Land Acquisition - Assessment of Market Value - Enhancement - Landowners entitled to highest market value - State of Haryana produced several sale deeds for acquired land - Court found sale deed No. 11511 (dated 10.01.2006) reflecting highest price - Developers purchasing land for residential colonies - Market value increased by 9% per annum - Landowners entitled to enhanced compensation. [Paras 7.9, 8.1]

Market Value Determination - Use of Sale Exemplars - Analysis - Court focused on highest price sale exemplar, rejecting average or lower-value sales - Sale deed No. 11511 used for assessing market value - Reflects developers' interest and higher land value trends - Market value of Rs. 42,51,000/- per acre determined after considering price escalation. [Paras 6.2.3, 7.4, 8.1]

Errors in Reference Court's Assessment - Held - Reference Court's use of average sale price and development deductions found incorrect - Highest sale price should determine market value - Development deductions not justified for undeveloped land sale instances. [Paras 6.2.2, 6.2.4]

Decision - Enhanced Compensation Awarded - Appeals allowed - Market value reassessed at Rs. 42,51,000/- per acre - Landowners entitled to enhanced amount with statutory benefits under amended Land Acquisition Act, 1894. [Para 8.2]

Family Law - Divorce on Grounds of Cruelty – Appeal – Family Court granted divorce to the husband on grounds of cruelty – Wife appealed, challenging the admissibility of electronic evidence and findings of cruelty – High Court upheld Family Court's decision – Held, Family Courts have wide discretion under Section 14 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, to admit evidence deemed necessary for resolving disputes – Certificate under Section 65B was filed – Electronic evidence taken on record correctly – Wife’s behavior of publicizing husband as a womanizer and drunkard, and her intrusive calls to his workplace amounted to cruelty – Divorce upheld – Husband directed to pay Rs. 50 lakhs as permanent alimony. [Paras 1-31]

Admissibility of Electronic Evidence – Analysis – Held – Section 14 of Family Courts Act grants Family Courts discretion to admit any evidence necessary to resolve disputes, even if not admissible under the Indian Evidence Act – Electronic evidence accompanied by a certificate under Section 65B is admissible – High Court found no procedural fault in the admission of CD, transcripts, and text messages. [Paras 18-23]

Decision – Evidence Supporting Cruelty – Family Court's findings of cruelty supported by evidence including testimony of the husband, his colleague, and his son – Wife’s actions had a significant impact on husband's reputation and professional life – High Court affirmed the divorce decree – Husband ordered to pay permanent alimony. [Paras 24-30]

Land Law - Partition Proceedings – Challenge under Article 226 to partition proceedings under Section 118 of Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 – Petitioner and another company 100% subsidiaries of Emaar-MGF Limited – Petition for consolidation of partition applications rejected as entities are separate corporate bodies – Argument of inequity and lack of contiguity dismissed – Consolidated chunk provided, adequate access available – Orders of Revenue Authorities upheld – Petition dismissed. [Paras 1-9]

Corporate Entities in Partition – Analysis – Separate partition applications cannot be consolidated if parties are distinct entities – Petitioner's argument for consolidation based on corporate relationship rejected – Legal principle that each corporate body is a separate entity upheld. [Paras 7]

Implementation of Mode of Partition – Held – Mode of partition required consolidated chunk for parties with other land – Petitioner's interpretation for contiguity rejected – Consolidated chunk provided as per mode – Access issue dismissed, site plan shows adequate road connectivity. [Paras 8]

Judicial Precedents – Reference to judgments affirming that non-identical parties' partition applications cannot be consolidated – Partition mode compliance and provision of access validated by site plan. [Paras 7-8]

Decision – Dismissal of Petition – Challenge to partition proceedings and final partition rejected – Orders of Revenue Authorities upheld – Petition lacks merit, dismissed. [Paras 9]

SARFAESI Act - Transfer of Property - Writ Petition for NOC – Property mortgaged to bank and sold under SARFAESI Act – Sale certificate issued and registered by Sub Registrar – Chandigarh Housing Board’s refusal to issue NOC and record the transfer held untenable – No statutory provision allowing refusal – Sale complete upon registration – Petition allowed, Housing Board directed to issue NOC and record transfer within 4 weeks. [Paras 1-36]

Sale Certificate and Property Transfer – Analysis – Held – Property sold under SARFAESI Act and sale certificate issued free from all encumbrances – Registration by Sub Registrar completes sale – Third party decree for recovery of money cannot impede transfer process – No statutory basis for Housing Board’s refusal to issue NOC. [Paras 25-34]

Decision – Issuance of NOC and Recording of Transfer – High Court finds Housing Board’s refusal arbitrary and illegal – Writ of Mandamus issued to grant NOC and record property transfer in petitioner’s name – Petition allowed, transfer to be completed within 4 weeks. [Paras 35-36]

Negotiable Instruments – Dishonour of Cheque – Section 139 NI Act – Section 4 Indian Evidence Act – Presumption of Legally Enforceable Debt – Whether absolute – Held: Presumption under Section 139 NI Act is rebuttable – Complainant must prove pre-existing liability and legally enforceable debt – Failure to produce cogent evidence by complainant – Burden of proof not discharged – Acquittal upheld as complainant failed to establish debt or liability beyond reasonable doubt. [Paras 1-16]

