A. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988—Sections 166(1)(c)—Legal Representatives—Dependency—Maintainability of Claim—All legal representatives of a deceased victim are entitled to maintain a claim petition under Section 166(1)(c), irrespective of whether each legal representative was actually dependent upon the deceased. The absence or extent of dependency may affect the quantum of compensation, but does not defeat the right to maintain the claim. [Paras 5–5.3] B. Motor Accident Compensation—Consortium—Spousal, Parental and Filial Consortium—Consortium is an independent and indispensable head of compensation. Spousal consortium is payable to the surviving spouse, parental consortium to children for the loss of parental care, affection, guidance and protection, and filial consortium to parents f...
A. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908—Order XXI Rule 22—Execution Proceedings—Notice to Legal Representatives—Order XXI Rule 22 is mandatory; however, where an execution proceeding is transferred to the DRT under Section 31 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, the subsequent execution is governed by Section 29 of the 1993 Act read with the Second Schedule to the Income-tax Act, 1961. Consequently, non-compliance with Order XXI Rule 22 has no impact on the validity of the auction sale conducted by the DRT. [Paras 31, 35–37] B. Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993—Section 29—Income-tax Act, 1961—Second Schedule Rules 2 & 61—Non-service of Notice—Auction Sale—Substantial Injury—Rule 2 of the Second Schedule incorporates principles of natural justice...
A. Indian Evidence Act, 1872—Section 60—Oral Evidence—Contents of Excluded Documents—Once internal documents, emails or correspondence have been held irrelevant and their production has been refused by orders attaining finality, the same material cannot be introduced indirectly through oral evidence. What is impermissible directly as documentary evidence cannot be brought on record indirectly through a witness. [Paras 13–15, 20] B. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908—Order XI—Discovery and Inspection—Finality of Judicial Orders—Where orders refusing discovery or production of internal documents have attained finality before the appellate courts, the trial court is bound by such orders and cannot reopen the issue at a subsequent stage. Repeated applications seeking the same material cannot...
A. Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 302, 34, 201 & 120B—Circumstantial Evidence—Homicidal Death—Medical Evidence—In a murder case based entirely on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish circumstances which unerringly point towards the guilt of the accused. Where the post-mortem report and medical evidence establish death by drowning and the injuries are consistent with accidental contact with stones or other hard substances, without evidence showing that the deceased was rendered unconscious and deliberately drowned, the medical evidence cannot support a finding of homicidal death. [Paras 8–10, 21–23] B. Circumstantial Evidence—Last Seen Theory—Motive—Accused Seen with Deceased—Mere proof that the accused were last seen with the deceased or were pre...
A. Indian Succession Act, 1925—Section 63(c)—Evidence Act, 1872—Sections 68 and 69—Proof of Will—A Will propounded by a beneficiary must be proved in accordance with the statutory requirements of attestation and proof—Failure to satisfactorily establish attestation under Section 68 and the foundational requirements for invoking Section 69 renders the Will legally unproved—Registered Will does not dispense with the mandatory proof required by law. (Paras 71, 135) B. Evidence Act, 1872—Proof of Will—Suspicious circumstances—Propounder’s burden—Suspicious circumstances are not to be considered in isolation but cumulatively—Circumstances such as inaccurate recitals, exclusion of natural branches, relationship of attesting witnesses with beneficiaries, non-examina...
A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Order XLI Rules 23, 24 and Section 107—Appellate Court—Remand—Remand is not to be ordered as a matter of course and is justified only where necessary in the interests of justice—Where the evidence necessary for adjudication is already available on record and the issues have been sufficiently framed, the appellate court should decide the matter itself instead of remanding it to the Trial Court—High Court’s order remanding the suit for reconsideration of validity of sale deed and limitation, despite sufficient evidence on record, held unsustainable and set aside. (Paras 16–17) B. Limitation Act, 1963—Section 3—Limitation—Duty of Court—Limitation is a matter which the Court is bound to consider even if it is not specifically pleaded by th...
A. Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 302 and 34—Murder—Sole eyewitness—Conviction can legally rest on the testimony of a single eyewitness where such evidence is wholly reliable, consistent and inspires confidence—Corroboration by medical evidence further strengthens the prosecution case—The fact that the witness is the daughter of the deceased does not, by itself, make her an interested or unreliable witness—Quality of evidence, and not the number of witnesses, is the governing consideration—Conviction based on the testimony of P.W.3 upheld. [Paras 17-25] B. Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 302 and 304—Murder and culpable homicide—Determination of intention—Nature and severity of injuries, weapon used, vital parts targeted and surrounding circumstances are relevant...
A. Central Excise Act, 1944—Section 11A—Extended period of limitation—Invocation of extended limitation requires clear evidence of wilful misstatement, suppression of facts, or intent to evade duty—Where the relevant facts were within the knowledge of the Department and the assessee and there was no deliberate concealment or intent to evade duty, the extended period cannot be invoked—Mere non-payment or short-payment of duty, without the statutory ingredients, is insufficient—Demand beyond the normal period of limitation is therefore unsustainable. [Paras 13, 15-16] B. Central Excise Act, 1944—Section 11A—Show Cause Notice—Extended limitation—A notice invoking the extended period must specifically establish suppression, wilful misstatement, or intent to evade duty and cannot r...
A. Central Excise Act, 1944—Section 11A—Extended period of limitation—Invocation of extended limitation requires clear evidence of wilful misstatement, suppression of facts, or intent to evade duty—Where the relevant facts were within the knowledge of the Department and the assessee and there was no deliberate concealment or intent to evade duty, the extended period cannot be invoked—Mere non-payment or short-payment of duty, without the statutory ingredients, is insufficient—Demand beyond the normal period of limitation is therefore unsustainable. [Paras 13, 15-16] B. Central Excise Act, 1944—Section 11A—Show Cause Notice—Extended limitation—A notice invoking the extended period must specifically establish suppression, wilful misstatement, or intent to evade duty and cannot r...
A. Central Excise Act, 1944—Section 11A—Extended period of limitation—Invocation of extended limitation requires clear evidence of wilful misstatement, suppression of facts, or intent to evade duty—Where the relevant facts were within the knowledge of the Department and the assessee and there was no deliberate concealment or intent to evade duty, the extended period cannot be invoked—Mere non-payment or short-payment of duty, without the statutory ingredients, is insufficient—Demand beyond the normal period of limitation is therefore unsustainable. [Paras 13, 15-16] B. Central Excise Act, 1944—Section 11A—Show Cause Notice—Extended limitation—A notice invoking the extended period must specifically establish suppression, wilful misstatement, or intent to evade duty and cannot r...
A. Trusts and Trustees — Rendition of Accounts — Maintainability — Co-trustee against Co-trustee — A suit by one trustee against a co-trustee for rendition of accounts is maintainable, as every trustee has the right to know the financial position of the trust and to demand accounts from a co-trustee entrusted with collection and expenditure of trust income — such accountability is necessary for proper supervision of trust affairs and to protect trustees from liability arising from misappropriation — (Para 6). B. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 92 — Rendition of Accounts — Legal Representatives — Survivability — A suit by co-trustees for rendition of accounts to enforce their individual right of supervision does not fall within Section 92 CPC, which concerns represen...
A. U.P. Regulation of Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021—Section 21(2)—Written tenancy agreement—Absence of written tenancy agreement does not bar maintainability of eviction proceedings or oust jurisdiction of Rent Authority—Jurisdiction flows from the statute and not from existence of tenancy document; landlord-tenant relationship and disputed tenancy facts are matters for adjudication on pleadings and evidence, not jurisdictional preconditions. [Paras 9–14, 25] B. U.P. Regulation of Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021—Sections 33 and 34—Code of Civil Procedure, 1908—Order VII Rule 11—Exclusion of procedural remedy—Act being a self-contained special enactment expressly excludes general application of the Code of Civil Procedure except specified powers; therefore, application anal...
A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order V Rule 1, Order VIII Rules 1 & 10, Section 151 — Karnataka Amendment Act, 2024 — Written Statement — 120-day limit — Held, the 120-day period is ordinarily mandatory and the right to file written statement stands forfeited thereafter; however, the amendment cannot be construed as completely extinguishing the limited judicial discretion preserved under Rule 10 and Section 151 CPC, as recognized in Salem Advocate Bar Association (2005) — In exceptional and compelling circumstances, where refusal to accept the written statement would result in grave miscarriage of justice or manifest injustice, the Court may exercise narrowly confined discretion, for reasons to be recorded and ordinarily upon realistic costs; such discretion is not to be exercised routinely or mech...
