Is Mere Allegation of Absence of Valid Driving Licence Sufficient to Shift Liability from Insurer in Motor Accident Claims?

The Chhattisgarh High Court clarified that to challenge a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal’s findings—particularly on the driver’s alleged lack of a valid licence and the assessment of disability—an insurer must furnish concrete evidence. This judgment upholds settled law, reinforcing established principles regarding the burden of proof under motor vehicle insurance claims, and will serve as […]

Does Order XXXVII CPC Mandate Deposit of Admitted Amount as a Precondition for Leave to Defend in Summary Suits After the 1977 Amendment? Binding Authority Reaffirmed

The Manipur High Court reaffirms that, following the 1977 amendment to Order XXXVII Rule 3(5) CPC, leave to defend a summary suit cannot be granted unless the defendant deposits the admitted sum; this position, supported by Supreme Court authority, remains binding and is not relaxed for installment payments. This judgment upholds existing Supreme Court precedent […]

Can Insurers Raise New Defences for the First Time on Appeal in Motor Accident Compensation Proceedings? – Reaffirmation of the Principle Against Introducing New Grounds on Appeal

The Chhattisgarh High Court reaffirmed that insurance companies cannot raise defences before the appellate court which were not pleaded before the Claims Tribunal under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The judgment upholds settled precedent, confirms existing procedural law, and remains binding authority for all subordinate courts in Chhattisgarh in the context of motor vehicle accident […]

When Does a Writ Petition Become Infructuous Due to Non-Prosecution and Efflux of Time? High Court of Chhattisgarh Upholds Existing Law on Dismissal of Infructuous Petitions

A High Court single-judge bench clarifies that if a writ petitioner repeatedly fails to appear and, owing to passage of time, obtains no interim relief, the matter can be dismissed as infructuous—thus upholding established principles. The decision restates that litigants must be diligent, and reaffirms available remedies in case of fresh cause of action. The […]

Does Withdrawal of Execution Applications Impact Judicial Precedent on Enforcement of Decrees Under the Civil Procedure Code?

Calcutta High Court allows withdrawal of execution application without addressing underlying questions of law; case does not alter existing precedent. All interim orders vacated, and the warrant of arrest discharged. Procedural outcome only, with no new binding or persuasive authority created for future enforcement or execution proceedings.   Summary Category Data Case Name EC/268/2020 of […]

Can Courts Interfere with Statutorily Prescribed Qualifications for Recruitment to Public Posts? Orissa High Court Upholds State’s Power to Prescribe ‘CITS’ as Mandatory for Assistant Training Officers

Orissa High Court reaffirms the limited scope of judicial review over qualifications set by expert/statutory authorities in public recruitment. The decision upholds the overriding effect of the Combined Technical Services Recruitment Examination Rules, 2022, and is binding authority within Odisha for future recruitment challenges.   Summary Category Data Case Name WP(C)/29894/2022 of SHAKTI PRASAD MISHRA […]

When and How Can the Presumption Under Section 139 of the NI Act Be Rebutted in Cheque Dishonour Cases? — Clarification by the High Court on Appellate and Revisional Interference

The High Court clarifies that while the admission of signature on a cheque raises a presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, this presumption is rebuttable by evidence to the contrary. Once such evidence is produced, the burden shifts back to the complainant. The ruling upholds prevailing Supreme Court precedents and sets a […]

Can a Director or Partner Be Vicariously Prosecuted Without Evidence of Active Involvement or Conspiracy in Offences By a Company? – High Court Reaffirms Supreme Court Doctrine, Affirms Limited Scope at Discharge Stage

The Himachal Pradesh High Court clarified that vicarious criminal liability of directors/partners does not arise automatically without specific allegations of active role or criminal intent; at the stage of discharge, courts are confined to assessing prima facie material and cannot embark on a detailed evaluation of evidence. This decision upholds and applies established Supreme Court […]

When Can an Appellate Court Interfere With an Acquittal Under Section 378 CrPC? Reaffirmation of Principles From Chandrappa and Other Supreme Court Precedents

The High Court reiterates that interference with acquittal is permissible only if the judgment is perverse or based on misreading or omission of material evidence, and when no other view except guilt is possible. The judgment upholds established Supreme Court precedent and serves as reaffirmed persuasive authority for criminal appellate practice.   Summary Category Data […]

Can Criminal Proceedings Under Section 307 IPC Be Quashed On the Basis of Settlement? High Court of Uttarakhand’s Exercise of Inherent Powers under Section 528 BNSS

Uttarakhand High Court holds that proceedings under Section 307 IPC, although non-compoundable, can be quashed where parties have settled and are living harmoniously; judgment allows for real and substantial justice using inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS. Affirms that practical justice may sometimes warrant quashing even in serious offences when private parties urge, setting a […]

Can a Writ Petition Challenging a Termination Order Be Withdrawn with Liberty to Approach an Alternative Forum?

The Court reaffirmed that a petitioner may withdraw a writ petition with liberty to challenge the impugned termination order before another appropriate authority or forum. The judgment does not alter precedent but upholds procedural facilitation for litigants seeking alternate remedies. This order serves as binding authority on procedural withdrawal in writ petitions within the jurisdiction. […]

Does Prolonged Incarceration Justify Bail in NDPS Commercial Quantity Cases Despite Section 37? — Punjab & Haryana High Court Reaffirms Bail Rights Emphasising Article 21

The Court reiterated that the constitutional right to personal liberty under Article 21 can override the statutory embargo under Section 37 of the NDPS Act in cases of prolonged pre-trial detention, holding that undue delay in trial constitutes a legitimate ground for bail even in commercial quantity narcotics cases. This judgment upholds and applies binding […]