This week’s roundup traverses legal terrains covering important cases such as Sourav Ganguly’s Termination of Player Representation Agreement Case, removal of ‘Bad Girl’ teaser from YouTube, chemistry professor electrocuted her husband to death, TP Chandrasekharan’s murder, distribution of pamphlets about teachings of Islam outside Temple, Bail in Sambhal Violence, and much more.
ACQUITTAL
TRIPURA HIGH COURT | ‘Benefit of Doubt cornerstone of criminal justice’; Murder accused’s conviction & life sentence, set aside
In a criminal appeal where the convict was punished with life imprisonment under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Division Bench comprising of Dr. T. Amarnath Goud* and Biswajit Palit, JJ opined that there is a significant distance between what “may be true” and “must be true,” which must be covered by clear, cogent, and unimpeachable evidence by the prosecution before an accused is condemned a convict. The Court found that there was misappreciation of evidence by the Trial Court and therefore, extending benefit of doubt to the accused, the Court set aside his conviction and life sentence. Read more HERE
ARBITRATION
BOMBAY HIGH COURT | ‘Anything the Court can see; the opposing party must be allowed to see’; Arbitral Award set aside over redacted disclosures
In a matter related to a multi-crore property development dispute over 12.5 acres of land in Malvani, Mumbai, a Single Judge Bench of Somasekhar Sundaresan, J., allowed the appeal filed by Atul Projects India Pvt. Ltd. (‘Atul Projects’), setting aside the arbitral tribunal’s order that had denied interim protection concerning its development rights. The Court held that the Tribunal had failed to consider critical material, including the unredacted Oberoi MoU central to determining third-party rights and the sequence of events relating to title clearance. Emphasising that Atul Projects’ obligations were contingent upon securing an “absolute clear title,”, the Court found that no valid termination had occurred on the dates claimed by the respondents. Additionally, the Court strongly disapproved of the excessive redaction of key documents, holding that such practice violates principles of natural justice. It quashed the arbitral tribunal’s order and remanded the matter for fresh consideration with full disclosure, firmly rejecting the filing of heavily redacted documents. The Court noted that this practice deprives the tribunal of material information essential for informed adjudication and undermines the principles of transparency and fairness that are foundational to judicial proceedings. Read more HERE
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT | Rs 14.49 crore arbitral award to Sourav Ganguly in Termination of Player Representation Agreement Case upheld
The present petition was filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘the Act’) by the Petitioner- Percept Talent Management Ltd. (‘Percept’) challenging an award dated 9-12-2018, read with the supplementary award dated 8-03-2019 (collectively referred to as “the award”) which had granted former cricketer Sourav Ganguly Rs 14.49 crore with interest and costs. A Single Judge Bench of Ravi Krishan Kapur, J., dismissed the challenge, holding that an arbitral award could not be interfered unless it was perverse or had been passed in violation of grounds enumerated under section 34 of the Act. The Court emphasised that there could be no re-appreciation of the findings by the Arbitral Tribunal (‘Tribunal’), nor did the Court substitute its own view or re-interpret the entire documentary evidence. Read more HERE
DELHI HIGH COURT | Unilateral arbitrator appointment invalid without express written waiver under Section 12(5) of Arbitration Act
The present appeal was filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘Arbitration Act’) challenging the order dated 23-5-2023 passed by the Commercial Court. By the said order, the Arbitration Award dated 12-10-2020 granting the appellant Rs. 1,76,01,359, was set aside on the ground that the Sole Arbitrator was unilaterally appointed by the State of Delhi (‘Respondent’), and the Award by a person ineligible to be appointed as an arbitrator under Section 12(5) read with Seventh Schedule of the Arbitration Act, was against public policy of India. The Division Bench of Vibhu Bakhru and Tejas Karia*, JJ., while dismissing the present appeal observed that any proceedings conducted before unilaterally appointed Arbitrator were a nullity and could not result into an enforceable award being against Public Policy of India and could be set aside under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act and/or refused to be enforced under Section 36. Further, the ineligibility of a unilaterally appointed arbitrator could be waived only by an express agreement in writing between the parties after the dispute had arisen between them and the award passed by a unilaterally appointed arbitrator was a nullity as the ineligibility goes to the root of the jurisdiction. Read more HERE
AVIATION LAW
BOMBAY HIGH COURT | Mumbai International Airport allowed to replace Celebi NAS with new airport handler after security clearance revocation
The present petitions under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘the Act’), was filed by Celebi NAS Airport Services India (P) Ltd. (‘Celebi NAS’), seeking interlocutory protection against its replacement by another operator at the Mumbai International Airport following revocation of its security clearance. A Single Judge Bench of Somasekhar Sundaresan, J., dismissed the petition holding that recently Delhi High Court upheld the revocation of security clearance, hence, no interim relief could be granted. The Court emphasised that Arbitral Tribunal could not grant specific performance and cancel the replacement of Celebi NAS in the two Concession Agreements, after the challenge to the grounds of revocation to an identically placed concern had also been judicially ruled on. Read more HERE
BAIL
KERALA HIGH COURT | Anticipatory bail denied to nine persons accused of assaulting Advocate for drafting complaint against them
The present application was filed for anticipatory bail by the petitioners-nine accused who were charged under Sections 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 118(2), 110, 190 and 296(b) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023 (‘BNS’), for assaulting an advocate over drafting a complaint against them. A Single Judge Bench of Bechu Kurian Thomas, J., dismissed the bail application and observed that if an advocate was attacked for carrying out professional duties, that is, for drafting a complaint against the accused persons, then the rule of law would suffer. Read more HERE
CHILD PORNOGRAPHY
MADRAS HIGH COURT | ‘Bad Girl’ teaser ordered to be removed from YouTube citing child pornographic depiction & State’s duty under Article 39(f)
The present writ petition was filed by the petitioners seeking urgent intervention against the alleged circulation of child pornographic content in the teaser of a Tamil movie titled “Bad Girl”, hosted on YouTube. The petitioners sought directions to the Union of India to ensure removal of such content and initiate appropriate legal action. A Single Judge Bench of P. Dhanabal, J., allowed the petition, holding that child protection is a constitutional mandate under Articles 39(f) and 45 of the Constitution, and directed the competent authority to issue notice and take appropriate action to remove the obscene contents and the videos. The Court emphasised that it was the duty of the State to protect the children in all respect and such content could not be allowed to continue. Read more HERE
CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908
KERALA HIGH COURT | Rights acquired under a favourable decree not affected by change in company’s name; Decree passed favouring Tata Tea, affirmed
The present second appeal was filed by the appellant (‘defendant’ in the original suit) against the concurrent findings of the Munsif Court (‘Trial Court’) as confirmed by the II Additional District Court (‘First Appellate Court’). The subordinate courts had passed a decree for recovery of possession and damages in favour of Tata Tea Ltd. (‘Tata Tea’), whose name was changed during the litigation and the defendant contended that the suit was not maintainable as the company was not in existence. A Single Judge Bench of Easwaran S., J., held that a change of name would not affect any rights or obligations of the company, thereby affirming the legality and enforceability of the decree passed in favor of the renamed entity, Tata Global Beverage Holdings (P) Ltd. Read more HERE
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT | ‘Dehors basic object of Punjab’s litigation policy’; Rs 1 lakh cost imposed on State for wasting Court’s time
In a petition challenging the charge-sheet issued for initiation of disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner, stating that it was violating Proviso of Rule 2.2(b), Note 2, of the Punjab Civil Services Rules, Volume II, a Single Judge Bench of Sheel Nagu, CJ., allowed the appeal and imposed cost of Rs 1,00,000 on the respondent stating that the present litigation dehors the very basic object of litigation policy of the State of Punjab. Read more HERE
CONVICTION
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT | Conviction of Chemistry Professor for electrocuting her Doctor husband to death, upheld
In a criminal appeal filed by a wife, Assistant Professor of Chemistry, who was convicted by the Trial Court for the murder of her husband and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life, the Division Bench of Vivek Agarwal* and Devnarayan Mishra, JJ., rejected the appeal holding that the chain of circumstances had been completed and the guilt of the wife had been proved beyond reasonable doubt by the prosecution. Read more HERE
CONTEMPT OF COURT
MADRAS HIGH COURT | ‘Rather than viewing judicial criticism defensively, State embraced institutional reform’; Contempt case closed over non-implementation of TNPID Act
In a petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 alleging non-compliance with the directions issued by the Court, wherein the Court, apart from directing the Monitoring Committee to take further steps for refunding the amount to the depositors, also highlighted serious lapses in the implementation of the Tamil Nadu Protection of Interests of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 1997 (‘TNPID Act’), the Single Judge Bench of B. Pugalendhi, J., taking note of the subsequent developments and the assurance that the system is now undergoing course correction with a strong institutional framework in place, held that the Contempt Petition stands closed, recording the compliance shown. The Court further clarified that any breach or deviation from the Standard Operating Procedure (‘SOP’), or from the timeline now fixed for the issuance of the Government Order, may be brought to its notice for appropriate action. Read more HERE
MADRAS HIGH COURT | Issue of alleged caste bias by a Judge placed before the Chief Justice for initiation of contempt case
The present writ appeal was filed by the appellant challenging the order dated 17-6-2025 passed earlier in administrative disputes with respondents including Tamil University, its Vice Chancellor etc.,. During the hearing, allegations of caste bias was passed against one of the High Court Judges by an advocate. The Division Bench of G.R. Swaminathan and K. Rajasekar, JJ., took note of the accusations attributing caste or religious bias being shown by a member of the Bench and opined that in the name of freedom of speech, one must not condone acts of contempt. The Court directed the Registry to place the matter before the Chief Justice of the Madras High Court for appropriate actions. Read more HERE
CRIMINAL TRIAL
MADRAS HIGH COURT | ‘Apprehension of possible tampering not a valid reason to refuse forensic examination’; Forensic analysis of pen drive & video recording in corruption case, allowed
In a criminal revision petition filed under Section 442 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking to quash the order of the Special Court / Chief Judicial Magistrate, which had dismissed the accused’s application for forensic examination of certain audio and video recordings and for securing the voice sample of the complainant, a Single Judge Bench of B. Pugalendhi, J. emphasised that the accused was entitled to a fair opportunity to rebut the allegations made against him. The Court observed that denying access to forensic comparison, despite the presence of specific electronic material forming part of the defence evidence, amounted to a serious curtailment of the accused’s right to a fair trial. Read more HERE
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT | Suo motu cognizance taken of school ceiling collapse case which claimed lives of 7 children
While taking suo moto cognizance based on news in media sources about collapse of ceiling and wall of a classroom of a Government Upper Primary School situated in Village Piplod, District Jhalawar on 25-07-2025 which claimed lives of 7 students and injured dozens of other children currently battling for their lives in the hospital, a Single-Judge Bench of Anoop Kumar Dhand, J., issued directions to the Central and State Governments to take effective steps for improving the education system, particularly focusing on school infrastructure, safety, and well-being of children. Read more HERE
CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT | “Justice system knows no caste, religion, creed, colour”; Relief denied to advocate seeking case transfer alleging personal bias of Special Judge
In a transfer petition filed under Section 447 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023(‘BNSS’) for the transfer of a special criminal case pending before the Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Raipur (‘Special Judge’), to any other Competent Court on the ground that the Special Judge had personal bias against the present accused, an advocate, and the accused was falsely implicated upon his instruction, the Single Judge Bench of Ramesh Sinha, CJ., dismissed the petition, holding that the allegation of bias merely due to an adverse order was not sufficient to justify transfer unless it was also substantiated by relevant material, which was not the case in the matter at hand. Read more HERE
CRUELTY
KERALA HIGH COURT | ‘Conviction under S 498-A IPC would be unjustified if cruelty is not proven’; All accused acquitted
