1. Appointment of Arbitrator – Unilateral power with one party -- Remedy -- Where a clause contains an otherwise defective unilateral appointment mechanism, the Court may sever the offending portion and exercise its power u/s 11(6) to appoint an independent arbitrator, thereby giving effect to the parties’ genuine intention to arbitrate -- Refusing to sever such clauses would effectively confer on the dominant party a “nuclear veto”, wholly inconsistent with the pro-arbitration policy of the Act and violative of Article 14 -- Court is empowered under Section 11(6) to cure the defect and appoint an independent arbitrator. (SC) Decided on: 28.11.2025

2. Dowry death – Presumption – Regular bail by High Court – Cancellation of -- Marriage took place on 22.02.2023, and the death occurred on 05.06.2023 i.e. within four months of marriage – Dying declarations to the father and elder sister, coupled with consistent testimony of relatives and post-mortem noting of an abrasion suggestive of restraint, satisfy the foundational requirements of Section 304B IPC -- Consequently, the presumption u/s 113B of the Evidence Act arises inexorably against Respondent No. 1/ husband -- High Court, however, failed to take this statutory presumption into account, and instead relied solely on general bail principles -- Courts has to evaluate the gravity of the offence, the nature of accusations and the prima facie evidence while considering bail – Held, such heinous offences strike at the very root of human dignity and violate the constitutional guarantees of equality and life with dignity under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India -- They corrode the moral fibre of the community, normalize violence against women, and erode the foundations of a civilized society -- Judicial passivity or misplaced leniency in the face of such atrocities would only embolden perpetrators and undermine public confidence in the administration of justice -- A firm and deterrent judicial response is, therefore, imperative, not only to uphold the majesty of law and do justice in the present case, but also to send an unequivocal message that neither law nor society will countenance barbarities born out of the evil of dowry -- Bail cancelled. (SC) Decided on: 28.11.2025

3. Rape -- False promise to marry – Quashing of FIR -- Respondent No.2 continued to meet the appellant and indulged in physical relations with him even though she was already married -- FIR also states that in September 2022, when respondent No.2 found out that she was pregnant with the appellant’s child, she told the appellant, “You live your life and I will live my life” -- At that time, the appellant assured her that they would get married and asked for some time from respondent No.2, to which she refused -- However, despite her refusal to be with the appellant, respondent No.2 continued to meet him at Hotel and engaged in physical relations with him – Held, not a case where the appellant lured respondent No.2 solely for physical pleasures and then vanished -- Relationship continued for a period of three long years, which is a considerable period of time -- They remained close and emotionally involved -- In such cases, physical intimacy that occurred during the course of a functioning relationship cannot be retrospectively branded as instances of offence of rape merely because the relationship failed to culminate in marriage – FIR quashed. (SC) Decided on: 24.11.2025

4. Eviction of tenant – Arrears of rent -- Power of Appellate Rent Authority -- While hearing the appeal, the Appellate Authority has full discretion to pass any order in accordance with law, including an order dismissing the Appeal and/or extending the time to deposit/pay the arrears of rent, or if it finds substantial merit in the Appeal, it may issue notice and unconditionally stay the impugned order of eviction, or if it finds that the Appeal raises an argument which is plausible but improbable, it may direct the Appellant to pay/deposit the amount determined by the Rent Controller pending the hearing of the Appeal -- Though the power of the Appellate Authority cannot be put in a straitjacket, yet normally speaking, a tenant must be directed to pay/deposit the amount determined by the Rent Controller before an Appeal is heard by the Appellate Authority and that too when a money decree has been passed by a Civil Court which has not been stayed by the Appellate Court. (SC) Decided on: 21.11.2025

5. Execution of money decree – Arrest and detention -- If a person has no means to pay, in absence of any mala fide or dishonest intention, the arrest and detention cannot be resorted to. (P&H HC) Reserved on: 17.11.2025 Decided on: 21.11.2025

