101. Summons not received back – Decision of appeal on merit – Permissibility of -- Court, duly noticed in the first paragraph of the impugned order that the notice issued to the respondent/ judgment debtor had not been received back -- It further went to notice that as per learned counsel representing the appellant/ decree-holder, the respondent-judgment debtor was sitting outside the Court room, but despite calls having been made, no one appeared on behalf of the respondent/ judgment debtor -- Court then proceeded to hear and allow the appeal -- Held, Court of Additional District Judge adopted a procedure unknown to law -- Once the respondent therein had not been served, there was no occasion for the Court to make calls and then proceed to decide the appeal without service having been effected -- Impugned order not sustainable, set aside. (P&H HC) Decided on: 18.11.2025

102. Compensation to employee – Injury – Negligence of employee – Effect of -- Commissioner erred in dismissing the application holding that the claimant suffered injuries on account of his own negligence -- Trite it is that the 1923 enactment deals with accidents arising out of and during the course of employment -- The concept is based upon ‘strict liability’ -- There is no room for assessing contributory negligence -- Order passed by the Commissioner, cannot be sustained and the same deserves to be set aside. (P&H HC) Decided on: 18.11.2025

103. Offence under Insecticides Act – Limitation – Period of limitation begins from the date of the receipt of the report of the Public Analyst – Period of limitation is 03 years from the said date – However, the time spent in obtaining sanction is to be excluded – Sample was taken on 26.08.2011 – Report of the Public Analyst was made available is dated 28.09.2011 – Sanction for prosecution was applied on 06.08.2012 and was granted on 05.10.2012 – Sanction was received by the CAO on 15.10.2012 – Approximately 02 months elapsed between when sanction was sought and when it was granted – Complaint was instituted only on 23.04.2018 after a gap of 06 years, 06 months and 25 days from the date of the receipt of the report of the Public Analyst – Complaint case is hopelessly barred by time – Complaint and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom quashed. (P&H HC) Decided on: 18.11.2025

104. Compensation in motor vehicle accident case -- Deceased, was a minor aged merely 12 years -- A minor, by virtue of tender age, is not engaged in employment, and therefore rigidly categorizing him as a “non-earner” would defeat the object of awarding just compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 -- Proper method of determining compensation under the head “loss of income” is to adopt, at the very least, the minimum wages notified for a skilled worker in the relevant State at the relevant time -- Notional monthly income of the deceased assessed at Rs.10,300, being the minimum wages of a highly skilled worker notified for the relevant period in the State of Haryana – Future prospects 40%, multiplier of 18 applied – 50 deduction towards personal expenses -- Loss of Estate Rs.18,150/- -- Funeral Expenses Rs.18,150/- -- Loss of Consortium Filial : Rs. 48,400 x 2 Rs.96,800/- -- Total comes to Rs.16,90,460/- -- Interest @ 9% per annum on the enhanced amount from the date of filing of claim petition allowed. (P&H HC) Decided on: 18.11.2025

105. Suit for specific performance -- Fabricated document in Court – Enquiry ordered by Trial Court – Challenge to -- Sale agreement dated 04.04.2000 against the defendants -- Executants of the agreement passed away on 20.01.1995 and 05.07.1990 respectively – Submission that unless and until any concrete evidence is made available on the record in support of such contentions, any order, issuing directions for conducting an enquiry for ascertaining the correctness of the execution of the document, cannot be passed – Held, if any litigant approaches the Court with fabricated documents, a thorough enquiry is required in order to ascertain the truth -- This is because filing of false documents is a serious matter that can be considered a fraud played on the Court, potentially leading to legal consequences for the litigants – No merit in instant petition, dismissed. (Raj. HC) Decided on: 18.11.2025

106. Excess payment to pensioners – Recovery of -- Permissibility of -- Petitioner is a pensioner and no material has been brought on record by the respondent/Corporation to show that any fraud or misrepresentation was committed by the petitioner while receiving the pension -- On the contrary, the explanation furnished is that excess pension payment was made to the petitioner, which is an administrative lapse -- In that eventuality, the petitioner cannot be blamed as he has not mislead the respondent/Corporation in order to secure higher amount of pension – Recovery from retired employees or their family pensioners impermissible -- Respondents directed to refund the amount if already recovered from the petitioner from the date of recovery till its actual realization, along with interest at the rate @ 6% per annum, within a period of three months. (P&H HC) Decided on: 18.11.2025