The present appeal was filed by the Accused 1 to 3 wherein the conviction and sentence passed against them, by the Additional Sessions Judge (‘Trial Court’), for the offence under Section 498-A read with Section 34 of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) was challenged. The PW-1 (‘wife’) alleged that Accused 1 (‘husband’), Accused 2 (‘father-in-law’), Accused 3 (‘mother-in-law’) and Accused 4 (‘sister-in-law’) subjected her to cruelty and harassed her for her dowry. The husband even compelled her to abort her foetus. A Single Judge Bench of Jobin Sebastian, J., held that the prosecution failed to establish the main act of cruelty as defined under Section 498-A IPC and found the conviction unsustainable in law. Consequently, the Court set aside the judgment of conviction and sentence and acquitted the accused. Read more HERE
DELHI HIGH COURT | Making derogatory and defamatory complaints to spouse’s employer amounts to cruelty
In an appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 challenging the decree of divorce passed under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (‘HMA’) by the Principal Judge, Family Courts, West District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi (‘Family Court’), the Division Bench of Renu Bhatnagar* and Navin Chawla JJ., stated that the complaints made by wife to her husband’s employer, especially those involving unsubstantiated claims of adultery, could not be treated to address the issues of any wrong done to her, as the husband’s employer had nothing to do with all such wrongs. The Court stated that irrespective of the merits of these complaints, making such derogatory and defamatory remarks in the form of complaints to the spouse’s employer were nothing but cruelty. Thus, the Court stated that there was no infirmity in the impugned judgment passed by the Family Court and accordingly, dismissed the appeal. Read more HERE
BOMBAY HIGH COURT | ‘Taunts for dark complexion not grave enough to prove cruelty or abetment to suicide under IPC’; Husband acquitted
The present criminal appeal was initiated by the appellant-husband, convicted by the Trial Court under Sections 498-A and 306 read with Section 34 of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) for allegedly harassing his wife for dark complexion and abetting her suicide. A Single Judge Bench of S. M. Modak, J., allowed the appeal, holding that the prosecution could not prove the connection in between the harassment and the act of suicide. The Court observed that mere domestic quarrels, in absence of wilful conduct, could not be said to be of such a high degree so as to compel the wife to commit suicide. Read more HERE
CYBERCRIME
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT | Google India distinct legal entity than Google LLC, cannot be sued for content posted on Google LLC and YouTube
In a civil writ petition filed by Google India Private Limited (‘Google India’) challenging an order passed by the Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge, rejecting their application to be deleted from a suit for permanent injunction filed by the respondent involving posts and broadcasts on Google LLC and YouTube, a Single-Judge Bench of Vijaykumar A. Patil, J., while setting aside the order, held that Google India is a distinct legal entity from Google LLC. and YouTube, and therefore cannot be sued for content posted, broadcasted, or web-hosted by Google LLC. and YouTube. Read more HERE
DISABLED PERSONS
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT | Denial of benefits under Section 20(4) of Rights of Persons with Disability Act violates Article 21
In a civil writ petition filed by the petitioner rendered 80% disabled due to a brain hemorrhage against the denial of salary and benefits by the respondents, a single-judge bench of Mahendar Kumar Goyal, J., allowing the petition held that Section 20(4) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (‘RPwD Act’) extends protection to both partially and completely disabled employees, ensuring their continuity in service with all benefits until superannuation, including placement on a supernumerary post if adjustment is not possible. The respondents were directed to release due salary and other service benefits to the petitioner with interest @6% per annum and 9% in case of delay. The respondents were further directed to pay monthly salary to the petitioner along with other service benefits in terms of Section 20(4) of the RPwD Act and Rs. 25000 were imposed as costs. Read more HERE
EDUCATION LAW
DELHI HIGH COURT | CUET-PG answer key challenge partially allowed; Directed NTA to award marks for ambiguous Psychology Question
In a petition instituted by several aspirants who had appeared for the CUET (PG)-2025 examination in Psychology (Paper Code: HUQP20), challenging the correctness of the final answer key published by the National Testing Agency (NTA) in respect of two specific questions, bearing Question IDs: 3016983411 and 3016983415, Vikas Mahajan, J., upheld the final answer of “Proximity” for Question ID 3016983411, rejecting the petitioners’ claim. However, for Question ID 3016983415, the Court accepted that both “Kinesthetic sense” and “Vestibular senses” were valid answers and directed NTA to award five additional marks to eligible petitioners who had selected Option 1 and filed objections within time. Read more HERE
BOMBAY HIGH COURT | Technical glitch can’t derail merit-based admission; DCI order discharging MDS student, discharged
The present writ petition was initiated by astudent and a Dental College where she was admitted, challenging two impugned communications issued by the Dental Council of India (‘DCI’) that sought to discharge her from the MDS course on the ground of irregular admission.The Division Bench of Manish Pitale* and Y. G. Khobragade, JJ., held that the admission of the student, secured on merits through NEET-MDS 2024 counselling, could not be invalidated due to technical issues in uploading documents caused by low connectivity from heavy rainfall in the rural area where the Dental College was located. The Court quashed the DCI’s impugned communications and held that neither the student nor the Dental College was at fault. Read more HERE
KERALA HIGH COURT | ‘Quasi-judicial authority lacks inherent power to review own orders’; Kannur University order reviewing college ownership, quashed
In a writ petition filed by the Sharaf Arts and Science College Committee (‘the Committee’), challenging the decision of Kannur University, based on the legal opinion of the University’s Standing Counsel and the resolution passed at the Syndicate meeting held on 21-06-2024, whereby ownership of Sharaf Arts and Science College, Padne, was declared to vest with the ‘Khidmath Organisation of Padne’, a Single Judge Bench of DK Singh, J., quashed the impugned order. The Court held that Kannur University had unlawfully reviewed its own earlier decision and improperly transferred ownership from the Sharaf Arts and Science College Committee to the ‘Khidmath Organisation of Padne. The Court further emphasised that a quasi-judicial authority does not possess an inherent power to review its own orders; such power must be expressly conferred by the statute under which the authority operates. Any exercise of review power without such statutory backing is ultra vires and void for want of jurisdiction. Read more HERE
FAMILY AND PERSONAL LAWS
