Non-delivery of Possession – Petitioner not provided possession of flat despite full payment – Respondent offered inadequate temporary solutions and refunds without interest – Court highlighted plight of petitioner who invested life savings and faced severe accommodation issues – Writ petition allowed with direction for full refund with interest and compensation for mental agony [Paras 1-23].

Contempt of Court – Alleged non-compliance with Court's earlier order for monthly compensation to petitioner – Respondent complied with orders by paying monthly sums and attempting to provide suitable alternate accommodations – Contempt petition dismissed due to respondent's compliance and efforts [CONT.CAS(C) 1294/2023 & CM APPL. 3311/2024, Paras 1-6].

Judicial Notice – Court noted exponential rise in property prices, deeming respondent's offer to refund only principal amount as inadequate – Emphasized duty of State-run enterprises to act fairly, granting additional compensation for mental agony [Para 18, 22].

Civil Procedure – Appeal and Delay Condonation – Article 227 – Order 41 Rule 3A CPC – Non-joinder of Necessary Party - Appeal Process – Challenge against the appellate court's order overruling objections related to the maintainability of an appeal filed without a condonation of delay application – High Court upheld appellate court's decision to grant leave for appeal despite procedural objections raised by the petitioner – Court found substantial issues regarding whether the trial court's order was justifiable based on the material presented and existing legal precedents [Paras 1-6, 24-45].

Non-Joinder of Necessary Party – Petitioner's failure to include a necessary party in the initial suit resulted in procedural and substantive complications – The petitioner filed a caveat against the excluded party, contradicting his own argument of non-necessity – Court emphasized the importance of including all affected parties to avoid procedural defects and ensure just adjudication [Paras 3-5, 25-28, 45].

Legal Analysis – Application of Order 41 Rule 3-A CPC - Condonation of Delay – Court ruled that in the given circumstances, the requirement for a delay condonation application was not applicable as the respondent learned of the trial court’s order through a caveat and acted promptly – Deficiency in filing delay condonation application can be a curable defect, which was not relevant in this case as the appeal was filed within the limitation period from the date of knowledge [Paras 18-20, 38-43].

Suppression of Material Facts – High Court found that the petitioner suppressed material facts and misled the trial court by excluding a necessary party, thereby obtaining an interim order through misrepresentation – Such conduct was deemed as playing fraud with the court, warranting dismissal of the petition and imposition of costs [Paras 29-32, 50-52].

Decision – Dismissal of Petition – Held – The writ petition was dismissed in limine for lacking merit and being based on suppressed facts and misrepresentation – Costs imposed on the petitioner for attempting to mislead the court and abusing the judicial process – Emphasized the need for clean hands and full disclosure in seeking equitable reliefs [Paras 52-53].

Constitutional Law – Right to Life and Liberty – Live-in Relationship – Protection from Threats – Criminal Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India – Petitioners, a couple in a live-in relationship, sought protection from threats by relatives. Citing previous judgments, the court emphasized the fundamental right to life and liberty under Article 21, which includes the right to live with a person of one’s choice. The court directed the appropriate authorities to assess the threat perception and take necessary action to protect the petitioners’ life and liberty, irrespective of the legal status of their relationship. – Directions issued for protection of petitioners’ life and liberty. [Paras 1-16]

Right to Life and Liberty – Legal Status of Relationship Irrelevant for Protection – Analysis – The court held that protection under Article 21 of the Constitution is paramount and not contingent upon the legality of the relationship. Previous judgments of the High Court and Division Bench were cited to support the principle that every individual, regardless of the societal acceptance of their relationship, is entitled to protection of their life and liberty. [Paras 10-14]

Decision – Protection Directed – Without Commenting on Relationship Legality – The High Court disposed of the petition with directions to the relevant authorities to consider the petitioners’ representation and take appropriate action to ensure their protection. The court clarified that this order does not preclude the State or any other aggrieved party from initiating legal proceedings against the petitioners if justified by their actions. [Paras 15-17]

Criminal Law – Conviction under Section 138 of NI Act – The petitioner was convicted by the Trial Court and the conviction was upheld by the Appellate Court – Petitioner issued cheques which were dishonored due to insufficient funds – Trial Court relied on the presumption under Section 139 of the NI Act – Petitioner argued that cheques were issued as security for other transactions, not for clearing a debt [Paras 1-16].