6. Death of dismissed employee -- Compassionate assistance to family – Dismissal on 04.12.1989, during the pendency of writ, he passed away on 22.02.1995 and writ was allowed on 22.02.2010 quashing the dismissal and directing release of all retiral benefits -- Legal fiction is that the employee was never dismissed, unless the Court restricts relief -- Rule 6 of the 2006 Rules clarify that all the pending cases, such as that of the petitioner shall be covered under the 2006 Rules – Claim denied on the ground that petitioner applied belatedly – Order does not consider the effect of the 2010 judgment, the retrospective restoration of service, the settled law on compassionate claims, or the humanitarian object underlying the scheme -- An administrative authority exercising statutory discretion is required to record reasons that demonstrate meaningful application of mind -- Failure to do so renders the action of the respondents arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India – Impugned order set aside, respondents directed to extend financial assistance within a period of 4 weeks. (P&H HC) Decided on: 21.11.2025

7. Photocopy of document – Validation of – Permissibility of -- Ld. Civil Judge proceeded to validate the photocopy of the agreement to sell on the condition that the petitioner deposits the deficient stamp duty along with a penalty quantified at ten times the sale consideration -- One page of the original document is available while the remaining page is only a photocopy – Held, even if a portion of the document exists in its original form, the instrument as a whole cannot thereby be deemed an original document -- In such circumstances, the composite document must necessarily be treated as a copy -- A copy whether partial or complete cannot be validated for the purposes of stamping -- Impugned order suffers from a manifest and material illegality, as the learned Civil Judge has exercised jurisdiction not vested in him under the law – Order set aside. (P&H HC) Decided on: 20.11.2025

8. Blanket anticipatory bail – Permissibility of -- When no criminal case or FIR is registered against a person, the grant of anticipatory bail is impermissible as doing so would amount to issuing a blanket protection against all possible future accusations -- Law does not contemplate granting such omnibus relief u/s 482 of the BNSS nor can a blanket order be passed to restrain the authorities from arresting an individual in the absence of a specific and existing criminal case. (P&H HC) Decided on: 20.11.2025

9. Appointment of Arbitrator – Prima-facie existence of arbitration clause -- High Court at the time of reference u/s 11 of the Act is only to see prima facie the existence of an arbitration clause and is not to conduct any mini-trial -- Since neither the arbitration clause nor the terms and conditions of the auction are in dispute, Court deems it fit and proper to allow the present petition and appoint a Sole Arbitrator. (P&H HC) Decided on: 19.11.2025

10. Suit for permanent injunction -- Amendment in name of defendant -- Typographical mistake -- Amendment is only for correction of a typographical mistake -- Application under Order VI Rule 17 CPC filed by the plaintiff-petitioner for amendment allowed subject to payment of ?30,000 as costs to be paid to the defendant-respondent -- Payment of costs shall be a condition precedent. (P&H HC) Decided on: 18.11.2025

11. Summons not received back – Decision of appeal on merit – Permissibility of -- Court, duly noticed in the first paragraph of the impugned order that the notice issued to the respondent/ judgment debtor had not been received back -- It further went to notice that as per learned counsel representing the appellant/ decree-holder, the respondent-judgment debtor was sitting outside the Court room, but despite calls having been made, no one appeared on behalf of the respondent/ judgment debtor -- Court then proceeded to hear and allow the appeal -- Held, Court of Additional District Judge adopted a procedure unknown to law -- Once the respondent therein had not been served, there was no occasion for the Court to make calls and then proceed to decide the appeal without service having been effected -- Impugned order not sustainable, set aside. (P&H HC) Decided on: 18.11.2025

12. Closing of evidence by Court order – Setting aside of -- Evidence of the petitioner was closed by the Court was in any way illegal or suffers from any material illegality or irregularity -- Considering the pace at which the learned Civil Judge is proceeding and the fact that even after closing the evidence of the petitioner, respondent/plaintiff has been granted 07 opportunities for rebuttal evidence -- Interest of justice requires, one opportunity to be granted to the petitioner to conclude his evidence at his own responsibility -- Petitioner allowed one effective opportunity subject to the payment of cost of Rs.50,000/-. (P&H HC) Decided on: 17.11.2025