107. Arbitral award – Interest on Pre-award/ Post award period – Mandate of -- Award is in two parts, the first part i.e., clause (a) deals with passing of an award which would include interest upto the date on which the award is made, while the second part, i.e., clause (b) deals with the grant of interest on the sum awarded by the arbitral tribunal -- Intent behind granting the pre-award interest is to compensate the claimant for the loss suffered from the time the cause of action arose till the passing of the arbitral award -- Similarly, the intent behind grant of post-award interest is to discourage the award-debtor from delaying the payment of the arbitral amount to the award-holder -- Grant of interest during the pre-award period is subject to the agreement as regard the rate of interest or unpaid sum between the parties – Grant of post-award interest under Section 31(7)(b) is mandatory -- Only discretion which the arbitral tribunal has is to decide the rate of interest to be awarded -- Where the arbitrator does not fix any rate of interest, then the statutory rate, as provided in Section 31(7)(b), shall apply -- Unless there is an express bar contained in the agreement, the arbitrator possesses the discretion and has jurisdiction to award interest including the post-award interest. (SC) Decided on: 18.11.2025

108. Offence under SC/ST Act – Anticipatory bail -- Essential ingredient for attracting Section 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC & ST Act is that such statement must be made within public view -- If a prima facie case is not made out, anticipatory bail can be granted -- Bar of Section 18 of the SC & ST Act does not apply where any prima facie case is not made out -- Appellant held entitled for the benefit of doubt, as prima facie the allegations contained in the FIR with regard to commission of any offence u/s 3 & 4 of the SC & ST Act, are not established -- Appeal allowed, directions given that in the event of arrest, the appellant shall be released on anticipatory bail to the satisfaction of Arresting Officer -- Appellant will join the investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer. (P&H HC) Reserved on: 17.11.2025 Decided on: 18.11.2025

109. Non-filing of protest petition – Maintainability of complaint u/s 200 Cr.P.C. – Quashing of proceedings -- Double jeopardy -- Charge-sheet by police in FIR, and negative report against appellant – Respondent no.2/ complainant failed to file protest petition, chose to file a private complaint invoking Section 200 of the Cr.P.C. after a lapse of two and a half years -- Question of double jeopardy would arise -- Appellants have made out a case for quashing of the proceedings -- High Court ought to have invoked its jurisdiction u/s 482 of the Cr.P.C. by quashing the proceedings, which are nothing but vexatious -- Proceedings pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, qua the appellants quashed. (SC) Decided on: 18.11.2025

110. Conviction in cheque bounce complaint – Appeal -- Suspension of sentence – Condition of deposit of 20% of compensation – In M/s Coromandel International Limited v. Shri Ambica Sales Corporation, (2025) Law Today Live Doc. Id. 20750, the Larger Bench/Division Bench has given cumulative answers (P&H HC) Decided on: 17.11.2025

111. Closing of evidence by Court order – Setting aside of -- Evidence of the petitioner was closed by the Court was in any way illegal or suffers from any material illegality or irregularity -- Considering the pace at which the learned Civil Judge is proceeding and the fact that even after closing the evidence of the petitioner, respondent/plaintiff has been granted 07 opportunities for rebuttal evidence -- Interest of justice requires, one opportunity to be granted to the petitioner to conclude his evidence at his own responsibility -- Petitioner allowed one effective opportunity subject to the payment of cost of Rs.50,000/-. (P&H HC) Decided on: 17.11.2025

112. Eviction of tenant -- Landlord – Execution of decree – Issue of ownership – Effect of -- A landlord need not be the owner of the property -- Subsequent events would not come in the way of the petitioner from getting the judgment and decree executed against the respondents, who are admittedly tenants of the petitioner. (P&H HC) Decided on: 17.11.2025