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT | Probe directed into fake Arya Samaj Societies conducting illegal marriages
In an application filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking quashing of summoning order and entire proceedings arising out of a criminal case registered against the accused herein under Sections 363, 366, 376 of the Penal Code, 1860, and Section 3 and 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, the Single Judge Bench of Prashant Kumar, J., dismissed the application for being non-meritorious. However, the Court directed the Home Secretary of the State to investigate fake Arya Samaj societies that were conducting illegal marriages and to determine how they had flourished in the State. Read more HERE
BOMBAY HIGH COURT | ‘Child’s welfare has upper hand over personal law’; Custody of 9-year-old minor granted to the mother
In a case concerning custody of a 9-year-old son, Single Judge Bench of Shailesh P. Brahme, J. held that when the personal law is pitted with comfort and welfare of the child, latter would have upper hand, quashing the order granting custody to the respondent-father, granting him only visitation rights with temporary custody. Read more HERE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT | Distribution of Pamphlets about teachings of Islam outside Temple not considered as Religious Conversion
In a criminal petition filed by the accused and others for quashing the complaint and First Information Report (‘FIR’) registered against them for offenses punishable under Sections 299, 351(2), and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNS’), and Section 5 of the Karnataka Protection of Right to Freedom of Religion Act, 2022 (‘KPRFR Act’), for distributing pamphlets promoting Islam in Ramatheerth Temple the Single-Judge Bench of Venkatesh Naik T, J*., quashed the FIR holding that the complainant lacked locus standi and the allegations in the FIR failed to satisfy the essential elements of offence under section 3 of the KPRFR Act. The Court observed that there were no allegations made against the accused of converting or attempting to convert any person to another religion. Read more HERE
MADRAS HIGH COURT | ‘No person or group can block access to public temples based on caste’; Officials slammed for closing Arulmigu Mariamman temple to avoid caste tensions
The case arose from two writ petitions concerning the Arulmigu Mariamman Temple at Chinna Dharapuram, Karur District. The first petitioner (Trust) sought resumption of worship and temple festivals, asserting there was no caste-based denial. While in the second petition, it was alleged that Scheduled Caste devotees were being denied entry into the temple. A Single Judge Bench of B.Pugalendhi, J., held that no person or group could block access to a public temple based on caste, and if anyone tried to create trouble or claim superiority based on caste, they would face strict legal consequences. The Court concluded that the right to worship could not be sacrificed for the sake of silence. Read more HERE
FRAUD
BOMBAY HIGH COURT | ‘Authorities stood motionless for 5 years’; Rs 10000 cost each imposed on authorities for failing to act in UIDAI identity fraud case
The present writ petition was filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution, after his Aadhaar and PAN details were fraudulently used to open a bank account, obtain GST registration and conduct business transactions and despite repeated complaints, none of the statutory agencies including Unique Identification Authority of India (‘UIDAI’), Income Tax Department, Union Bank, and GST authorities took timely action. The Division Bench of M.S. Sonak and Jitendra Jain*, JJ., while allowing the petition held that the prolonged inaction of the statutory and regulatory authorities amounted to a serious dereliction of their duties, emphasising that they failed to discharge their legal obligations by not taking any action since the last five years of the discovery of fraud committed on them. Further, the Court imposed cost of Rs 10,000 on each of the authorities, which was to be paid to the petitioner for their dereliction of duty. Read more HERE
HEALTH AND MEDICAL LAW
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT | ‘Private hospitals treat patients as guinea pig/ATM machines’; Summons refused to be quashed in medical negligence case
In an application filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (‘CrPC’), the accused sought to quash the summoning order passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (‘ACJM’) for offences under Sections 304A, 315, 323, and 506 of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’), along with the entire proceedings pending before the ACJM’s court, the Single Judge Bench of Prashant Kumar, J. said that it has become a common practice among private nursing homes and hospitals to entice patients for treatment despite lacking proper infrastructure or qualified medical professionals. Once a patient is admitted, these institutions often begin contacting doctors to administer treatment. The Court noted that such establishments increasingly treat patients as mere “guinea pigs” or “ATM machines,” seeking to exploit them financially. While acknowledging that medical professionals should be protected from unwarranted criminal prosecution, the Court emphasised that such protection is meant for those who act with due diligence and caution. It cannot extend to doctors who run ill-equipped nursing homes and lure patients solely for monetary gain. Upon perusal of the material on record and considering the facts at this stage, the Court concluded that it could not be said that no prima facie offence was made out against the accused. The cognizance order was passed after due consideration of the evidence collected during the investigation. The Court held that the issues raised by the accused involved were disputed questions of fact, which could not be addressed under Section 482 CrPC. Read more HERE
HOUSING AND REAL ESTATE
BOMBAY HIGH COURT | ‘Access to justice cannot be reduced to mere formality’; Maharasthra RERA directed to restore hybrid hearings
In a writ petition seeking to streamline the process of execution of orders passed by the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (‘Maha RERA’) and to provide a mechanism for mentioning matters, conduct hearings immediately after filing of execution proceedings and expeditious disposal of execution proceedings, the Division Bench comprising of Revati Mohite Dere* and Dr. Neela Gokhale, JJ., emphasised that the objective of Real Estate Regulatory Authority (‘RERA’) and Maha RERA is to provide speedy, transparent, and effective adjudication of disputes in the real estate sector. The Court stated that virtual-only hearings, when coupled with the inability to communicate effectively or mention urgent matters, result in systemic opacity and procedural delays. Thus, the Court issued certain directions to Maha RERA, including direction to restore hybrid hearings, permitting parties to opt for either physical or virtual appearance. Read more HERE
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
DELHI HIGH COURT | ‘NUTELLA’ declared as a well-known trade mark
