A. Uttar Pradesh Regulation of Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021—Sections 4, 21 and 38—Jurisdiction of Rent Authority—Unwritten tenancy—Non-filing of tenancy particulars—Maintainability of eviction proceedings—Held, the Rent Authority constituted under the Act of 2021 has jurisdiction to entertain an eviction application even where no written tenancy agreement exists and where the landlord has failed to file tenancy particulars—The requirement of execution of a written tenancy agreement and intimation thereof under Section 4 is directory and not mandatory, as the Act does not prescribe any penal or disabling consequence for non-compliance—Conscious omission by the State Legislature of the disabling clause contained in Section 4(6) of the Model Tenancy Act indicates legislative intent not to b...

A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Or. 39 Rr. 1, 2 & 4 and Or. 43 R. 1(r)—Ex parte temporary injunction—Appealability and concurrent remedies—An order granting an ex parte temporary injunction under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 is appealable under Order XLIII Rule 1(r)—A party aggrieved by such an order is entitled to prefer an appeal within the limitation period prescribed by the Limitation Act, 1963—Independently of the appellate remedy, the aggrieved party may also apply to the same court under Order XXXIX Rule 4 for discharge, variation or setting aside of the injunction—Both remedies are concurrent in nature and the availability of one does not bar the other; they may be pursued simultaneously in accordance with law. (Paras 69–70) B. Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Or. 39 Rr. 1, 2 ...

A. Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 528—Transfer and Quashing of Proceedings—Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 420, 506—Dishonour of Cheque—Parallel Proceedings—Legality—Held, Simultaneous Prosecution under Section 138 NI Act and under Sections 420, 506 IPC Based on the Same Set of Allegations is Impermissible—When the factual foundation and transaction alleged in both proceedings are identical, continuation of prosecution under IPC amounts to parallel trial and is legally unsustainable—Issue concerning the applicability of Section 300(1) CrPC and the doctrine of double jeopardy in such circumstances already stands referred to a Larger Bench of the Supreme Court in J. Vedhasingh v. R.M. Govindan, (2022) SC 665...

A. Public Interest Litigation—Encroachment on Public Path (Rasta)—Statutory Duty of Authorities—Encroachment over land recorded as Rasta (public pathway) in revenue records—Held, land recorded for public utility vests in Gram Panchayat and is under custody of the Bhumi Prabandhak Samiti, comprising Village Pradhan (Chairman) and Lekhpal (Secretary)—Failure to protect such land and to initiate proceedings amounts to dereliction of statutory duty—Court emphasized zero-tolerance policy against encroachment on public utility land. [Paras 3, 5, 8, 20, 27–30] B. Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006—Sections 25, 26 and 67—Removal of Obstructions and Encroachments—Sections 25 & 26 empower Tahsildar to decide right of way disputes and direct removal of obstacles from public roads ...

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 528—Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506—Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961—Sections 3 and 4—Quashing of criminal proceedings—Settlement before Supreme Court—Effect—Where parties to a matrimonial dispute amicably settled all disputes before the Supreme Court Mediation Centre and the Hon’ble Supreme Court, by order dated 24.07.2025 in Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 405 of 2025, accepted the Settlement Agreement dated 18.06.2025, dissolved the marriage under Article 142 of the Constitution, and directed that “all proceedings between the parties, civil and criminal stand terminate”—Held, continuation of criminal proceedings under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act is rende...

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 125—Maintenance of wife and child—Minor husband—Liability—Quantum of maintenance—Application under S.125 CrPC filed by wife and minor daughter against revisionist-husband—At the time of filing (10.02.2019), husband was a minor (DOB 01.01.2003), but by the time of impugned judgment (22.11.2023) he had attained majority—Held, there is no bar under CrPC against filing of S.125 proceedings against a minor husband; however, obligation to maintain wife and child arises only upon attaining majority—Wife had sufficient cause to live separately due to dowry harassment proved on record—Revisionist being able-bodied must maintain his wife and child even by physical labour—Assessing notional income at ₹18,000 p.m., 25% thereof (₹4,500) would be...

A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC)—Order VI Rule 17—Amendment of Pleadings—Commencement of Trial and Due Diligence Exception—Commencement of trial occurs not merely at the stage of framing of issues, but when parties are directed to lead evidence—Affidavit in lieu of examination-in-chief and leading of evidence after amendment may justify amendment even post framing of issues, provided due diligence is shown. (Paras 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 24) B. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC)—Order VI Rule 17—Scope and Object of Amendment—Proviso aims to curb delay and prevent introduction of inconsistent cases after trial begins—However, amendment may be allowed if it aids in determining the real controversy, does not prejudice the other party, and avoids multiplicity of proceedings, partic...

A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Order 7 Rule 11(d)—Rejection of Plaint—Bar of Law—An application under Order 7 Rule 11(d) CPC must be decided solely on the basis of the averments in the plaint—The defendant’s written statement or defence cannot be considered at this stage—The court is required to read the plaint as a whole to determine whether a cause of action exists—A plaint disclosing a cause of action cannot be rejected merely on the possibility that the plaintiff may ultimately fail to prove the claim. (Paras 23, 24, 34) B. Hindu Succession Act, 1956—Section 6 (as amended by Act 39 of 2005)—Coparcenary Rights of Daughters under Mitakshara Law—Following the Supreme Court’s judgment in Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma, daughters who were alive on 09.09.2005 (date o...

Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 419(4)—Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—Dishonour of Cheque—Appeal Against Acquittal—Scope of Interference—Held, Where Complainant Admitted Receipt of Substantial Repayment (Rs.99,000/-) Against Alleged Loan of Rs.1,00,000/-, Presumption under Section 139 NI Act Stood Rebutted—Admission of Repayment by Complainant Constitutes Best Evidence Against Him—Trial Court’s Finding of Acquittal Based on Proper Appreciation of Evidence and Not Perverse—No Ground Made Out for Grant of Leave to Appeal under Section 419(4) BNSS—Application Dismissed. (Paras 15–17) Result: Application dismissed.  ...

A. Land Acquisition Act, 1894—U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam, 1965—Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013—Inapplicability—Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act does not apply to acquisitions made under the U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam, 1965, as the latter is not included in the Fourth Schedule of the 2013 Act—There has been no legislative amendment incorporating the deemed lapse provision into the 1965 Act—The scope of Section 24(2) is confined to proceedings initiated under the 1894 Act. (Paras 27, 28, 29, 30, 31) B. Land Acquisition—Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act—Deemed Lapse—Inapplicability to Concluded or Stale Claims—Section 24 of the 2013 Act cannot be invoked to reopen co...