113. Additional evidence -- Video footage and photographs -- Placing on record – On application moved by complainant, the learned trial Court permitted the complainant to place certain documents on record, i.e. the video footage and photographs of the incident – Claimed by the complainant that in the video footage and photographs, the incident has been recorded and given to the Investigating Officer also, but the Investigating Officer having been under the influence of accused-petitioners, has not collected the above mentioned evidence – Held, no illegality or infirmity has been committed by the learned trial Court in permitting the complainant to bring the above mentioned documents on record -- At this stage, when permission to produce the above mentioned documents has been accorded, the admissibility of the above mentioned documents cannot be looked into -- Appreciation of above mentioned point can take place at the time of final adjudication of the trial. (P&H HC) Decided on: 17.11.2025

114. Dacoity -- To sustain a charge of dacoity under Section 310(2) of the BNS [Section 395 of the IPC], the offence of robbery [Section 309 of the BNS/Section 392 of the IPC] must first be established -- Robbery, in turn, is an aggravated form of theft or extortion -- A foundational element of ‘theft’ as defined under Section 303 of the BNS [Section 378 of the IPC] is ‘dishonest intention’, i.e., the intention to cause wrongful gain to one person or wrongful loss to another. (SC) Decided on: 17.11.2025

115. Senior Citizens case -- defect of coram non judice – Issue not raised earlier – Effect of -- Once an order is found to have been passed by an authority lacking jurisdiction or lawful coram, it is a nullity in the eyes of law and cannot be sustained, irrespective of whether such a plea was initially taken -- Matter remanded to the Maintenance Tribunal for fresh adjudication. (P&H HC) Decided on: 17.11.2025

116. Recovery on disclosure – Relevancy -- Section 27 is an exception to the preceding Sections 25 and 26 -- Language further indicates that when any fact is deposed to as discovered in consequence of information received from a person who is in custody of the Police in connection of an offence, it must relate distinctly to the fact so discovered -- For relevancy, the “facts thereby discovered” is preceded with the words “so much of such information, whether it amounts to confession or not as relates distinctly” -- “distinctly” indicates directly, indubitably, strictly and unmistakably, apparently, used in Section 27 to limit and define the scope of probable information -- Only that much information as is clearly connected with the fact discovered can be treated as relevant under the phrase ‘facts discovered’. (SC) Decided on: 14.11.2025

117. Auction sale – Challenge to -- Once a sale is confirmed by the competent authority, rights accrue in favour of the auction-purchaser which cannot be extinguished except in cases of proven fraud or substantial irregularity – Auction and its subsequent confirmation have not been shown to suffer from any material irregularity, mistake or fraud as contemplated u/s 38 of the Revenue Recovery Act -- Auction-purchaser paid the full purchase amount on the day of sale and the sale was confirmed only after due procedure and in the absence of any valid challenge -- Issuance of the sale certificate and registration of the property in the purchaser’s name, followed by subsequent transfers to bona fide purchasers, confer finality on the transaction. (SC) Decided on: 14.11.2025

118. Divorce – Desertion -- Cruelty – Irretrievable breakdown of marriage -- Parties got married on 20.05.2009 -- A male child was born from wedlock on 07.03.2010 -- High Court granted divorce primarily on the strength of the reasons, accepting the oral narratives of the respondent/ husband with respect to the alleged mental cruelty suffered by him -- High Court not adverted to the wife/ appellant’s plea that she was thrown out of the matrimonial home and was forced to live separately -- Child is in custody of the appellant from the very beginning -- In the light of such a plea, which she duly supported in her deposition, it was imperative upon the High Court firstly to determine as to: (i) Whether the appellant was thrown out of the matrimonial home or she herself voluntarily deserted the respondent? (ii) Whether the withdrawal of the first divorce petition wherein also the divorce was sought on the ground of cruelty, would bar the filing of second petition on the same cause of action? (iii) Whether cruelty was committed by the respondent in not allowing the appellant to join the matrimonial home and/or by denying any maintenance, love, affection, and care to the minor child of the parties? It is imperative upon the Family Court or the High Court to determine as to who out of the two is responsible for breaking the marital tie and forcing the other to live separately -- Unless there is cogent evidence for willful desertion or refusal to cohabit and/or look after the other spouse, the finding of marriage having been broken irretrievably is likely to have devastating effects, especially on the children -- Appeal allowed in part, impugned judgment of the High Court set aside and the matter remitted to the High Court for a fresh consideration in accordance with law. (SC) Decided on: 14.11.2025