In the present case, the plaintiffs sought a decree of permanent injunction for infringement of its trade mark, passing off, delivery up and damages against the defendant in respect of its trade mark ‘NUTELLA’ and , and even sought their mark ‘NUTELLA’ to be declared as a well-known trade mark under Section 2(zg) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 (‘the 1999 Act’). A Single Judge Bench of Saurabh Banerjee, J., declared ‘NUTELLA’/ as a ‘well-known trade mark’ and granted permanent injunction to the plaintiffs, thereby restraining the defendant and all persons acting on its behalf from manufacturing, packaging, supplying, distributing, selling, advertising, or dealing in any counterfeit ‘NUTELLA’ products. Further, the Court stated that the plaintiff was entitled to Rs 30,00,000 towards damages of the present proceedings and directed the defendant to pay Rs 2,00,000 as costs to Delhi High Court Bar Association Lawyers Social Security and Welfare Fund. Read more HERE
JUDICIARY
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT | ‘Abstention from work or mass leave by judicial employees of Subordinate Courts is illegal’; Directions issued for immediate return
In an application for suspension of sentence where the advocates raised the issue of the Judicial employees of Subordinate Courts being on mass leave and non-issuance of copies on record to litigants and lawyers, a single-judge bench of Ashok Kumar Jain, J., held that the abstention of work or mass leave by judicial employees of Subordinate Courts (District Courts) of the State is illegal and uncalled for. The Court called upon every employee of District Judiciary (Subordinate Courts) to resume the duty latest by 10.00 A.M. on 25-07-2025 failing which the Court issued various directions to the District Judges and the State. Read more HERE
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT | “As we sow, so shall we reap”: Feudal mindset in Judiciary criticised, Relief granted to illegally terminated District Judge
In a writ petition filed by a Former District Judge against the rejection of his appeal against his termination after 28 years of blemish-free service, the Division Bench of Atul Sreedharan* and Dinesh Kumar Paliwal, JJ., allowed the petition, holding that the Former Judge was terminated only on account of passing judicial orders without an iota of material to establish corruption even on the anvil of preponderance of probability. Accordingly, the Court restored his pensionary benefits and directed that he be given back wages from the date of termination to the date he would have otherwise superannuated, with interest at 7 percent. The Court also directed the State and the High Court to pay a total of Rs 5 Lakhs to the Former Judge as compensation. Read more HERE
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT | Rs 50,000 cost imposed on convict for ‘attempting to overawe District Judiciary’ by alleging assurance of acquittal by Trial Court Judge
In a writ petition filed against a non-speaking administrative order of the High Court in a complaint filed by him against the Trial Court Judge for allegedly assuring the convict that he would be acquitted, the Division Bench of Atul Sreedharan* and Amit Seth, JJ., dismissed the petition, holding that the convict’s act was an attempt to overawe the District Judiciary by making frivolous and outrageous allegations against the Judicial Magistrate First Class (‘JMFC’), Umariya. The Court imposed a cost of Rs 50,000 to be paid by the convict to the Madhya Pradesh State Legal Services Authority within ten days. Read more HERE
GUJARAT HIGH COURT | A single uncommunicated adverse remark or doubtful integrity enough for compulsory retirement’; Committee’s call to retire District Judge, upheld
In a writ petition challenging the notification dated 19-5-2009 (‘impugned notification’) by which the petitioner had been compulsorily retired from judicial service, the Division Bench of AS Supehia* and RT Vachhani, JJ, declined to interfere with the direction of the Specially Constituted Committee and the Full Court of this Court. The Court also held that the perception of integrity of judicial officer formed by the Committee cannot be interfered with by exercising powers under Article 226 of the Constitution unless there is patent illegality, breach of procedure or it is a disproportionate measure. Read more HERE
LIVE-IN RELATIONSHIP
BOMBAY HIGH COURT | Consent for sexual relation under illegal surrogacy agreement disguised as live-in relationship not valid in law; Rape case refused to be quashed
In a case where live-in relationship agreement has been executed between accused’s wife and the prosecutrix, the Division Bench of Vibha Kankanwadi* and Sanjay A. Deshmukh, JJ. rejected the application filed by the accused, specifying that such an agreement practically amounts to agreement of surrogacy. The Court held that that consent obtained under an agreement that is illegal in the eyes of law cannot be considered valid. It further held that when surrogacy in such a form is prohibited, specifically, soliciting surrogacy through payment, which is against public policy, the consent obtained cannot be considered free consent. Therefore, no case was made out for the exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The Court also remarked that it was unimaginable how such an agreement could be entered into by the wife of the accused, as it effectively involved parting with her husband, an act no sane married woman would ordinarily undertake. Read more HERE
MAINTENANCE
DELHI HIGH COURT | Granting interim maintenance to qualified unemployed wife doesn’t mean breeding a class of idle woman; Plea against maintenance order, dismissed
In the present case, a revision petition was filed under Section 438 read with Section 442 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNSS’) and Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘CrPC’) by the petitioner-husband, challenging the order dated 9-5-2025 of the Family Court, New Delhi (‘the Trial Court’), which granted ad-interim maintenance of Rs 1,00,000/- per month to the respondent-wife. A Single Judge Bench of Neena Bansal Krishna, J., observed that raising objections at this stage to the grant of maintenance despite the wife’s earning capacity, and stating that it would be like breeding a class of idle women dependent on their husband, was premature and unwarranted. The Court stated that the order dated 9-5-2025 was only ad-interim in nature, which was meant to provide immediate relief until the interim maintenance application was finally decided. The Court thus, dismissed the petition for devoid of merits and stated that both the parties were at liberty to make contentions before the Trial Court during the consideration of the interim maintenance application. Read more HERE
MEDICAL TERMINATION OF PREGNANCY
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT | ‘Despite counseling, minor rape victim opts against full-term pregnancy’; Termination permitted at 31 weeks
In a petition filed by a father on behalf of his minor daughter, who is a victim of rape, for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent authorities to terminate the pregnancy of the minor, the division bench of Manoj Kumar Gupta and Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,JJ. while allowing the medical termination of pregnancy, gave some directions. Read more HERE