13. Eviction of tenant -- Landlord – Execution of decree – Issue of ownership – Effect of -- A landlord need not be the owner of the property -- Subsequent events would not come in the way of the petitioner from getting the judgment and decree executed against the respondents, who are admittedly tenants of the petitioner. (P&H HC) Decided on: 17.11.2025

14. Additional evidence -- Video footage and photographs -- Placing on record – On application moved by complainant, the learned trial Court permitted the complainant to place certain documents on record, i.e. the video footage and photographs of the incident – Claimed by the complainant that in the video footage and photographs, the incident has been recorded and given to the Investigating Officer also, but the Investigating Officer having been under the influence of accused-petitioners, has not collected the above mentioned evidence – Held, no illegality or infirmity has been committed by the learned trial Court in permitting the complainant to bring the above mentioned documents on record -- At this stage, when permission to produce the above mentioned documents has been accorded, the admissibility of the above mentioned documents cannot be looked into -- Appreciation of above mentioned point can take place at the time of final adjudication of the trial. (P&H HC) Decided on: 17.11.2025

15. Recovery on disclosure – Relevancy -- Section 27 is an exception to the preceding Sections 25 and 26 -- Language further indicates that when any fact is deposed to as discovered in consequence of information received from a person who is in custody of the Police in connection of an offence, it must relate distinctly to the fact so discovered -- For relevancy, the “facts thereby discovered” is preceded with the words “so much of such information, whether it amounts to confession or not as relates distinctly” -- “distinctly” indicates directly, indubitably, strictly and unmistakably, apparently, used in Section 27 to limit and define the scope of probable information -- Only that much information as is clearly connected with the fact discovered can be treated as relevant under the phrase ‘facts discovered’. (SC) Decided on: 14.11.2025

16. Auction sale – Challenge to -- Once a sale is confirmed by the competent authority, rights accrue in favour of the auction-purchaser which cannot be extinguished except in cases of proven fraud or substantial irregularity – Auction and its subsequent confirmation have not been shown to suffer from any material irregularity, mistake or fraud as contemplated u/s 38 of the Revenue Recovery Act -- Auction-purchaser paid the full purchase amount on the day of sale and the sale was confirmed only after due procedure and in the absence of any valid challenge -- Issuance of the sale certificate and registration of the property in the purchaser’s name, followed by subsequent transfers to bona fide purchasers, confer finality on the transaction. (SC) Decided on: 14.11.2025

17. POCSO -- Evidence establish the commission of offence – When the accused present in court removed his mask, the victim got frightened and did not even look at the accused -- Victim was required to be sent out of the courtroom, and recording of the evidence was stopped -- When the victim was found to be normal after some time, the recording of evidence though commenced had to be discontinued having regard to the mental status of the victim (PW-1) -- At the time when the victim was called again for tendering her evidence with her mother, she was crying and was not able to speak anything in the court as the victim PW-1 was frightened by the presence of the accused, hence, her examination was closed -- Whole sequence of events in course of recording of evidence of PW-1, was tale-telling -- Shock related to the happening of the incident which continued with the victim post-incident made its statement in the trauma-filled behaviour of the victim who was a 4 year-old girl -- Conviction of the appellant recorded by the trial court and affirmed by the High Court upheld – Sentence reduced to rigorous imprisonment for 6 years with fine. (SC) Decided on: 13.11.2025

18. Cancellation of bail – Once bail has been granted by a competent Court, the same can be cancelled only when there is cogent material showing that the accused has misused the concession of bail, has tampered with evidence or there has been a subsequent supervening circumstance warranting such cancellation -- Mere reiteration of allegations forming the basis of FIR or apprehension of misuse is not sufficient ground for cancellation of bail -- Cancellation of bail already granted requires demonstration of supervening circumstances such as misuse of liberty, tampering with evidence, intimidation of witnesses or deliberate evasion of the judicial process – Mere dissatisfaction with the reasoning of the Court which has granted the bail or the seriousness of the offence by itself, is not sufficient to recall such an order. (P&H HC) Decided on: 13.11.2025