119. POCSO -- Evidence establish the commission of offence – When the accused present in court removed his mask, the victim got frightened and did not even look at the accused -- Victim was required to be sent out of the courtroom, and recording of the evidence was stopped -- When the victim was found to be normal after some time, the recording of evidence though commenced had to be discontinued having regard to the mental status of the victim (PW-1) -- At the time when the victim was called again for tendering her evidence with her mother, she was crying and was not able to speak anything in the court as the victim PW-1 was frightened by the presence of the accused, hence, her examination was closed -- Whole sequence of events in course of recording of evidence of PW-1, was tale-telling -- Shock related to the happening of the incident which continued with the victim post-incident made its statement in the trauma-filled behaviour of the victim who was a 4 year-old girl -- Conviction of the appellant recorded by the trial court and affirmed by the High Court upheld – Sentence reduced to rigorous imprisonment for 6 years with fine. (SC) Decided on: 13.11.2025

120. Cancellation of bail – Once bail has been granted by a competent Court, the same can be cancelled only when there is cogent material showing that the accused has misused the concession of bail, has tampered with evidence or there has been a subsequent supervening circumstance warranting such cancellation -- Mere reiteration of allegations forming the basis of FIR or apprehension of misuse is not sufficient ground for cancellation of bail -- Cancellation of bail already granted requires demonstration of supervening circumstances such as misuse of liberty, tampering with evidence, intimidation of witnesses or deliberate evasion of the judicial process – Mere dissatisfaction with the reasoning of the Court which has granted the bail or the seriousness of the offence by itself, is not sufficient to recall such an order. (P&H HC) Decided on: 13.11.2025

121. Consumer – Incorporate company -- Definition of “person” in Section 2(1)(m) is inclusive and not exhaustive -- Therefore, there can be no doubt that even an incorporated company could be a consumer within the meaning of Section 2(1)(d) read with Section 2(1)(m) of the 1986 Act. (SC) Decided on: 13.11.2025

122. Appointment of Constable -- Forged degree – Dismissal from service -- Once on the basis of a forged degree/ certificate, a person gets appointment in the uniformed service of the country, that being the police, which is supposed to uphold the rule of law, the act of the respondent is uncondonable -- The further fact which is admitted is that there is absolutely, no rebuttal by the respondent that the certificate/ degree presented by him before the appellants at the time of his appointment and on the basis of which, he was appointed as a Constable, is genuine -- Punishment of dismissal from service restored. (SC) Decided on: 12.11.2025

123. Compensation in motor vehicle accident case -- Consortium -- Estranged husband – Right of -- At the time of the death of the deceased, the appellant was her legally wedded husband, although it appears that they were living separately -- Question for consideration, therefore, is whether the appellant, being the legally wedded but estranged husband, is entitled to any compensation under the head of loss of consortium – Held, appellant, being the legally wedded husband of the deceased, is entitled to a sum of Rs.40,000/- towards loss of consortium. Satinder Kaur alias Satwinder Kaur’s case (2021) 11 SCC 780 relied. (M.P. HC) Decided on: 12.11.2025

124. Order 8, Rule 6A -- Counter claim against the co-defendant cannot survive and the same has to be rejected. (SC) Decided on: 12.11.2025

125. Redemption of usufructuary mortgage – Limitation -- When there is a usufructuary mortgage, the period of limitation does not run from the date of creation of the mortgage but from the date of payment of mortgage, either out of the usufructuary or partly out of the usufructuary or partly on payment of deposit by mortgager as provided u/s 52 of Transfer of Property Act, 1882 -- Till then the period of limitation would not start under Section 61(a) of the Schedule to the Limitation Act -- As such mere expiry of the period prescribed thereunder could not extinguish the mortgager’s right of redemption and thereby the right of mortgagee to seek declaration of title and ownership over the mortgage property stands untouched. (SC) Decided on: 12.11.2025

126. Death of tenant – Subsequently death of Successor – Right of other Legal heirs -- Wife is alive and living with her husband upto the date of his death and therefore, she was only entitled for succession of tenancy -- On the death of said successor/ wife tenancy will not devolve upon his any legal heirs -- Other respondents have no justifiable claim for continuing in possession of the property under the garb of tenancy created in favour of Tenant, which was succeeded by his wife after his death -- Respondents are liable not only to be evicted and also to pay use and occupation charges for their unauthorized possession on the prevailing market rate. (H.P. HC) Reserved on: 24.06.2025 Date of decision: 11.11.2025