Burden of Proof – Section 139 of NI Act – The Court reiterated that the accused must rebut the presumption of liability by leading cogent evidence – In this case, the petitioner successfully rebutted the presumption by establishing that cheques were issued as security, not for payment of a debt – Prosecution failed to produce invoices or any documentary evidence to prove the transaction [Paras 12-15].

Evaluation of Evidence – Invoices and Supply of Goods – The complainant failed to produce any invoices or documentation to substantiate the supply of goods claimed – Cross-examination of the complainant revealed admissions that contradicted the prosecution’s case – No sufficient evidence to establish that the accused owed the amount stated in the cheques [Paras 13-15].

Decision – Criminal Revision Petition allowed – Judgment of conviction and order of sentence by the Trial Court and its confirmation by the Appellate Court set aside – Petitioner acquitted of the offence under Section 138 of NI Act – Bail bonds cancelled [Para 16].

Service Law - Employment Law – Dispute regarding payment of interest on arrears following a settlement – Appellant, Bridge and Roof Company (India) Ltd., challenges direction to pay interest to the respondent, a retired employee, for delay in payment of arrears pursuant to a settlement – Settlement between the company and its employees under the Industrial Dispute Act was dated 30^th March, 2019 and covered the period from 1^st January, 2017 to 31^st December, 2026 – Payment of arrears delayed until 24^th November, 2022 without interest despite financial capability demonstrated by the company through profit disclosures from 2016 to 2021 [Paras 1-6, 23-25].

Jurisdiction – Appellant argues writ petition not maintainable due to availability of alternative remedy under Section 33 C(2) of the Industrial Dispute Act, as monetary benefits are computable – High Court’s jurisdiction under Article 226 questioned, with precedents suggesting exhaustion of statutory remedies before resorting to constitutional remedies [Paras 7-10, 17-20].

Decision – High Court upholds the decision granting interest on arrears, finding no supervening conditions justifying the delay – Settlement binding from the date of signing under Section 19 of the Industrial Dispute Act, ensuring employees receive dues immediately or within a reasonable period – Argument that COVID-19 impacted financial capability rejected based on financial disclosures showing sufficient profits during the relevant periods [Paras 21-27, 31, 35-36].

Arbitration Law – Dispute resolution in commercial infrastructure projects – Appeals filed by NHAI challenging the arbitral decision favoring GMR Hyderabad Vijayawada Expressways Ltd, which was awarded a contract for highway development and claims subsequent financial adjustments due to “Change in Law” events affecting project costs and revenues – Claims include adverse impacts from legal and policy changes in sand mining and state bifurcation altering traffic patterns and financial forecasts – Tribunal and Single Judge findings focus on interpretation of “Change in Law” under the contract, the financial implications, and whether such changes necessitated adjustments to contracted payments and liabilities [Paras 41, 82-91].

Financial and Contractual Assessments – NHAI disputed the reductions in traffic and revenue claimed by GMR as not substantiated appropriately under the concession agreement – Tribunal and court evaluated the financial model and reports provided during the bid and project execution phases, highlighting reliance on traffic studies for financial projections – Both tribunal and court findings emphasized the role of the concession agreement in guiding the resolution of these financial discrepancies through a reevaluation of the financial impacts considering the actual project data [Paras 53, 86, 93].

Judicial Review – The High Court upheld the tribunal’s award, emphasizing the limited scope of intervention in arbitral awards under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act – Court found no reason to deviate from tribunal findings that were based on substantial evidence and agreement terms, particularly regarding the impacts classified as “Change in Law” [Paras 77, 101-102].