19. Appointment of Constable -- Forged degree – Dismissal from service -- Once on the basis of a forged degree/ certificate, a person gets appointment in the uniformed service of the country, that being the police, which is supposed to uphold the rule of law, the act of the respondent is uncondonable -- The further fact which is admitted is that there is absolutely, no rebuttal by the respondent that the certificate/ degree presented by him before the appellants at the time of his appointment and on the basis of which, he was appointed as a Constable, is genuine -- Punishment of dismissal from service restored. (SC) Decided on: 12.11.2025

20. Appointment of Lambardar – Age – Education -- There is no hard and fast rule that a particular person i.e. younger in age or elder in age or more qualified or less qualified is to be appointed as a ‘Lambardar’ -- The best choice is the one who can effectively serve as a Lambardar of the village concerned. (P&H HC) Decided on: 11.11.2025

21. SARFAESI proceedings – Suit for declaration and permanent injunction -- Rejection of plaint -- Plaintiff has neither raised any loan from the bank nor the plaintiff is a guarantor in the issue which has led to the action having been initiated by the bank under the 2002 Act -- Plaintiff approached the Civil Court seeking a declaration that gift deed alleged to be executed and registered by the GPA holder and thereafter mortgage deed, in the year 2015 are void abinitio, false and fictitious documents and a result of fraud committed by defendants No.1 to 3 in connivance with each other -- In light of this prayer of declaration, a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendant-bank to misuse the process of law to take the possession of the suit premises has also been prayed for -- Invoking jurisdiction under Order VII, Rule 11 of the CPC and throwing out the plaint at the very initial stage, would be a very-very dangerous step as it would take away the right of the plaintiff to agitate the cause before the appropriate For a -- The issues raised in the suit, cannot be decided under Section 17 of the 2002 Act – Trial Court dismissed application under order VII Rule 11 -- Revision dismissed. (H.P. HC) Decided on: 11.11.2025

22. Appointment of Lambardar – Younger in age – Candidature of -- Difference in age between the appellant and respondent No. 4 is only of two years which cannot be made the basis to contend that 37 years old respondent No. 4 is incapable for discharging the duty on the post of Lambardar. (P&H HC) Decided on: 10.11.2025

23. Corruption case -- Sanction by Competent authority -- In case the trial Court finds that the sanction has been issued by a competent authority, the trial shall proceed -- However, in case the conclusion is otherwise, the trial Court shall return the chargesheet to the investigating agency for procuring fresh sanction from the appropriate authority. (SC) Decided on: 10.11.2025

24. Rejection of plaint – Court its own motion -- If a plaint has missing or deficiency of fact/s on the basis of which a given cause of action intended to be agitated can be said or assumed to be constituted, then a plaint is self-warranting its rejection sooner than later, be it on court’s own indulgence or on asking of a defendant. (J&K&L HC) Decided on: 08.11.2025

25. Detention -- Article 22(5) mandates that each ground for detention must be individually specified and not vague, ensuring transparency and accountability in the detention process -- Grounds must not be vague, indefinite or general -- Vague allegations make it impossible for the detenu to understand the reasons and effectively challenge the detention -- Vagueness of grounds of detention vitiating the order of detention -- On this ground alone, the impugned order of detention is liable to be set aside (J&K&L HC) Reserved on: 30.10.2025 Decided on: 08.11.2025

26. NDPS – Commercial quantity – Examination of evidence – Nature of -- At the stage of considering bail application of an accused, the evidence led by the prosecution cannot be meticulously examined -- It is only if from a cursory look at the evidence recorded during trial of the case, it is possible to frame an opinion that accused is not guilty of offence involving commercial quantity of drugs that he can be enlarged on bail -- If such an opinion can be framed only after meticulous examination and appreciation of the evidence on record, the same is to be left for determination at the final stage of the case and not while considering a plea for bail of the accused. (J&K&L HC) Reserved on: 04.11.2025 Decided on: 08.11.2025