127. Family Courts Act, 1984 (66 of 1984), Section 14 -- Divorce -- Adultery -- Reliance upon photographs – Divorce by Family court -- Family Court may receive as evidence any report, statement, documents, information or matter that may, in its opinion, assist it to deal effectually with a dispute, whether or not the same would be otherwise relevant or admissible under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – Wife not denying that she was not there on photographs, stated that said photographs have been created by using some trick; who has created these false photographs and by what method, has not been stated, only a general statement has been made to avoid confrontation with said photographs – Husband had evidence of wife's adultery on her mobile phone -- He transferred said pictures in his mobile phone -- Photographer who developed photographs was also examined in Court -- No error in the judgment passed by Family Court by placing reliance on the photographs. (M.P. HC) Decided on: 11.11.2025

128. Appointment of Lambardar – Age – Education -- There is no hard and fast rule that a particular person i.e. younger in age or elder in age or more qualified or less qualified is to be appointed as a ‘Lambardar’ -- The best choice is the one who can effectively serve as a Lambardar of the village concerned. (P&H HC) Decided on: 11.11.2025

129. SARFAESI proceedings – Suit for declaration and permanent injunction -- Rejection of plaint -- Plaintiff has neither raised any loan from the bank nor the plaintiff is a guarantor in the issue which has led to the action having been initiated by the bank under the 2002 Act -- Plaintiff approached the Civil Court seeking a declaration that gift deed alleged to be executed and registered by the GPA holder and thereafter mortgage deed, in the year 2015 are void abinitio, false and fictitious documents and a result of fraud committed by defendants No.1 to 3 in connivance with each other -- In light of this prayer of declaration, a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendant-bank to misuse the process of law to take the possession of the suit premises has also been prayed for -- Invoking jurisdiction under Order VII, Rule 11 of the CPC and throwing out the plaint at the very initial stage, would be a very-very dangerous step as it would take away the right of the plaintiff to agitate the cause before the appropriate For a -- The issues raised in the suit, cannot be decided under Section 17 of the 2002 Act – Trial Court dismissed application under order VII Rule 11 -- Revision dismissed. (H.P. HC) Decided on: 11.11.2025

130. Appointment of Lambardar – Younger in age – Candidature of -- Difference in age between the appellant and respondent No. 4 is only of two years which cannot be made the basis to contend that 37 years old respondent No. 4 is incapable for discharging the duty on the post of Lambardar. (P&H HC) Decided on: 10.11.2025

131. Corruption case -- Sanction by Competent authority -- In case the trial Court finds that the sanction has been issued by a competent authority, the trial shall proceed -- However, in case the conclusion is otherwise, the trial Court shall return the chargesheet to the investigating agency for procuring fresh sanction from the appropriate authority. (SC) Decided on: 10.11.2025

132. Compensation in railway accident -- Unauthorised crossing of railways tracks – Contributory negligence -- Effect of -- Even if the deceased persons were crossing the railway tracks unauthorizedly to reach to other platform, the claim for compensation u/s 124-A of the Railways Act, 1989, may still be maintainable -- Contributory negligence or unauthorized entry alone does not automatically absolve the railway administration of liability, unless the case falls within the exceptions provided viz. suicide, self-inflicted injury, own criminal act, intoxication, or natural cause. (M.P. HC) Reserved on: 15.10.2025 Decided on: 10.11.2025

133. Compensation in motor vehicle accident case -- Minor Driver – No driving licence – Driven without consent – Ground of -- U/s 3 read with Section 4 and 5 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, no person below the prescribed age can drive a motor vehicle, and the owner of such vehicle is under a statutory duty to ensure that the vehicle is not driven by a person who does not hold a valid licence -- Both the owner and the driver are real brother -- Duty to keep the vehicle safe and not accessible to an unlicensed person lies squarely on the owner -- Owner cannot escape liability by merely stating lack of consent -- Breach being fundamental and directly contributing to the cause of the accident, the insurer is entitled to be exonerated from liability to indemnify the claimants -- Insurance Company is directed to pay the compensation to the claimants in the first instance and recover the same from the owner and driver thereafter. (M.P. HC) Decided on: 10.11.2025

