A. Transfer of Property Act, 1882—Section 108(O); Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947—Sections 13(1)(a), 13(1)(b)—Eviction—Defendant evicted for demolishing load-bearing wall between drawing room and kitchen and installing iron girders—Expert evidence confirmed damage and irreparability—Plaintiff’s claim that girders strengthened property rejected—Eviction upheld. B. Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947—Section 13(1)(a)—Permanent Structural Alteration—Removal of load-bearing wall constitutes permanent structural alteration causing damage and impairing utility/value—Eviction justified based on expert testimony. C. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC)—Section 100—Second Appeal—Scope—High Court ...

A. Specific Relief Act, 1963—Section 6—Recovery of Possession—Dispossession—Plaintiff claiming ownership of shop No. 6 and dispossession by defendants entitled to relief—Defendants’ claim that possession was given in lieu of old shop No. 17 failed; photographs, court commissioner’s report, and sale deeds confirmed distinct premises—Suit filed within limitation period. B. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC)—Section 115—Revision—Scope of High Court—Revisional jurisdiction is confined to examining illegality or material irregularity in subordinate court’s proceedings—High Court cannot re-appreciate evidence like an appellate court. C. Evidence Act, 1872—Admissibility of Evidence—Oral and documentary evidence, including photographs, court commis...

A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC)—Order 7 Rule 11—Rejection of Plaint—Limitation—A suit is barred by limitation if the plaintiffs’ knowledge of the relevant sale deed and its execution is apparent from the plaint and annexed documents. Knowledge established in 2007, with confirmations in 2012 and 2014, rendered a 2017 suit time-barred. B. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC)—Order 7 Rule 11—Rejection of Plaint—Illusory Cause of Action—A plaint that is cleverly drafted to appear within limitation but lacks a real cause of action can be rejected. Vague and unsupported allegations of fraud or inducement do not disclose a legal right to sue. C. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC)—Section 96(1)—Appeal Against Consent Decree—A party not privy to original proceedings cannot...

A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC)—Section 100—Second Appeal—Scope and Applicability—A Second Appeal lies only if it involves a “substantial question of law.” Pure questions of fact or re-appreciation of evidence do not warrant admission. Concurrent findings of fact are generally binding unless perverse, arbitrary, shocking to conscience, or violative of natural justice. B. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC)—Section 100—Second Appeal—Concurrent Findings of Fact—High Court should refrain from interfering with concurrent findings of lower courts except in cases of perversity, arbitrariness, or substantial injustice. C. Transfer of Property Act, 1882—Section 106—Notice of Termination of Tenancy—A valid notice under Section 106 is required, and unless a substan...

A. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC)—Section 482—Quashing of FIR—Abuse of Process—High Court’s inherent powers to quash FIR must be exercised sparingly and with caution. Court should not ordinarily probe the reliability of evidence at quashing stage; powers are to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice, not to stifle legitimate prosecution. B. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC)—Section 482—Delay in Lodging FIR—Delay in filing an FIR is not in itself a ground for quashing; such considerations are relevant during trial. C. Penal Code, 1860 (IPC)—Section 464—False Document—Making a false document includes altering a document without lawful authority after execution, dishonestly or fraudulently, whether the person is alive or deceased at the time of alte...

A. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988—Section 166—Claim Petition—Deceased, a teacher, died in a road accident involving an S.T. Bus; claimants (husband and two minor children) sought compensation—Tribunal found S.T. bus driver 90% negligent and deceased 10% contributorily negligent, and awarded compensation. B. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988—Section 173—Appeal by S.T. Corporation—Challenged negligence and liability, contending absence of eyewitnesses and inadequate evidence—Court held sufficient evidence established vehicle involvement and fatal injuries due to driver’s negligence; appeal dismissed. C. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988—Negligence—Contributory Negligence—Accident near bus stop at intersection of a road and National Highway; Tribunal’s apportionment of 90% negligenc...

A. Penal Code, 1860 (IPC)—Sections 416, 419, 114—Cheating by Personation, Cheating and Personation, Common Intention—Conviction upheld where evidence proved that the applicant did not appear for examination and another person wrote the answer sheet on his behalf; conclusion supported by handwriting expert’s report and confession indicating use of a dummy candidate. B. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC)—Sections 397, 401—Revisional Jurisdiction—High Court’s revisional powers are supervisory and circumscribed, allowing correction of patent defects, jurisdictional errors, or perverse orders; reappreciation of evidence is impermissible except where a glaring miscarriage of justice is evident. C. Evidence Act, 1872—Section 114—Presumption of Fact—Court may presume that t...

A. Bombay Rents, Hotels and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947—Sections 13(1)(k) & 13(1)(L)—Eviction—Non-user of premises—Landlord must prove initial non-user for six months; thereafter, tenant must show reasonable cause for non-user. Evidence such as minimum electricity consumption and tenant admissions of not residing in premises support landlord’s claim. B. Bombay Rents, Hotels and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947—Section 13(1)(L)—Eviction—Alternative accommodation—Tenant’s admissions of residing in allotted quarters and other residences, along with failure to challenge eviction, indicate availability of alternative accommodation. C. Bombay Rents, Hotels and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947—Section 29—Civil Revision Application—Scope&md...

A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC)—Order 7, Rule 11(d)—Rejection of plaint—Bar of limitation—Court may reject plaint under Order 7, Rule 11(d) if the plaint itself, along with annexed documents, clearly shows that the suit is barred by limitation. B. Limitation Act, 1963—Article 59—Suit to cancel or set aside an instrument—Period of limitation is three years, commencing from the date when the plaintiff first knew, or with due diligence could have known, the facts entitling him to cancel or set aside the instrument. C. Deemed Knowledge—Registered documents—Date of registration is treated as deemed knowledge for limitation purposes; in other cases, knowledge is deemed to accrue when facts could have been discovered by due diligence, and ignorance cannot extend limitation. D. Fr...

A. Hindu Marriage Act, 1955—Section 24—Interim Maintenance—Order passed during pendency of divorce petition remains valid even after initial dissolution of marriage if divorce decree is subsequently set aside and petition remanded for retrial. B. Hindu Marriage Act, 1955—Sections 24 & 25—Interim Maintenance vs. Permanent Alimony—Where divorce petition is restored for retrial, an earlier application for interim maintenance under Section 24 continues to be valid—No immediate requirement to file fresh application for interim maintenance or permanent alimony under Section 24 or 25, particularly when court is directed to decide petition by a specific date. C. Family Law—Maintenance—Social Justice—Maintenance provisions under Hindu Marriage Act are a measure of social justice...