27. Summoning u/s 12 of DV Act – Review of order – Permissibility of -- Proceedings u/s 12 of the DV Act cannot be equated with lodging of a criminal complaint or initiation of prosecution -- So, the trial Magistrate, after obtaining the response from the husband and his relatives etc. is well within his jurisdiction to revoke his order of issuing summons to them or he can even drop the proceedings against all or any of the relatives of the husband -- Since the proceedings under Section 12 of the DV Act are not, in strict sense, criminal in nature, as such, bar to alter/revoke an order by a Magistrate is not attracted to these proceedings. (J&K&L HC) Reserved on: 07.11.2025 Decided on: 08.11.2025

28. Stray dogs bites : Directions issued having regard to the alarming rise in incidents of dog bites within institutional areas such as educational institutions, hospitals, sports complexes, bus stands/depots (including Inter-State Bus Terminals) and railway stations, in the interest of public safety, health, and management of stray dogs: - -- The State Governments and Union Territories shall through their respective local/ municipal authorities, within a period of two weeks, identify all Government and private educational institutions, hospitals (including district hospitals, primary health centres, and medical colleges), public sports complexes or stadia, bus stands/depots (including Inter-State Bus Terminals) and railway stations situated within their territorial limits. -- The administrative heads of the aforesaid institutions shall through their respective local/ municipal authorities, under the overall supervision of the District Magistrate concerned, ensure that the premises are secured by adequate fencing, boundary walls, gates and such other structural or administrative measures as may be necessary to prevent the ingress of stray dogs. The said exercise shall be completed as soon as possible and preferably within a period of 8 weeks from today. -- The management of every educational institution, hospital, sports complex, bus stand/depot (including Inter-State Bus Terminal) and railway station identified under Direction (A) shall designate a Nodal Officer responsible for the upkeep and cleanliness of the premises and for ensuring that stray dogs do not enter or inhabit the campus. The details of the said officer shall be displayed prominently at the entrance and notified to the jurisdictional municipal body/authority. -- The local municipal authorities and panchayats shall carry out regular inspections, at least once in every three months, of all such premises to ensure that no stray dog habitats exist within or in the immediate vicinity of these institutions. Any lapse in this regard shall be viewed seriously, and responsibility shall be fixed upon the concerned municipal officials/administrative authorities. -- It shall be the responsibility of the jurisdictional municipal body/authority to forthwith remove every stray dog found within the premises of an educational institution, hospital (public or private), sports complex, bus stand/depot (including Inter-State Bus Terminal) or railway station and to shift such animal/s to a designated shelter, after due sterilisation and vaccination, in accordance with the Animal Birth Control Rules, 2023. The stray dogs so picked up shall not be released back to the same location from which they were picked up. We have consciously directed the non-release of such stray dogs to the same location from which they were picked up, as permitting the same would frustrate the very effect of the directions issued to liberate such institutional areas from the presence of stray dogs. -- All Government and private hospitals shall maintain a mandatory stock of anti-rabies vaccines and immunoglobulin at all times. -- Every school and educational institution shall be directed by the Ministry of Education, Government of India, to conduct awareness sessions for students and staff on preventive behaviour around animals, first-aid in case of bites, and immediate reporting protocols. -- The management of stadiums and sports complexes shall ensure the deployment of security or ground-keeping personnel specifically tasked with around the clock vigil against the entry or habitation of stray dogs. -- The railway authorities having jurisdiction over the railway stations as well as the State transport corporations and municipal authorities having jurisdiction over bus stands, depots and Inter-State Bus Terminals, shall ensure that such public-transport premises/facilities are effectively secured and maintained so as to prevent the habitation or movement of stray dogs within their premises. Proper waste-management systems shall be implemented to eliminate food sources that attract animals, and regular inspections shall be conducted to detect and address the presence of stray dogs. -- Animal Welfare Board of India shall, within four weeks, issue detailed Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for prevention of dog bites and management of stray dogs in institutional premises (public or private) including but not limited to Government and private educational institutions, hospitals (including district hospitals, primary health centres, and medical colleges), and sports complexes or stadia, to be uniformly adopted across all States and Union Territories. The aforesaid directions in continuation of and in furtherance of Court’s order dated 22nd August, 2025, to ensure that the menace of stray dog attacks within institutional areas is curbed through effective preventive and administrative mechanisms. The primary objective is to safeguard the fundamental right to life and safety of citizens, particularly children, students, patients, and sportspersons, while ensuring compliance with the principles embodied in the Animal Birth Control Rules, 2023 framed under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 -- Any reported non-compliance shall be viewed very seriously and may invite penalties/consequences including but not limited to the initiation of suo moto contempt proceedings against the erring officials. (SC) Decided on: 07.11.2025