134. Rejection of plaint – Court its own motion -- If a plaint has missing or deficiency of fact/s on the basis of which a given cause of action intended to be agitated can be said or assumed to be constituted, then a plaint is self-warranting its rejection sooner than later, be it on court’s own indulgence or on asking of a defendant. (J&K&L HC) Decided on: 08.11.2025

135. Detention -- Article 22(5) mandates that each ground for detention must be individually specified and not vague, ensuring transparency and accountability in the detention process -- Grounds must not be vague, indefinite or general -- Vague allegations make it impossible for the detenu to understand the reasons and effectively challenge the detention -- Vagueness of grounds of detention vitiating the order of detention -- On this ground alone, the impugned order of detention is liable to be set aside (J&K&L HC) Reserved on: 30.10.2025 Decided on: 08.11.2025

136. NDPS – Commercial quantity – Examination of evidence – Nature of -- At the stage of considering bail application of an accused, the evidence led by the prosecution cannot be meticulously examined -- It is only if from a cursory look at the evidence recorded during trial of the case, it is possible to frame an opinion that accused is not guilty of offence involving commercial quantity of drugs that he can be enlarged on bail -- If such an opinion can be framed only after meticulous examination and appreciation of the evidence on record, the same is to be left for determination at the final stage of the case and not while considering a plea for bail of the accused. (J&K&L HC) Reserved on: 04.11.2025 Decided on: 08.11.2025

137. Summoning u/s 12 of DV Act – Review of order – Permissibility of -- Proceedings u/s 12 of the DV Act cannot be equated with lodging of a criminal complaint or initiation of prosecution -- So, the trial Magistrate, after obtaining the response from the husband and his relatives etc. is well within his jurisdiction to revoke his order of issuing summons to them or he can even drop the proceedings against all or any of the relatives of the husband -- Since the proceedings under Section 12 of the DV Act are not, in strict sense, criminal in nature, as such, bar to alter/revoke an order by a Magistrate is not attracted to these proceedings. (J&K&L HC) Reserved on: 07.11.2025 Decided on: 08.11.2025

138. Stray dogs bites : Directions issued having regard to the alarming rise in incidents of dog bites within institutional areas such as educational institutions, hospitals, sports complexes, bus stands/depots (including Inter-State Bus Terminals) and railway stations, in the interest of public safety, health, and management of stray dogs: - -- The State Governments and Union Territories shall through their respective local/ municipal authorities, within a period of two weeks, identify all Government and private educational institutions, hospitals (including district hospitals, primary health centres, and medical colleges), public sports complexes or stadia, bus stands/depots (including Inter-State Bus Terminals) and railway stations situated within their territorial limits. -- The administrative heads of the aforesaid institutions shall through their respective local/ municipal authorities, under the overall supervision of the District Magistrate concerned, ensure that the premises are secured by adequate fencing, boundary walls, gates and such other structural or administrative measures as may be necessary to prevent the ingress of stray dogs. The said exercise shall be completed as soon as possible and preferably within a period of 8 weeks from today. -- The management of every educational institution, hospital, sports complex, bus stand/depot (including Inter-State Bus Terminal) and railway station identified under Direction (A) shall designate a Nodal Officer responsible for the upkeep and cleanliness of the premises and for ensuring that stray dogs do not enter or inhabit the campus. The details of the said officer shall be displayed prominently at the entrance and notified to the jurisdictional municipal body/authority. -- The local municipal authorities and panchayats shall carry out regular inspections, at least once in every three months, of all such premises to ensure that no stray dog habitats exist within or in the immediate vicinity of these institutions. Any lapse in this regard shall be viewed seriously, and responsibility shall be fixed upon the concerned municipal officials/administrative authorities. -- It shall be the responsibility of the jurisdictional municipal body/authority to forthwith remove every stray dog found within the premises of an educational institution, hospital (public or private), sports complex, bus stand/depot (including Inter-State Bus Terminal) or railway station and to shift such animal/s to a designated shelter, after due sterilisation and vaccination, in accordance with the Animal Birth Control Rules, 2023. The stray dogs so picked up shall not be released back to the same location from which they were picked up. We have consciously directed the non-release of such stray dogs to the same location from which they were picked up, as permitting the same would frustrate the very effect of the directions issued to liberate such institutional areas from the presence of stray dogs. -- All Government and private hospitals shall maintain a mandatory stock of anti-rabies vaccines and immunoglobulin at all times. -- Every school and educational institution shall be directed by the Ministry of Education, Government of India, to conduct awareness sessions for students and staff on preventive behaviour around animals, first-aid in case of bites, and immediate reporting protocols. -- The management of stadiums and sports complexes shall ensure the deployment of security or ground-keeping personnel specifically tasked with around the clock vigil against the entry or habitation of stray dogs. -- The railway authorities having jurisdiction over the railway stations as well as the State transport corporations and municipal authorities having jurisdiction over bus stands, depots and Inter-State Bus Terminals, shall ensure that such public-transport premises/facilities are effectively secured and maintained so as to prevent the habitation or movement of stray dogs within their premises. Proper waste-management systems shall be implemented to eliminate food sources that attract animals, and regular inspections shall be conducted to detect and address the presence of stray dogs. -- Animal Welfare Board of India shall, within four weeks, issue detailed Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for prevention of dog bites and management of stray dogs in institutional premises (public or private) including but not limited to Government and private educational institutions, hospitals (including district hospitals, primary health centres, and medical colleges), and sports complexes or stadia, to be uniformly adopted across all States and Union Territories. The aforesaid directions in continuation of and in furtherance of Court’s order dated 22nd August, 2025, to ensure that the menace of stray dog attacks within institutional areas is curbed through effective preventive and administrative mechanisms. The primary objective is to safeguard the fundamental right to life and safety of citizens, particularly children, students, patients, and sportspersons, while ensuring compliance with the principles embodied in the Animal Birth Control Rules, 2023 framed under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 -- Any reported non-compliance shall be viewed very seriously and may invite penalties/consequences including but not limited to the initiation of suo moto contempt proceedings against the erring officials. (SC) Decided on: 07.11.2025