Rebuttable Presumption – Burden of Proof – Sections 118, 139 NI Act – Evidence Act Section 4 – Presumption under Section 139 NI Act requires credible evidence by complainant – Accused can rebut presumption by showing probable defence – Absence of evidence of financial capacity to lend amount in question – Acquittal justified due to complainant's failure to substantiate claims. [Paras 4-11]

Decision – Acquittal Upheld – Appeal dismissed – No cogent and convincing evidence by complainant to establish enforceable debt – Judgment of acquittal by trial court upheld due to lack of substantive proof from complainant – No illegality or perversity in trial court's judgment. [Para 16]

Criminal Law – Dishonor of Cheque – Sections 138, 139 NI Act – Section 357(3) Cr.P.C. – Legally enforceable debt – Presumption in favor of holder – Failure to reply to legal notice – Accused's failure to respond to legal notice does not automatically assume acceptance of liability – Held: Presumption under Section 139 is rebuttable – Accused successfully rebutted presumption by raising doubt about financial capacity and existence of debt – Conviction and sentence set aside. [Paras 1-27]

Financial Capacity and Burden of Proof – Legal Notice – Section 138, 139 NI Act – Failure of complainant to prove financial capacity to lend amount in question – Burden shifts to complainant to show transaction and enforceable debt – Discrepancies in complainant's evidence regarding capacity and absence of proof of income – Accused's denial and plausible explanation sufficient to rebut statutory presumption. [Paras 4-25]

Decision – Acquittal – Conviction and sentence under Sections 138, 139 NI Act set aside – Accused acquitted – Complainant failed to establish pre-existing liability and financial capacity – Burden of proof not discharged by complainant. [Paras 26-28]

Criminal Law – Unnatural Offence and Aggravated Sexual Assault – Sections 377 IPC and 10 POCSO Act – Conviction based on minor victim’s testimony – Section 377 attracted where penetration occurs on any part of the body, predominant intent must be sexual – Absence of external injury marks on the victim’s body not sufficient to disprove the offence – Victim’s young age and inability to resist due to overpowering by older boys considered – Held: Conviction upheld as the absence of injury does not negate the offence – Testimony of the child reliable and credible. [Paras 1-27, 30-32]

Child Testimony – Credibility – Assessment – Section 377 IPC and 10 POCSO Act – Victim’s testimony considered credible despite absence of corroborative medical evidence – Courts emphasize the reliability and trustworthiness of the child’s account – Judicial precedence supports reliance on child testimony if it is convincing and consistent – Prosecution not required to establish violent resistance for offence under these sections. [Paras 13, 19-20, 27-29]

Decision – Conviction and Sentence Upheld – Petition dismissed – Courts below rightly convicted the petitioners for offences under Sections 377 IPC and 10 POCSO Act – The judgment found valid, legal, and in accordance with the law without any perversity. [Paras 33, 37]

Civil Procedure - Rejection of Plaint – Civil Revision against Trial Court's Order dismissing application for rejection of suit under Order VII, Rule 11 CPC – Suit challenging decree dated 20.05.1986 alleging fraud and claiming coparcenary rights under amended Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act – High Court holds no existing coparcenary post-severance of shares in 1986 decree – Ingredients of fraud not specifically pleaded – Held, the suit is barred as the cause of action is illusory and vexatious – Trial Court's order set aside, application under Order VII, Rule 11 CPC allowed, plaint rejected. [Paras 1-7]

Hindu Succession Act - Coparcenary Rights – Analysis – Held – Amendment to Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act confers coparcenary rights to daughters from 25.12.2004 – Decree of 1986 resulted in severance of coparcenary status – No coparcenary existed post-1986 for the plaintiff to claim rights – Claims of fraud unsubstantiated as per Order VI, Rule 4 CPC. [Para 4-5]

Decision – Rejection of Suit – Court finds the trial court's dismissal of the application under Order VII, Rule 11 CPC unsustainable – Suit dismissed as it does not disclose a cause of action – Petition allowed, plaint rejected. [Para 7]

Criminal Law – Abetment to Suicide – Sections 34, 306 IPC – Petition to Quash FIR – Alleged abetment by threats in February 2019, suicide in May 2019 – Necessity of proximate and live link between threats and suicide – No evidence of contact or threats post-February 2019 – FIR quashed as no direct or indirect act of instigation proven. [Paras 1-27]

Abetment Requirements – Legal Standards – Section 306 IPC – Section 107 IPC – Abetment requires intention and direct act to instigate or aid suicide – Mere mention in suicide note insufficient without evidence of instigation – Precedents emphasize mens rea and proximate cause – Petition allowed, FIR quashed. [Paras 12-26]

Decision – Quashing of FIR and Subsequent Proceedings – Petition allowed – FIR No. 62 dated 16.05.2019 under Sections 306 and 34 IPC quashed along with subsequent proceedings including the report under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. – Absence of live link between alleged threats and suicide, no mens rea or direct instigation established. [Paras 26-27]