MINES AND MINERALS
KERALA HIGH COURT | Fundamental right under Article 19(1)(g), upheld; Police protection ordered against obstruction to NITK quarry survey team
In a writ petition filed by the petitioner seeking direction to the police authorities to provide protection to him and the team of National Institute of Technology, Karnataka (‘NITK’), to conduct the survey for assessing the fitness of the leased land in order top start quarrying activities, a Single Judge Bench of N. Nagaresh, J., while upholding the petitioner’s fundamental right under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution to carry on any trade, occupation or business of his choice, directed the authorities concerned to provide adequate police protection to the petitioner and the survey team till the inspection was complete. Read more HERE
KERALA HIGH COURT | Violation of Hill Slope Excavation Limits | NHAI directed to display quarry permit and emergency contact details at project sites
In a public interest litigation filed by residents of Chelannur Panchayath, Kozhikode, the petitioners highlighted the absence of an effective mechanism to inform the authorities when the excavation of hill slopes exceeded permissible limits, thereby posing a threat of slope destabilization. The division bench comprising Nitin Jamdar*, C.J., and Basant Balaji, J., disposed of the petition after accepting the statement made on behalf of the National Highways Authority of India (‘NHAI’). The Authority undertook to issue necessary instructions to the concessionaire, either by separate communication or by incorporating the requirement into the agreement, to erect metallic boards at regular intervals along the stretch of road where quarrying activities are conducted. These boards are to display the information mandated under Rule 10(i) of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2015, as well as the contact details of the officer in charge of the relevant Project Implementation Unit (‘PIU’). Read more HERE
MOTOR VEHICLES
HIMCHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT | ‘Claimant’s future snatched!’: Motor accident compensation increased on account of 100% disability
The present appeal was filed by Tata AIG General Insurance Co. Ltd. (‘insurer’) under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (‘MV Act’), against the order dated 27-02-2018, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (‘Tribunal’), wherein Respondent 1 (‘claimant’) was awarded approximately Rs 68 lakh in compensation on account of injuries and disablement sustained by him in a motor accident. The insurer contended that the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal was excessive. A Single Judge Bench of Satyen Vaidya, J., recalculated the compensation payable to the claimant and increased the amount to almost Rs 82 lakh keeping in mind that he would be spending the rest of his life lying on a cot or sitting on a chair. Read more HERE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT | Husband entitled to loss of dependency despite separation claim; Burden to establish separation on Insurer
In a miscellaneous first appeal filed by the claimant for modifying the impugned judgment and award of Rs 70,000 passed by the Additional Senior Civil Judge denying him compensation for loss of dependency under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (‘MV Act’) for death of his wife on the ground of them living separately, the Single-Judge Bench of Ravi V Hosmani, J., allowed the appeal in part and modified the award to Rs.14,96,250 by granting compensation for loss of dependency holding that residing together cannot be added as additional condition to be established by claimant in order to be entitled for compensation. The Court further observed that the burden to establish separation would be on Insurer. Read more HERE
NDPS
DELHI HIGH COURT | ‘Merely receiving package, unaware of its contents, not ‘conscious possession’ under NDPS Act’; Bail granted to man caught with LSD paper blots
In a bail application wherein, the accusedaccused had been apprehended collecting a parcel from DTDC containing commercial quantity of LSD paper blots, the Single Judge Bench of Sanjeev Narula, J, held that merely receiving a package, being unaware of its illicit contents, does not amount to ‘conscious possession’ under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (‘NDPS Act’). Thereafter, the Court allowed release of the accused on bail after furnishing a personal bond and surety of Rs. 25,000. Read more HERE
BOMBAY HIGH COURT | ‘Adverse Police Report unsustainable’; Order denying furlough to prisoner pending conviction in another NDPS case set aside
In the present case, the petitioner, who was undergoing trial for an offence under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (‘NDPS Act’), had applied for furlough leave application, but the same was rejected. he Division Bench comprising of Anil L. Pansare, and M.M. Nerlikar*, JJ., held that since the petitioner was yet to be convicted in a pending case, registered under the provisions of NDPS Act, which was one of the categories for which furlough was barred, therefore the Rules of Notification dated 2-12-2024 could not be applicable to him. Further, the Court stated that the apprehension expressed by the Police in the Adverse Police Report, that there would be danger to the family of the deceased if the furlough was granted to the petitioner, was not sustainable. The Court thus, quashed and set-aside the rejection order and directed the authorities to release the petitioner on furlough leave for a period of 21 days on the condition as the authorities concerned deemed fit. Read more HERE
MANIPUR HIGH COURT | Bail application of NDPS accused allegedly participated in misbranding controlled substance as normal drug dismissed
In a case where the accused was allegedly involved in misbranding of Pseudoephedrine (controlled substance) as a normal drug, by putting up fake labels of ordinary drug and assisting in transporting the same to Myanmar through Manipur, a Single Judge Bench of A. Guneshwar Sharma, J., keeping in view of seizure of huge quantity of controlled substance which has potential of using in the manufacturing of narcotic substance and other incriminating material and likelihood of non-availability during trial and trans-border operation, stated that it was not inclined to grant bail. Thus, the Court dismissed bail application of the NDPS accused who were allegedly participating in misbranding a controlled substance as normal drug. Read more HERE
KERALA HIGH COURT | ‘No grounds for arrest communicated in arrest intimation or memo’; Bail granted in NDPS case
The accused filed the present bail application for the offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C), 25 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (‘NDPS Act’) as he was found in possession of ganja. A Single Judge Bench of Bechu Kurian Thomas, J., on being satisfied that the accused was not informed about the grounds for arrest, directed his release on bail. Read more HERE
PAROLE
KERALA HIGH COURT | Parole denied to TP Chandrasekharan’s murder convict for son’s Choroonu ceremony