139. Compensation in motor vehicle accident case -- Accident by L&T machine -- L&T machine was registered with Registering and Licensing Authority, Nahan -- Plea of appellant that L&T machine involved in accident was not a motor vehicle is not sustainable and, accordingly, rejected. (H.P. HC) Reserved on: 11.7.2025 Decided on: 07.11.2025

140. Land Acquisition case – Market value of acquired land -- Market value deemed to be the just and fair compensation for the acquired land -- "market value" would be the price of the land prevailing on the date of publication of the preliminary notification u/s 4(1) of the Act -- Acid test for determining the market value of the land is the price, which a willing vendor might reasonably expect to obtain from a willing purchaser -- In determining the market value, the factors enumerated in Section 23 are to be taken into consideration -- There cannot be any mathematical accuracy in ascertaining the amount of compensation payable -- Existing amenities like, water, electricity, possibility of their further extension, whether near about town is developing or has prospect of development have to be taken into consideration. (H.P. HC) Reserved on: 30.10.2025 Decided on: 06.11.2025

141. Medical negligence -- Bolam Test -- Determining factor of Negligence” for the purpose of fastening liability under civil law and under criminal law is jurisprudentially different -- Generally it is the amount of damages incurred, which is the determinative factor of the extent of liability in tort, and it is the degree of negligence which is the determinative factor of liability as a crime -- While in a civil proceedings, mere preponderance of probability shall be sufficient for the plaintiff for making out a case, in criminal proceedings, complainant is required to prove guilt of the respondent beyond reasonable doubt because negligence to be established by the prosecution or the complainant, as the case may be, must be culpable or gross – To fasten liability in criminal law, the degree of negligence has to be higher than that of negligence enough to fasten liability for damages in civil law and essential ingredient of mens rea could not be excluded from the consideration when charge in criminal court consists of criminal negligence. (J&K&L HC) Reserved on: 13.10.2025 Decided on: 06.11.2025

142. Appointment of Lambardar – Death of other candidate – Effect of -- Appellant was appointed as Lambardar and he is not disqualified for appointment to said post under any provision of law and the case was only remanded back by the Commissioner as well as the Financial Commissioner, to consider the claim of respondent No. 4 – Held, upon the death of respondent No. 4, his claim stood extinguished -- No fresh consideration can be given to his claim -- Appellant ordered to remain continued to work on the post of Lambardar. (P&H HC) Decided on: 06.11.2025