A. Uttar Pradesh Regulation of Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021—Sections 35 & 39—Court Fees Act, 1870—Court fee on appeal—Held: A memorandum of appeal against a composite decree for eviction, arrears of rent and mesne profits is required to be valued on the subject matter in dispute in appeal—Where the appellant challenges the entire decree, court fee is payable on the entire decretal liability, including accrued or ascertainable mesne profits—Court fee paid on the original application does not determine the court fee payable in appeal. (Paras 44 to 76) B. Uttar Pradesh Regulation of Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021—Section 39—Court Fees Act, 1870—Statutory fiction—Scope—Held: Section 39(2) deems an application before the Rent Authority and an appeal before the Rent ...
A. Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 147 (Corresponding to Section 128 Cr.P.C.)—Enforcement of Maintenance Order—Limitation period for recovery warrant—Continuing Liability in nature—A maintenance order passed U/s 125 Cr.P.C. continues to remain operative until modified or set aside by a competent court, and the husband's obligation to pay monthly maintenance is a continuing statutory liability—Every monthly default in payment of maintenance gives rise to a recurring and continuing cause of action for enforcement of the subsisting maintenance order—The one-year limitation prescribed in the first proviso restricts only the issuance of a recovery warrant and does not extinguish the claimant's substantive right to recover maintenance arrears. (Para 16, 17, 18 21, 22) B. Bharti...
A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Section 372 Proviso—Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 413—Appeal against acquittal—Complainant as victim—Held: In prosecutions under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the complainant, being the payee or holder in due course of the dishonoured cheque, is also the "victim" of the offence and, therefore, possesses an independent statutory right to challenge an order of acquittal under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/Section 413 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 before the Court immediately superior to the Trial Court, namely the Sessions Court. Consequently, appeals erroneously instituted before the High Court under Section 378 o...
A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Section 372 Proviso—Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 413—Appeal against acquittal—Complainant as victim—Held: In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the complainant, being the payee or holder of the dishonoured cheque, is also a "victim" of the offence and is entitled to prefer an appeal against an order of acquittal under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/Section 413 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 before the Court immediately superior to the Trial Court, namely the Sessions Court. Such remedy is independent of the procedure under Section 378 of the Code, and pending appeals presented before the High Court ...
A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Sections 138, 118(a) and 139—Dishonour of cheque—Statutory presumptions—Rebuttal—Service of notice—Held: In a prosecution under Section 138, once the drawer admits or the complainant proves execution of the cheque and the signature thereon, the statutory presumptions under Sections 118(a) and 139 arise that the cheque was issued for valid consideration and in discharge of a legally enforceable debt or liability. The burden then shifts to the accused to rebut the presumptions by leading cogent and probable evidence. A mere denial of liability or an explanation offered in the statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, without supporting evidence, does not rebut the statutory presumptions. Further, where the statutory demand notice is dispatched to th...
A. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 125—Maintenance claim—Revisionist claiming maintenance as legally wedded wife—Trial Court rejecting claim due to existence of prior marriage of opposite party and lack of evidence of solemnization of marriage—Held, revisionist cannot claim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC as legally wedded wife when marriage is not established and no live-in relationship is pleaded or proven—Presumption of valid marriage under Section 125 CrPC can arise only where parties have lived together as husband and wife for a considerable period or in a live-in relationship, and mere assertion of being legally wedded wife without evidence of marriage or live-in relationship is insufficient to sustain a maintenance claim. [Paras 7, 9, 12, 13] B. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Se...
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 482 — Quashing of FIR — FIR registered under Sections 420 and 120B IPC — Parties entered into a settlement and implemented the terms of compromise — Respondent No.2 derived benefits from the compromise but failed to support the verification proceedings before the Magistrate — Held, once a compromise is acted upon and benefits derived thereunder, the complainant cannot back out from the settlement, and continuation of criminal proceedings in such circumstances amounts to harassment and abuse of the process of law — FIR and all consequential proceedings quashed. [Paras 9 to 12] ...