29. Compensation in motor vehicle accident case -- Accident by L&T machine -- L&T machine was registered with Registering and Licensing Authority, Nahan -- Plea of appellant that L&T machine involved in accident was not a motor vehicle is not sustainable and, accordingly, rejected. (H.P. HC) Reserved on: 11.7.2025 Decided on: 07.11.2025

30. Land Acquisition case – Market value of acquired land -- Market value deemed to be the just and fair compensation for the acquired land -- "market value" would be the price of the land prevailing on the date of publication of the preliminary notification u/s 4(1) of the Act -- Acid test for determining the market value of the land is the price, which a willing vendor might reasonably expect to obtain from a willing purchaser -- In determining the market value, the factors enumerated in Section 23 are to be taken into consideration -- There cannot be any mathematical accuracy in ascertaining the amount of compensation payable -- Existing amenities like, water, electricity, possibility of their further extension, whether near about town is developing or has prospect of development have to be taken into consideration. (H.P. HC) Reserved on: 30.10.2025 Decided on: 06.11.2025

31. Medical negligence -- Bolam Test -- Determining factor of Negligence” for the purpose of fastening liability under civil law and under criminal law is jurisprudentially different -- Generally it is the amount of damages incurred, which is the determinative factor of the extent of liability in tort, and it is the degree of negligence which is the determinative factor of liability as a crime -- While in a civil proceedings, mere preponderance of probability shall be sufficient for the plaintiff for making out a case, in criminal proceedings, complainant is required to prove guilt of the respondent beyond reasonable doubt because negligence to be established by the prosecution or the complainant, as the case may be, must be culpable or gross – To fasten liability in criminal law, the degree of negligence has to be higher than that of negligence enough to fasten liability for damages in civil law and essential ingredient of mens rea could not be excluded from the consideration when charge in criminal court consists of criminal negligence. (J&K&L HC) Reserved on: 13.10.2025 Decided on: 06.11.2025

32. Appointment of Lambardar – Death of other candidate – Effect of -- Appellant was appointed as Lambardar and he is not disqualified for appointment to said post under any provision of law and the case was only remanded back by the Commissioner as well as the Financial Commissioner, to consider the claim of respondent No. 4 – Held, upon the death of respondent No. 4, his claim stood extinguished -- No fresh consideration can be given to his claim -- Appellant ordered to remain continued to work on the post of Lambardar. (P&H HC) Decided on: 06.11.2025

33. Appointment of Lambardar – Choice of Collector – Age and education -- Though petitioner is younger in age by three years and more educated, however, respondent No. 5 (appointed candidate) is not ineligible for being considered for the post of Lambardar and in FIR case he was never convicted -- Learned Collector's choice has been further affirmed by learned Divisional Commissioner as well as learned Financial Commissioner – Held, in the matter of appointment of a Lambardar, the choice of learned Collector cannot be lightly interfered, even if two views are possible -- No compelling reasons to interfere in the concurrent view of the Revenue Authorities – Writ petition dismissed. (P&H HC) Decided on: 06.11.2025

34. Dismissal of Lambardar -- SS had two sons, however, the petitioner acting as Lambardar had attested wrong pedigree table (kursinama) of SS, wherein MS was shown as the only son of SS -- Collector dismissed him from the post of Lambardar and which order further affirmed by learned Divisional Commissioner and Financial Commissioner – Held, order does not call for any interference, petitioner as Lambardar, was required to ensure correct verification of the Kursinama (pedigree table/ family tree) relating to the legal heirs of the deceased -- Omission of one son in the mutation proceedings is not a minor lapse -- Civil writ petition dismissed. (P&H HC) Decided on: 06.11.2025

