admin_nupur

Karnataka High Court. Mr.Srinivas Adhikeshavulu Dalvoi v/s M/S Anushka Constructions Pvt Ltd…

MOU if delivered possession of immovable must be registered . Otherwise it is not admissible in evidence . No benefit under section 53 A of TPAct can be claimed on the basis of unregistered deed. The agreement of sale is dated 29.11.2011 and MOU is dated 08.12.2021, which is obviously after coming into force of […]

Karnataka High Court. Mr.Srinivas Adhikeshavulu Dalvoi v/s M/S Anushka Constructions Pvt Ltd… Read More »

Ankit Raj v. State of NCT of Delhi and Others: CRL.M.C. 3061/2025 & CRL.M.A. 13572/2025…

CRL.M.C. 3061/2025 & CRL.M.A. 13572/2025Ankit Raj v. State of NCT of Delhi and Others A Single Bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma remarked, “The law governing offence of rape is intended to protect the bodily integrity and autonomy of women and to punish those who exploit them by force or by deception which vitiates free

Ankit Raj v. State of NCT of Delhi and Others: CRL.M.C. 3061/2025 & CRL.M.A. 13572/2025… Read More »

Preet v/s Santro FAO 1096/1998 15/09/25…

🏛️ PUNJAB HARYANA HIGH COURT HEADLINES ENGLISH AND HINDI Motor Vehicles Act, Rash and negligent driving – Determination of liability – Held, credible and consistent eyewitness testimony attributing negligence to the motorcyclist, which remained unrebutted, should be given substantial weight – FIR cannot automatically override such testimony – Tribunal’s finding holding scooter driver/owner liable reversed,

Preet v/s Santro FAO 1096/1998 15/09/25… Read More »

Dastagirsab v/s Sharanappa @ Shivasharanappa Police Patil (D) by LRs. & Ors.

Supreme Court upholds Karta’s sale of HUF property for daughter’s marriage as legal necessity. The Supreme Court reversed the High Court’s decision, holding that the sale of joint family property by the Karta was for legal necessity (marriage expenses of the daughter) and the purchaser was bona fide. The High Court erred in ignoring evidence

Dastagirsab v/s Sharanappa @ Shivasharanappa Police Patil (D) by LRs. & Ors. Read More »

Komal Krishan Arora & Ors. v/s Sandeep Kumar & Ors…

Supreme Court upholds Father’s custody of son, slams mother’s “deceptive conduct” The Supreme Court ruled that the interim custody of the minor son, Master K, shall remain with the father, considering his suitability as a natural guardian and the mother’s failure to act in the child’s welfare by concealing his whereabouts and violating court orders.

Komal Krishan Arora & Ors. v/s Sandeep Kumar & Ors… Read More »

Rajmuni v/s State Civil Supplier MAC 1183/16 29/08/25…

🏛️ CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT Motor Vehicles Act, Sections 166 and 168 Dependency criterion for compensation – Both legally wedded wives of the deceased and their children, including illegitimate children, entitled to compensation if dependent on the deceased – Dependency is the basis for entitlement to compensation, not just legal heir status – Second wife treated

Rajmuni v/s State Civil Supplier MAC 1183/16 29/08/25… Read More »

Thammineni Bhaskar v/s The State of Andhra Pradesh: Criminal Appeal No. 4623 of 2024…

Supreme Court acquits man in murder-kidnapping case due to lack of evidence. The Supreme Court set aside the conviction as the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. Key eyewitnesses turned hostile, and there was no reliable evidence to establish kidnapping or last seen together. Court: Supreme Court of India Case: Criminal Appeal

Thammineni Bhaskar v/s The State of Andhra Pradesh: Criminal Appeal No. 4623 of 2024… Read More »

Legal Update:सुप्रीम कोर्ट का बड़ा फैसला Sec.420 IPC| फर्जी दस्तावेज़ से कोई लाभ न मिला तो धोखाधड़ी का अपराध नहीं: सुप्रीम कोर्ट…

सुप्रीम कोर्ट का बड़ा फैसला Sec.420 IPC| फर्जी दस्तावेज़ से कोई लाभ न मिला तो धोखाधड़ी का अपराध नहीं: सुप्रीम कोर्टसुप्रीम कोर्ट ने बुधवार (10 सितम्बर) को एक शैक्षणिक संस्थान के प्रमुख के खिलाफ दर्ज धोखाधड़ी का मामला रद्द कर दिया, जिन पर फर्जी फायर डिपार्टमेंट एनओसी का इस्तेमाल कर संबद्धता (affiliation) लेने का आरोप

Legal Update:सुप्रीम कोर्ट का बड़ा फैसला Sec.420 IPC| फर्जी दस्तावेज़ से कोई लाभ न मिला तो धोखाधड़ी का अपराध नहीं: सुप्रीम कोर्ट… Read More »

Legal Update: S.179(1) BNSS | पुलिस अधिकार के तौर पर मामले से परिचित ‘किसी भी व्यक्ति’ की उपस्थिति सुनिश्चित नहीं कर सकती: आंध्र प्रदेश हाईकोर्ट…

S.179(1) BNSS | पुलिस अधिकार के तौर पर मामले से परिचित ‘किसी भी व्यक्ति’ की उपस्थिति सुनिश्चित नहीं कर सकती: आंध्र प्रदेश हाईकोर्टCase Title: V D MOORTHY v. THE STATE OF AP and othersLegal Akhada updateआंध्र प्रदेश हाईकोर्ट ने कहा कि भारतीय नागरिक सुरक्षा संहिता (BNSS) की धारा 179(1) के तहत किसी पुलिस अधिकारी की

Legal Update: S.179(1) BNSS | पुलिस अधिकार के तौर पर मामले से परिचित ‘किसी भी व्यक्ति’ की उपस्थिति सुनिश्चित नहीं कर सकती: आंध्र प्रदेश हाईकोर्ट… Read More »