Decision – Upholding of Arbitral Award and Jurisdictional Affirmation under Section 34 – High Court confirms the correctness of the arbitral tribunal’s interpretation of the “Change in Law” provisions within the Concession Agreement – Validates the need for re-assessment of compensation claims by an independent arbitrator rather than the appellant, who is a party to the dispute – Acknowledges the comprehensive evaluation of legal and contractual terms by both the arbitral tribunal and the learned Single Judge – Appeals and related applications dismissed, with orders for the independent arbitrator to reassess the respondent’s financial claims. [Paras 103-104]

Eviction Proceedings – Non-Service of Summons Contested – Petitioner challenges eviction under Section 14(1)€ of the Delhi Rent Control Act, asserting improper service of summons – Respondent asserts summons were served through multiple modes including registered post and publication – High Court finds no infirmity in the service process – Service deemed proper despite petitioner’s non-appearance to contest; eviction upheld. [Paras 1-10]

Service of Summons – Methods and Efficacy – Summons served via postman, publication, and affixation after petitioner avoided service – Court finds process server’s and postman’s reports credible despite petitioner’s allegations of collusion with the respondent – Substituted service via affixation and newspaper publication validated by trial record. [Paras 5-7, 9]

Legal Proceedings – Conduct of Parties – Petitioner’s non-participation in eviction proceedings despite known pending legal actions criticized – High Court dismisses argument for service in presence of civil court, citing lack of authority to accept service on petitioner’s behalf – Statutory requirements of the Delhi Rent Control Act for serving summons strictly adhered to by the respondent. [Paras 8-9]

Decision: Petition dismissed – Eviction order upheld – High Court confirms proper service of summons, rejecting allegations of improper service and collusion – Petitioner’s failure to contest eviction proceedings after summons duly served leads to dismissal of revision petition. [Para 10]

Probate Law – Maintainability of probate petition based on certified copy of registered Will – Appellants challenge probate orders permitting proceedings absent original Will, alleging mandatory requirement for original Will at filing – Single Judge admitted probate petition on basis of certified copy, pending verification and evidence of Will’s authenticity and execution under Sections 237 and 276 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 [Paras 1-3, 5-7].

Legal Principle – No automatic presumption of revocation by destruction due to unavailability of original Will – Supreme Court precedent emphasizes no general rule of presumption; any presumption is weak and rebuttable with minimal evidence, focusing on likely misplacement or theft rather than revocation [Para 17].

Evidence and Procedure – Admissibility of certified copies in probate proceedings – Certified copy of registered Will accepted as initial evidence for probate proceedings, with final decision contingent upon comprehensive evaluation during trial phase [Paras 17.3, 18-18.4].

Appellate Review – Challenges to interim probate orders – Court highlights that mere issuance of notice in probate petition does not constitute conclusive judgment, but given the comprehensive challenge to the petition’s maintainability, appellate intervention justified to address substantive legal issues [Para 22].

Decision – Dismissal of Appeal – Appellants’ objections regarding non-maintainability of probate petition based on certified copy dismissed, affirming lower court’s decision to proceed with probate based on available evidence and legal standards [Paras 23-24].

Criminal Law – Abetment of Suicide – Quashing of Proceedings – Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing criminal proceedings under Section 306 IPC – Allegation that applicants abetted suicide by threatening and harassing the deceased – Suicide note indicating mental distress caused by false allegations and threats – Court examines evidence to determine if prima facie case of abetment is made out – Held, sufficient material exists for prosecution under Section 306 IPC – Application dismissed. [Paras 1-31]

Abetment of Suicide – Analysis of Evidence – Held, abetment involves mental process of instigating or aiding in the commission of suicide – Continuous harassment and threats to falsely implicate in serious offences like rape can amount to abetment – Evidence suggests applicants created an environment leading to the deceased’s suicide – Court relies on precedent to support findings. [Paras 20-30]

Decision – Quashing Application Dismissed – Court finds sufficient evidence to proceed with prosecution under Section 306 IPC – Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. dismissed – Observations on necessity of clear mens rea and direct or indirect acts of instigation. [Paras 30-31]