35. Closing of evidence – Fair trial -- Though the Ld. Civil Judge has acted well within the ambit of judicial discretion in regulating the recording of evidence – However, in the interest of justice and in order to balance procedural propriety with the right to a fair trial, the petition disposed of with the specific direction that the petitioner shall be granted one final and definitive opportunity to tender himself and his two witnesses for cross-examination strictly subject to cost of Rs.10,000/-. (P&H HC) Decided on: 06.11.2025

36. SARFAESI -- Injunction – Fraud alleged – Jurisdiction of civil Court -- Normally the jurisdiction of the Civil Court is barred and the correct remedy for a party is to knock the doors of the DRT u/s 17 of the SARFAESI Act -- In certain cases, where fraud is pleaded and the same cannot be proved in the proceedings before the DRT, the Civil Court does have the jurisdiction to deal with the issue. (P&H HC) Reserved on: 17.09.2025 Decided on: 06.11.2025

37. Claim petition under Motor vehicle Act – Limitation – Interim order / No Claim Petition should be dismissed as time barred -- During the pendency of SLP, the tribunal and the High Courts directed not to dismiss the claim petitions on the ground of such petitions as barred by limitation as prescribed under sub-Section (3) or Section 166(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Matters ordered to re-list on 25.11.2025. (SC) Decided on: 04.11.2025

38. Conviction in cheque bounce complaint -- Compromise at revisional stage – Legality of cost imposed -- Acquittal order subject deposit of cost with State Legal Service Authority in accordance with the judgment of this Court in Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H., (2010) 5 SCC 663 – Held, construing it to be a law would discourage settlements at the revisional stage -- When the complainant has no objection, there cannot be any mandate of law directing the appellant to pay any further amount – Held, law laid down in the aforementioned judgment cannot be regarded as a binding precedent -- Direction imposing costs on the appellant cannot be sustained in the eye of law, particularly when the complainant does not want any further amount and the appellant has expressed his inability to comply with the same. (SC) Decided on: 04.11.2025

39. Compensation on account of untoward incidents -- Bonafide passenger – Travell in wrong train -- Deceased had purchased a railway ticket and had expired due to the injuries sustained in the railway accident -- Merely because the deceased had boarded a wrong train, it cannot be construed that he was not a bona fide passenger so as to absolve the railway authorities from contending that deceased not being a bona fide passenger. (SC) Decided on: 04.11.2025

40. Execution of decree -- Objections -- An objection petition under Section 47 should not invariably be treated as a commencement of a new trial -- Jurisdiction lies in a narrow compass -- Object of Section 47 is to prevent unwarranted litigation and dispose of all objections as expeditiously as possible -- There is a steady rise of proceedings akin to a retrial which causes failure of realization of the fruits of a decree, unless prima facie grounds are made out entertaining objections under Section 47 would be an abuse of process. (SC) Decided on: 03.11.2025

41. Suit for specific performance – Terminaiton of contract – Effect of – Declaration that termination of contract was invalid – Requirement of -- By accepting Rs.1,95,000 after expiry of six months, D-1 and D-2, firstly, waived their right, as available to them under the contract, to forfeit the advance consideration/ earnest money, Secondly, by such acceptance and endorsement on the back of the agreement they treated the contract as subsisting and, thirdly, by transferring part of the subject matter of the agreement in favour of D-3, even before serving a forfeiture notice, they committed a breach of the contract. In such circumstances, the plaintiff had an option to treat the contract as subsisting and sue for specific performance more so when termination was a void act, no longer permissible under the varied contract -- Suit for specific performance was maintainable even without seeking a declaration that termination of the contract was invalid in law. (SC) Decided on: 29.10.2025

42. Compensation in motor vehicle accident case -- Violation of terms of Permit – Principe of pay and recover -- Offending vehicle did not have the permit to enter the City, where the accident took place -- Purpose of an insurance policy in the present context is to shield the owner/ operator from direct liability when such an unforeseen/unfortunate incident takes place -- To deny the victim/ dependents of the victim compensation simply because the accident took place outside the bounds of the permit and, therefore, is outside the purview of the insurance policy, would be offensive to the sense of justice, for the accident itself is for no fault of his -- High Court applying the pay and recover principle, is entirely justified and requires no interference. (SC) Decided on: 29.10.2025