The present writ petition was filed by the convict’s wife seeking emergency leave for him to attend the choroonu ceremony of their child. The convict was serving a life sentence in the T. P. Chandrasekharan murder case, who was an Indian politician and the founder of the Revolutionary Marxist Party. A Single Judge Bench of P.V. Kunhikrishnan,J. held that parole could not be granted to a murder convict for every ceremony and accordingly dismissed the writ petition.Read more HERE
POCSO
MEGHALAYA HIGH COURT | ‘Deficiency in conduct of legal aid counsel defeats right to fair trial’; Retrial ordered in POCSO case
In a criminal appeal seeking to quash and set aside the conviction of the accused and remand the matter to the Trial Court for retrial as he was provided with an ineffective legal aid resulting in denial of fair trial, the Division bench of W. Diengdoh J. and B. Bhattacharjee J.* stated that the legal aid must be real, substantial, and meaningful and any deficiency in the conduct of legal aid counsel would defeat the right of the accused to a fair trial. The Court observed that the legal aid provided to the accused during the trial was neither effective nor adequate, which has not only infringed his fundamental rights but also seriously prejudiced his defence in the case. Thus, the Court remanded the matter to the Trial Court for a retrial. Read more HERE
CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT | ‘Saying ‘I Love You’ alone not sexual assault in absence of proven sexual intent’; Acquittal of man in POCSO case, upheld
In a criminal appeal filed against the acquittal of the respondent who allegedly yelled ‘I love you’ at a minor girl, the Single Judge Bench of Sanjay S. Agrawal, JJ., dismissed the appeal, thereby upholding the acquittal, since none of the offences stood proved against the respondent. Read more HERE
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT | [POCSO] Death sentence in rape and murder case commuted to life imprisonment without remission for 60 years
A death reference and an appeal were filed challenging the conviction judgment dated 27-06-2023 and the sentencing order dated 28-06-2023 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge in a POCSO case wherein the Trial Court had convicted the appellants under Sections 376-DB, 302 read with 34, 201 read with 34, 363, and 365 of the Penal Code, 1860, as well as under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, awarding them the death penalty. A division bench of Debangsu Basak and Shabbar Rashidi, JJ., commutes the death penalty awarded by the Trial Judge to one of life imprisonment without the possibility of remission for a period of 60 years from the date of commission of the offence. Read more HERE
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT | Intra-court appeal not available to take new ground by making a totally new case
In the present case, an appeal was filed under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent, challenging order dated 7-5-2025 whereby the title of the petitioner could not be decided since there was no document produced to substantiate the same. The Division Bench of Sujit Narayan Prasad* and Arun Kumar Rai, JJ., dismissed the appeal holding that the intra-court appeal in furtherance of the proceeding of the writ court was not available to take new ground by making a totally new case. The Court stated that if a document was placed before the writ court, the matter would have been different and in those circumstances, the writ court would have considered the said document. Read more HERE
PUBLIC PROPERTY
ORISSA HIGH COURT | Eviction of Dargah’s Toilets on Government land upheld; Cited no right to occupy public premises without legal sanction
The present petition was filed by the petitioner, Lal Baba Dargah (‘Dargah’), a religious institution, challenging the initiation of eviction proceedings under the Orissa Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1972 (‘Public Premises Act’), and the subsequent orders passed by the Collector and the Sub-Collector-cum-Estate Officer (‘Sub-Collector’), Sadar, Sundargarh. A Single Judge Bench of Dr. S.K. Panigrahi, J., while dismissing the petition, upheld that the land classified as “Rasta”, located within the territorial jurisdiction of Rajgangpur Municipality and recorded in the name of the State Government, clearly fell within the definition of “public premises” under Section 2(f) of the Public Premises Act. The Court concluded that the petitioner’s distinction between land recorded as “Rasta” and “public premises” was misconceived and contrary to the enactment’s plain language and scheme. Read more HERE
QUASHMENT OF PROCEEDINGS/ FIR
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT | “Offence of cheating will not be made out unless deception is played since beginning”: Criminal proceedings u/s 406 and 420 IPC, quashed
In a criminal miscellaneous petition seeking to set aside the entire criminal proceedings as well as the order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Koderma for offences punishable under Sections 406 or 420 of the Penal Code 1860 (‘IPC’), a Single Judge Bench of Anil Kumar Choudhary J* stated that unless the accused person played deception since the beginning of the transaction between the parties, the offence of cheating punishable under Section 420 of the IPC would not be made out. Thus, the Court stated that continuation of the criminal proceedings against the petitioner would amount to abuse of the process of law and accordingly, set aside the impugned order and quashed the criminal proceedings. Read more HERE
BOMBAY HIGH COURT | ‘No disturbance to public peace’: FIR against men allegedly accused of committing affray, quashed
In a case where FIR was registered against petitioners (‘accused persons’) for committing affray by fighting in a hospital, the Division Bench comprising of Anil L. Pansare, and M.M. Nerlikar*, JJ., stated that entire record did not show that there was disturbance to the public peace. The contents of the FIR and the material in the charge-sheet depict that the material was not sufficient to attract Section 159 of Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) and therefore, it cannot be said that the accused persons have committed an offence punishable under Section 160 of IPC. Thus, the Court quashed the FIR as there was no disturbance to public peace. Read more HERE
BOMBAY HIGH COURT | FIR against teacher over mocking posts on ‘Operation Sindoor’ in WhatsApp group refused to be quashed
In a petition filed by the accused seeking quashing of the First Information Report (‘FIR’) for posting controversial WhatsApp messages and social media status, and for reacting with a laughing emoji to the phrase “Jai Hind”, the Division Bench of A. S. Gadkari and Rajesh S. Patil*, JJ opined that the accused could have avoided such a reaction when the nation was celebrating the successful mission of the Indian Armed forces , namely “Operation Sindoor”. The Court held that the intention of the accused became an essential ingredient to be assessed in light of the language she had used for India, particularly at a time when the entire nation was expressing pride in the Indian Armed forces. Accordingly, the Court dismissed the petition, stating that the instant case constituted the necessary ingredients of the alleged offences, and therefore, the FIR was not liable to be quashed. Read more HERE
SENIOR CITIZENS
