicitly empowers the plaintiff to bring a fresh suit subjec India Law Library Docid # 2451981
(689) MST. ABBIBEE AND OTHERS Vs. SMT. NASSO BEE AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (GWALIOR BENCH)] 10-09-2026 Property Law — Ownership and Family Settlement — Muslim Law — Suit for declaration of title and possession — Plaintiffs claimed land was jointly purchased by their predecessor and defendant no.4 — Evidence showed purchase consideration was paid by their father, who recorded the land in his sons' names — Father partitioned the property among all sons during his lifetime in 1954 through a settlement deed written by predecessor himself — Contention that Muslim law does not recognize joint family or India Law Library Docid # 2451985
(690) DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER Vs. BALRAM TIWARI AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 10-09-2026 Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 — Section 74 — Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — Condonation of delay — Appeal filed by Railways barred by 101 days — Railways functions through an impersonal machinery where procedural formalities and administrative approvals consume time — Sufficient cause shown for delay — Application for condonation of delay allowed and delay condoned. India Law Library Docid # 2451986
(691) THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD. Vs. SMT.RAMTA AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 10-09-2026 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Sections 149 and 168 — Breach of Insurance Policy — Driving Licence — Principle of Pay and Recover — Driver and owner failed to produce a valid and effective driving licence despite opportunity — Breach of policy condition established — Held, third-party claimants cannot be deprived of compensation due to policy breach — Insurance Company directed to first satisfy the award in favour of the claimants and subsequently recover the amount from the owner of the offending v India Law Library Docid # 2451991
(692) NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD. Vs. MANOJ KUMAR AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 10-09-2026 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Claim for compensation — Requirement of proving negligence — Standard of proof — Pillion rider fell from motorcycle alleging rash and negligent driving and sudden acceleration — No FIR lodged, no independent eyewitness, and no contemporaneous police investigation — Medical evidence only proved injury and treatment, not the manner of driving — Principle of fault liability requires claimant to establish rashness or negligence on preponderance of probabiliti India Law Library Docid # 2451994
(693) GOKUL SINGH Vs. NEW INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 10-09-2026 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Motor accident compensation — Assessment of monthly income — Absence of documentary proof — Judicial notice of statutory notifications — Where exact income is not strictly proved by documentary evidence, courts must take judicial notice of minimum wage notifications issued by the Labour Commissioner applicable on the date of the accident — The Claims Tribunal committed an error of law by assessing the claimant's income at Rs. 3,000/- per month, below the India Law Library Docid # 2451996
(694) ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY Vs. SHANTI DEVI AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 10-09-2026 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Sections 147, 149 and 166 — Overloaded vehicle carrying passengers beyond permit capacity — Claim by legal representatives of single deceased passenger — Offending jeep with permit capacity of 9 passengers was carrying 16-17 passengers at the time of accident — Insurance policy covered risk of up to 18 passengers — Claim pertained to death of only one passenger — Insurer cannot be completely exonerated from liability merely because the vehicle was overloaded — Single c India Law Library Docid # 2452003
(695) ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY Vs. KOUSHALYA AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 10-09-2026 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Sections 147, 149, 166 and 173 — Overloading of vehicle — Breach of permit capacity — Insurer's liability — Offending vehicle carrying 16-17 passengers against permit capacity of 9 passengers, but insurance policy covered risk up to 18 passengers — Insurance company sought complete exoneration citing permit violation — Insurer remains liable to indemnify up to the number of authorized/insured passengers — Compensation claimed solely for death of one deceased passenger India Law Library Docid # 2452004
(696) NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD. Vs. MANOJ KUMAR AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 10-09-2026 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Claim for compensation — Standard of proof — Fault liability — Negligence cannot be presumed merely because an accident occurred or the claimant suffered injuries. The claimant, travelling as a pillion rider, alleged sudden acceleration but failed to lodge an FIR or produce independent eyewitnesses or contemporaneous police investigation. Medical evidence and vehicle details in hospital records establish injury, not the manner of driving. Mere allegations India Law Library Docid # 2452012
(697) RAJU Vs. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 10-09-2026 Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 — Sections 3, 4 and 45 — Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 483 — Regular bail — Excise duty evasion — Predicate offences under Indian Penal Code — Applicant sought bail in ECIR registered for alleged revenue loss through forged treasury challans — Applicant was already enlarged on bail in predicate offence after furnishing substantial security — Co-accused was granted bail by the Supreme Court considering nascent stage of trial and provis India Law Library Docid # 2452027
(698) RAMESH KUMAR SONI Vs. RAM KRISHNA SONI AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (GWALIOR BENCH)] 10-09-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 22 Rule 3, Order 22 Rule 5 and Order XVII Rule 1 — Substitution of Legal Representatives — Inquiry to determine legal representative — Closure of evidence due to counsel's non-appearance — Deceased had instituted proceedings to set aside a compromise decree — Competing applications for substitution filed by natural legal heirs and by petitioner claiming under a registered Will — Trial Court closed petitioner's right to lead evidence of attesting witness w India Law Library Docid # 2452046
(699) DAYASHANKAR (DEAD) THROUGH LRS AND OTHERS Vs. BHAGWANLAL AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (GWALIOR BENCH)] 10-09-2026 M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 — Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Section 109 — Derivative title of landlord — Attornment by tenant — Plaintiffs purchased suit property through registered sale deed from earlier owner's widow — Tenant disputed relationship and title of plaintiffs — Held, a transferee of landlord's rights steps into shoes of transferor landlord with all rights and liabilities — Attornment by tenant is not necessary to confer validity on transfer of landlord's rights — Tenant India Law Library Docid # 2452053
(700) THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Vs. AJAY KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 10-09-2026 Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 — Section 19 — Maintainability of Intra-Court Appeal — Direction for personal appearance — Appellants challenged Single Bench order requiring Principal Secretary to remain personally present in contempt proceedings — Maintainability of writ appeal — Held, an appeal under Section 19 lies as of right only against an order or decision imposing punishment for contempt — Interlocutory orders directing personal appearance or compliance do not impose punishment, nor do they India Law Library Docid # 2452073