43. Rejection of plaint – Res-judicata -- Suit being barred under Order 2 Rule 2 CPC or by res judicata, the trial Court rightly held that the same was a matter of evidence and the plaint could not have been rejected on the said ground. (P&H HC) Decided on: 29.10.2025

44. Advalorem Court fees – Executant of Sale deed – Role of -- Legal position is well settled that where a person, who is not a party to a sale deed, seeks to avoid the same, he may pay a fixed court fee under Section 7(iv)(c) of the Court Fees Act, 1870 -- However, when the executant of the document himself seeks its cancellation, he must pay ad valorem court fee on the value of the property or consideration mentioned in the document -- This principle is based on the reasoning that an executant, having executed the document, cannot claim it to be void without first paying the fee on the transaction he himself created -- Plea that the sale deeds were obtained by fraud or that full consideration was not paid does not alter their status as executants -- Court Fee Act does not make any distinction between voluntary execution and execution allegedly induced by fraud. (P&H HC) Decided on: 29.10.2025

45. Omission by Investigation officer – Effect of -- Any omission on the part of the investigating officer cannot go against the prosecution’s case. Story of the prosecution is to be examined dehors such omission by the investigating agency. Otherwise, it would shake the confidence of the people not merely in the law enforcing agency but also in the administration of justice. (SC) Decided on: 28.10.2025

46. Corruption case -- Acquittal by trial Court – Conviction in appeal by High Court -- Demand of illegal gratification and Acceptance – Proof of – Sole basis of the prosecution to prove demand and acceptance is the narration of the complainant, a close scrutiny of which reveals serious infirmities -- Both, the DSP and the Inspector of ACB, admit they did not question the complainant on this point, and till date no explanation has ever been offered for keeping Mediator/ R out of the room -- They also admit that they did not question any of the other office staff or visitors -- Other mediator B was not examined by the prosecution at all -- These circumstances are nowhere addressed by the High Court -- Such omissions cannot be brushed aside lightly, as they strike at the root of the prosecution version and cast serious doubt on whether demand and acceptance were proved beyond reasonable doubt – Order of acquittal restored. (SC) Decided on: 28.10.2025

47. Threatening Witness – Offence u/s 195A IPC – FIR by police -- Permissibility of -- Section 195A IPC was conceptualized as an offence distinct and different from those u/ss 193 IPC, 194 IPC, 195 IPC and 196 IPC -- Those offences require a complaint to be made only by those named in Section 195(1)(b)(i) CrPC and they were all non-cognizable offences -- However, an offence u/s 195A IPC was a cognizable offence -- Threatened witness or other person may take immediate steps by either giving oral information of the commission of this cognizable offence to the concerned police officer, u/s 154 CrPC, or by making a complaint to a jurisdictional Magistrate, u/s 195A CrPC, so as to set the process of criminal law in motion. (SC) Decided on: 28.10.2025

48. Award of the Arbitrator contains an elaborate examination of the terms of contract and a plausible view is taken by way of a reasoned award after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties -- Limited scope available to High Court u/s 37 of the Act -- View taken by the Arbitrator is clearly a permissible view and is in consonance with the Clauses of the NITs/contract – Appeal dismissed. (P&H HC) Decided on: 28.10.2025

49. Abetment to suicide -- Refusal to marry – Quashing of FIR -- Appellant could not be said to have intended the consequences of his act namely suicide -- It is possible that she might have felt hurt -- Mere refusal to marry even if true by itself would not amount to instigation as explained under Section 107 of the IPC -- First Information Report quashed. (SC) Decided on:27.10.2025

50. Sale deed – Challenge to -- Agriculture land – Plea of -- Ad-valorem court fee -- Petitioner has not, at any stage, pleaded that the court fee is liable to be computed on the basis of the land revenue assessed or payable in respect of the suit property -- Instead, the petitioner has affixed court fee treating the suit as one seeking a mere declaration – Held, petitioner, being the executant of the impugned sale deed, is liable to pay advalorem court fee on the sale consideration mentioned therein. (P&H HC) Decided on: 27.10.2025