Limitation Law - Second Appeal – Delay in Refiling – Vague Justification – Condonation Rejected – An application under Section 151 CPC seeking condonation of 800 days delay in refiling the appeal was dismissed – Held: The explanation given was vague, generic, and did not constitute sufficient cause – Delay of each day must be explained in law [Paras 1–4].

Civil Suit – Declaration of Ownership – Karewa Marriage Dispute – Appeal Dismissed – The plaintiff challenged mutation of inheritance by alleging that the defendant was not the widow of deceased Ram Bhagat – Held: Rajwanti sufficiently proved karewa marriage and cohabitation with Ram Bhagat through admissions and witness statements – Concurrent findings of fact were rightly returned by the courts below [Paras 2–12].

Customary Marriage – Admission by Witnesses – Sufficient Proof – No Need for Documentary Evidence – The plaintiff’s own witnesses admitted the cohabitation and relationship of Rajwanti with Ram Bhagat – Held: Such admission constitutes best evidence – Plea of lack of documentary proof of karewa marriage not sustainable [Paras 11–12].

Declaration Suit – Possession Not Proved – Maintainability Fails – It was admitted that the defendant was in possession of the suit property and the plaintiff had not sought possession – Held: Simplicitor declaration suit without claim for possession is not maintainable under Specific Relief Act [Para 13].

Concurrent Findings – No Interference in Second Appeal – Findings of fact based on evidence and admission – Held: No scope for interference under Section 100 CPC – Appeal dismissed both on merit and due to delay [Paras 15–18].

Decision: Regular Second Appeal dismissed on merits and also on account of delay—Concurrent findings upheld—Pending applications also disposed of—No costs awarded.

NDPS Act – Bail under Section 483 BNSS – Disclosure Statement – Bail Denied – Petitioner not named in FIR, implication based on disclosure statement of co-accused – No recovery effected from petitioner – Petitioner allegedly managed drug money laundering firm – Allegations of concealment of heroin in tomato ketchup and juice bottles – Evidence includes call records, financial transactions and involvement in trade-based money laundering – Held: Despite lack of recovery, material prima facie indicates managerial role in a transnational drug syndicate – Gravity of offence and risk of absconding outweigh plea for bail – Bail denied [Paras 2-23].

NDPS Act – Speedy Trial – Direction for Expedited Proceedings – Twice Weekly Hearing Ordered – Considering voluminous evidence (8596 pages, 142 witnesses), trial to proceed twice a week – Both prosecution and defence directed to cooperate – Aim is to balance right to speedy trial with national security concerns [Paras 24-25].

Civil Law - Family Settlement – Coparcenary Rights – Exclusion of Major Coparcener – Injunction Justified - Plaintiff, a major coparcener in the Biswanath Ganeriwala HUF (BHUF), was excluded from the 2008 Deed of Partition and 2009 Deed of Declaration, purportedly on false representation of minority – Court held prima facie case of fraud and misrepresentation made out – Injunction restraining reliance on disputed deeds upheld [Paras 7, 22, 47, 60-61].

Territorial Jurisdiction – Suit to Invalidate Deeds – Section 20 CPC Applicable – Trial Court Empowered - Relief claimed centered on declaration and cancellation of deeds, not property rights directly – Most defendants resided within trial court’s jurisdiction – Held: Suit maintainable under Section 20 CPC; trial court had territorial jurisdiction [Paras 19-21, 30-34, 40].

Limitation – Date of Knowledge of Deed – Mixed Question of Law and Fact – Suit Not Time-Barred - Plaintiff asserted knowledge of impugned deeds in December 2023 – Court found this plausible; earlier letter misidentifying himself as signatory showed lack of actual knowledge – Suit filed in 2024 held within limitation [Paras 41-44].

Suppression – Material Fact – No Fraud or Concealment Proved – No Estoppel - Non-disclosure of prior letter immaterial – No evidence that deeds were acted upon or suppression influenced court – Held: No suppression of material facts [Paras 45-47].

