Tenancy Law—Lease Renewal and Rent Enhancement; Public Premises Act—Eviction Proceedings—The lease renewal clause stipulating a 25% rental enhancement, coupled with the lessor’s discretion to grant a fresh lease, distinguishes this case from precedents mandating unconditional renewal—The landlord’s discretion in fixing renewal terms is upheld, particularly where the lessor is a public authority with public purpose objectives. (Paras 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 16) The Estate Officer’s duty under the Public Premises Act requires recording reasons for eviction orders—Show cause notices communicating preliminary views on unauthorized occupation, rent arrears, and damages comply with statutory mandates. (Para 14) Allegations of unauthorized alterations to the lease deed are rejected due to absence o...

Will Execution and Attestation; Indian Evidence Act—Proof of Will—Under Sections 63 and 71 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, and Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act, execution of a Will by a literate testator with a Left Thumb Impression (LTI) is valid if there are no suspicious circumstances—The explanation that the LTI was due to trembling hands was accepted, and there is no legal requirement to read over or explain the Will to a literate testator. (Para A) Regarding attestation under Section 63(c) of the Succession Act, all essential ingredients are satisfied if witnesses sign in the presence of the testator—This presence can be inferred from the evidence's totality and cross-examination, even if not explicitly stated in every testimony. (Para B) Proof of due execution of a Will does not require ma...

A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Order 41 Rule 11—Admission of Appeals—The hearing under Rule 11 is procedural and mandatory, aimed at determining whether the appeal can be dismissed without requiring the respondent’s presence—It is not a stage for admitting or rejecting the appeal outright—Appeals against orders not exempt under Appellate Side Rules must mandatorily be listed for hearing under this provision. (Paras 31–33) B. Commercial Courts Act, 2015—Sections 5, 18—Commercial Appeals—The designated Commercial Appellate Division applies the Appellate Side Rules mutatis mutandis, and Practice Directions take precedence in case of conflict—This specialized bench holds jurisdiction to hear appeals under Order 41 Rule 11, ensuring a streamlined process for commercial dispute...

A. Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 420, 405, 120B—Cheating, Criminal Breach of Trust, and Conspiracy—Quashing of Criminal Case—Where allegations stem from a commercial dispute involving unpaid dues, and the accused directors or chairman of a company are not parties to the original transaction nor shown to have acted with fraudulent or dishonest intent, continuation of criminal proceedings amounts to misuse of criminal law—Petitioners were not directly involved in the alleged business dealings between the complainant and a third-party supplier—The material on record failed to demonstrate inducement, deception, or dishonest intention at the inception of the contract—Substantial payments made under the transaction negate allegations of cheating—The complaint sought to give a criminal colour to...

A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Section 80—Requirement of Notice to Public Officers—The Official Liquidator qualifies as a 'public officer' under Section 2(17) CPC, making compliance with the notice requirement under Section 80 mandatory before instituting a suit—Absence of such notice, unless cured under Section 80(2), renders the suit barred—However, such procedural defect constitutes a formal irregularity, for which withdrawal with liberty to file afresh under Order 23 Rule 1 is legally permissible. (Paras 26, 28–33, 89, 91, 93–95) B. SARFAESI Act, 2002—Section 34—Bar on Civil Court Jurisdiction—Civil Court’s jurisdiction is not ousted merely because the case touches upon secured assets—The bar applies only when the dispute directly concerns measures under...

A. Review of Judgment—Scope and Power under CPC The power of review under Section 114 and Order 47 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) is not an inherent power and cannot be used as a substitute for appellate jurisdiction—A review is permissible only to correct patent errors, mistakes apparent on the face of the record, or the discovery of new and important matters—An error that requires a detailed analysis is not considered apparent on the face of the record—A review cannot be sought merely to reargue points already decided or to correct a judgment with which a party disagrees. (Paras 11, 12, 13, 14, 17, 19, 21, 22, 23) B. Grounds for Review—Limitation of Scope The grounds for review are strictly limited to the discovery of new or important matters, an error apparent on the face of the record...

A. Bail Cancellation—Grounds for Review The cancellation of bail can be sought on two primary grounds: (i) the post-bail conduct of the accused, and (ii) the original order granting bail being flawed—The second ground is available for consideration by a superior court, as the lower court cannot review its own order. (Para 6) B. Seriousness of Charges—Transnational Cybercrime Syndicate The charges against the petitioners are of a grave and complex nature, involving the operation of a fake call center designed to defraud foreign nationals—The petitioners were allegedly involved in impersonation, coercion, and fraudulent manipulation of computer systems, targeting victims, particularly from the U.S., leading to significant financial losses. (Para 7) C. Substantial Evidence Against Petitioners The investigatio...

A. Ex-Parte Proceedings—Application to Vacate Under CPC Order 9 Rule 7 An application seeking to vacate an ex-parte order is maintainable if it is filed on the date scheduled for hearing, as opposed to being filed after the conclusion of arguments—The application can be considered valid at this stage, even before the arguments are finalized. (Para 38) B. Applicability of Order 9 in Commercial Courts The provisions of Order 9 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, governing ex-parte proceedings, remain applicable to commercial courts—This is because the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 does not amend or exclude these provisions, thus retaining their relevance in commercial litigation. (Para 21) C. Ex-Parte Hearing—Court’s Duty to Make an Order Before proceeding with a case ex-parte under CPC Order 9 Rule 6(1)(...

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC)—Section 374—The appellant challenged his conviction under Section 20(b)(ii)B of the NDPS Act for possession of 1.5 kg ganja—The prosecution relied on recovery of contraband from a polythene packet held by the accused and seizure proceedings supported by police witnesses—The appellant contended procedural lapses, including non-compliance with Section 50 of the NDPS Act, irregularities in seizure witness testimonies, and false implication—The Court upheld the conviction, relying on settled law that Section 50 safeguards apply only to personal searches of the accused’s body, not to bags or containers carried by him, citing State of Punjab v. Baldev Singh and Rajan Kumar Chadha v. State—The Court found the prosecution evidence reliable despite some witnesses denyin...

Commercial Courts Act, 2015—Section 12A—The court held that mere conjectures, surmises, or inferences cannot attribute direct knowledge to the plaintiff regarding the impugned product prior to the date pleaded in the plaint—The suit concerned infringement and passing off of a product marked “ELITO.” The plaintiff claimed to have first learned of the product in February 2025, while the defendant alleged prior knowledge based on public disclosures and regulatory filings in 2024—The court emphasized that Section 12A mandates pre-institution mediation unless urgent interim reliefs are sought—However, the plaintiff’s assertion of timely knowledge was accepted, and no material concealment, fraud, or deception was found—Reliance on large public documents such as annual reports did not equate ...