143. Appointment of Lambardar – Choice of Collector – Age and education -- Though petitioner is younger in age by three years and more educated, however, respondent No. 5 (appointed candidate) is not ineligible for being considered for the post of Lambardar and in FIR case he was never convicted -- Learned Collector's choice has been further affirmed by learned Divisional Commissioner as well as learned Financial Commissioner – Held, in the matter of appointment of a Lambardar, the choice of learned Collector cannot be lightly interfered, even if two views are possible -- No compelling reasons to interfere in the concurrent view of the Revenue Authorities – Writ petition dismissed. (P&H HC) Decided on: 06.11.2025

144. Dismissal of Lambardar -- SS had two sons, however, the petitioner acting as Lambardar had attested wrong pedigree table (kursinama) of SS, wherein MS was shown as the only son of SS -- Collector dismissed him from the post of Lambardar and which order further affirmed by learned Divisional Commissioner and Financial Commissioner – Held, order does not call for any interference, petitioner as Lambardar, was required to ensure correct verification of the Kursinama (pedigree table/ family tree) relating to the legal heirs of the deceased -- Omission of one son in the mutation proceedings is not a minor lapse -- Civil writ petition dismissed. (P&H HC) Decided on: 06.11.2025

145. Closing of evidence – Fair trial -- Though the Ld. Civil Judge has acted well within the ambit of judicial discretion in regulating the recording of evidence – However, in the interest of justice and in order to balance procedural propriety with the right to a fair trial, the petition disposed of with the specific direction that the petitioner shall be granted one final and definitive opportunity to tender himself and his two witnesses for cross-examination strictly subject to cost of Rs.10,000/-. (P&H HC) Decided on: 06.11.2025

146. SARFAESI -- Injunction – Fraud alleged – Jurisdiction of civil Court -- Normally the jurisdiction of the Civil Court is barred and the correct remedy for a party is to knock the doors of the DRT u/s 17 of the SARFAESI Act -- In certain cases, where fraud is pleaded and the same cannot be proved in the proceedings before the DRT, the Civil Court does have the jurisdiction to deal with the issue. (P&H HC) Reserved on: 17.09.2025 Decided on: 06.11.2025

147. Claim petition under Motor vehicle Act – Limitation – Interim order / No Claim Petition should be dismissed as time barred -- During the pendency of SLP, the tribunal and the High Courts directed not to dismiss the claim petitions on the ground of such petitions as barred by limitation as prescribed under sub-Section (3) or Section 166(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Matters ordered to re-list on 25.11.2025. (SC) Decided on: 04.11.2025

148. Conviction in cheque bounce complaint -- Compromise at revisional stage – Legality of cost imposed -- Acquittal order subject deposit of cost with State Legal Service Authority in accordance with the judgment of this Court in Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H., (2010) 5 SCC 663 – Held, construing it to be a law would discourage settlements at the revisional stage -- When the complainant has no objection, there cannot be any mandate of law directing the appellant to pay any further amount – Held, law laid down in the aforementioned judgment cannot be regarded as a binding precedent -- Direction imposing costs on the appellant cannot be sustained in the eye of law, particularly when the complainant does not want any further amount and the appellant has expressed his inability to comply with the same. (SC) Decided on: 04.11.2025

149. Compensation on account of untoward incidents -- Bonafide passenger – Travell in wrong train -- Deceased had purchased a railway ticket and had expired due to the injuries sustained in the railway accident -- Merely because the deceased had boarded a wrong train, it cannot be construed that he was not a bona fide passenger so as to absolve the railway authorities from contending that deceased not being a bona fide passenger. (SC) Decided on: 04.11.2025

150. Mutation on the basis of sale deed -- Locus standi to challenge -- There is no challenge to the said sale deed at the hands of the appellants -- Once, there is a sale deed and the Revenue Authorities have accepted the said sale deed so as to enter the mutation, the appellant cannot raise any grievance qua the mutation -- Revenue Authorities have raised no objection qua the aspect of entering into the mutation -- Existence of the sale deed dated 24.06.1966 in favour of respondent No.5/ Society not disputed – Held, appellant has no locus to challenge the same. (P&H HC) Decided on: 04.11.2025