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT | Senior Citizens Act, 2007 | Maintenance Tribunals can’t resolve property disputes; Civil Courts hold jurisdiction
In a writ petition filed by a senior citizen, seeking a direction upon respondent 2 to ensure the protection of his life and property, citing Rule 21 of the UP Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, 2014 (‘Rules, 2014’) as the respondent’s duty. The petitioner clarified that he wished to construct a gate on his property, but respondents 2 to 5 were obstructing the construction and issuing threats. The Division Bench of Arindam Sinha and Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava*, JJ., held that the Maintenance Tribunal under Section 7 of the Senior Citizens Maintenance and Welfare Act, 2007 (‘Act 2007’) does not have the jurisdiction to adjudicate property ownership disputes, especially in cases involving third-party claims. The Court emphasised that such disputes must be resolved before Civil Courts, not the Maintenance Tribunal. Read more HERE
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT | “Neglect, cruelty, or abandonment of elderly parents violate Article 21”; Sons rebuked for abusing father for share in land acquisition compensation
In a writ petition filed by a 75-year-old plus, visibly infirm, man regarding release of the compensation that he was supposed to receive from the State due to the acquisition of his land and its structure, the Division Bench of Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Prashant Kumar, JJ., disposed of the petition while directing that the entire compensation amount be released in favour of the petitioner at the earliest. Noting that the petitioner was abused by his sons for their share in the compensation, the Court directed that if the sons caused any annoyance or interference in the future, the petitioner shall be at liberty to file a recall application, and the High Court shall not hesitate to pass appropriate and stringent orders. Read more HERE
SERVICE LAW
MEGHALAYA HIGH COURT | “Absence from service on misplaced notion”: Suspension order against St. Mary’s School teachers quashed; Directs clearance of due payment
In two petitions, the petitioners had sought the recall of the suspension order issued against them, along with related approval order and the enquiry report. They had also sought payment of the subsistence allowance and salary for the year 2008-2009. A Single Judge Bench of W. Diengdoh J. set aside and quashed the suspension orders, holding that it had become infructuous. Further, the Court directed the authorities concerned to pay the arrears subsistence allowance to the petitioners from the period they had been placed under suspension till date. Read more HERE
SUICIDE
ORISSA HIGH COURT | Balasore Student self-immolation case | Judicial SIT probe decline; ICC held accountable
The present Public Interest Litigation (‘PIL’) was filed by the petitioner, a public-spirited person raising concerns over an unprecedented incident dated 12-7-2025, in which the victim of sexual harassment committed self-immolation by pouring petrol in front of the Principal’s office. Despite medical attention, the girl succumbed to burn injuries on 14-7-2025. The petitioner sought the constitution of a Special Investigation Team (‘SIT’) headed by a responsible officer of repute ensuring fair investigation. The Division Bench of Harish Tandon, CJ., and Manash Ranjan Pathak, J., declined the prayer, noting that SIT had already been constituted by the State. The Court held that constituting a SIT over the SIT constituted by the Government may not be proper at the nebulous stage of the investigation unless the Court, upon examining the materials presented before it, perceived that the investigation had been misdirected. Read more HERE
TERRORISM AND ORGANIZED CRIME
JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT | ‘Incitement of secession, calling J&K an ‘occupied territory’ is unlawful activity’; Discharge of accused set aside
The present appeal was filed by the appellant against the order of the Additional Sessions Judge (‘Trial Court’), wherein the respondents, who were facing prosecution under Section 13 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (‘UAPA’) for delivering anti-national speech and calling for secession of Jammu and Kashmir claiming that it was illegally occupied, stood discharged. The Division Bench of Sanjeev Kumar and Sanjay Parihar*, JJ., set aside the discharge and held that it was legally unsustainable and reflected a ‘non-application of mind and erroneous application of law’. Read more HERE
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT | Sambhal Violence| “Only bald and verbal allegations, no admissible evidence”: Bail granted to Jama Masjid Committee Chairman
In a bail application filed by the Chairman of Sambhal Jama Masjid Committee (‘the Chairman’) in the 2024 Sambhal Masjid violence case, the Single Judge Bench of Sameer Jain, J., allowed the application, holding that, except for bald and verbal allegations, there was no admissible evidence against the Chairman. Read more HERE
DELHI HIGH COURT | Order dismissing default bail to UAPA accused allegedly involved in propagating ISIS ideology and radicalizing youth upheld
In an appeal filed under Section 21 of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 challenging the orders passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala House Courts, Delhi (‘the Trial Court’), whereby the detention period of the appellant (‘accused’) was extended and his default bail application was dismissed, the Division Bench of Subramonium Prasad* and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar JJ., stated that the material on record indicated that the accused persons including the present accused, were active members of ISIS. The Court stated that the accused persons were propagating the ideology of the ISIS and trying to recruit youth for furtherance of the objectives of ISIS in banned organisations. The Court stated that the order of the Trial Court extended custody not as a matter of routine but based on credible material outlining the investigative steps requiring completion. Therefore, the Court opined that the Trial Court’s order of detention was not mechanical in nature. The accused could not have been released on account of ongoing investigation as releasing them at a crucial stage would have impeded the investigation and accordingly, dismissed the present appeal. Read more HERE
WILL
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT | No statutory time limit prescribed for registration of a Will; Posthumous registration valid
In Miscellaneous First Appeals filed by the appellants challenging the common order dated 08-04-2025 passed by the Trial Court, which rejected their Interlocutory Application (I.A.) in a suit for separation and possession of ancestral property by doubting the genuineness of a Will solely due to its posthumous registration, a Single-Judge Bench of Ramachandra D. Huddar, J.*, set aside the order of the Trial Court. The Court held posthumous registration of Will valid and that there is no statutory time limit for the registration of a Will, and its validity is determined by its execution and attestation as prescribed under Section 63 of the Succession Act, 1925, not by the timing of its registration. Read more HERE