Title to Property – Sale Certificate in Court Auction – Deed of Indenture Post Sale Invalid - Mumbai property was purchased by BHUF in court auction – Sale certificate conclusive of BHUF’s title – Later Indenture by Sanchaita to appellant ineffective, as transferor no longer held title – Subsequent deeds and declarations excluding plaintiff were prima facie invalid [Paras 49-57, 63-64].

Decision – Appeal Dismissed – Temporary Injunction Affirmed - Appellate court found no error in trial court’s decision – Injunction rightly granted based on strong prima facie case and balance of convenience – Appeal and connected application dismissed [Paras 65-69].

Service Law – Abandonment of Service vs Termination – Reinstatement Order Set Aside – Bank employee overstayed ex-India leave and thereafter absented without explanation – Labour Court ordered reinstatement citing lack of enquiry – High Court held: conduct established abandonment of service, not termination – No enquiry required – Reinstatement order contrary to law, set aside [Paras 4–7, 13–21]. 

Disciplinary Enquiry – Not Mandatory for Abandonment – Settled Law – Bank not obligated to conduct enquiry for prolonged absence – Cited Supreme Court rulings in Vijay S. Sathaye v. Indian Airlines Ltd. and State of M.P. v. B.S. Bhadoriya – Absence for extended periods deemed voluntary abandonment – Labour Court’s contrary finding held perverse [Paras 15–20]. 

Back Wages – No Relief When Reinstatement Invalid – Workman’s writ for back wages dismissed – High Court held that since reinstatement itself was unsustainable, claim for consequential benefits like back wages also fails [Paras 11, 22]. 

Intention to Abandon – Evident from Conduct – Notices Ignored – Workman received multiple notices to rejoin but failed to respond – Court concluded there was no intention to resume service – Going abroad without approval also indicative of disinterest in duties [Paras 4–6, 13–14, 20]. 

Decision – Writ by Bank Allowed – Writ by Workman Dismissed – Labour Court’s award dated 03.02.1999 set aside – Reinstatement quashed – No back wages granted – Petitioner Bank’s writ allowed; Workman’s writ dismissed [Paras 21–22]. 

Civil Law - Religious Institution – Dispute over Succession of Mataadhipathi – Custom and Qualification Central – Matter Referred to Civil Court - Multiple sons of the deceased Peetadhipathi claimed succession based on competing unregistered wills and nominations – Held: Questions of fact and conflicting documents cannot be resolved in writ – Proper forum is Civil Court [Paras 5, 19].

Succession Procedure – Section 54 of Endowments Act – Nomination Requires Timely Intimation and Recognition – Lapse Fatal - Though petitioners claimed nomination by the deceased Peetadhipathi, failure to submit documents within 90 days under Section 54(1) rendered nomination incomplete – Dharmika Parishad rightly treated vacancy under Section 54(2) [Paras 9-13].

Temporary Administration – Appointment of Fit Person – Valid Pending Final Decision – Not Arbitrary - Appointment of Assistant Commissioner as fit person for day-to-day affairs upheld as interim measure to avoid administrative disruption – Held: Reasonable and legal, subject to further developments [Paras 13-15].

Customary Succession – Sons Entitled if Qualified – To be Evaluated by Dharmika Parishad – Court Orders Evaluation - Since Mutt’s custom allows sons to succeed, court directed all claimants to approach Dharmika Parishad to assess their eligibility under Section 53(2) – Nomination to be made accordingly, subject to civil court outcome [Paras 17-21].

Decision – Appeals Partly Allowed – Modified Direction – Succession Dispute to Be Decided by Civil Court – Until then, Qualified Son May Be Nominated - Court modified Single Judge’s order, directed evaluation of claimants’ eligibility by Dharmika Parishad, while maintaining right to civil litigation on succession [Paras 20-21].

Criminal Law - Corruption Allegation – Demand and Acceptance – Sole Witness Not Wholly Reliable – Conviction Set Aside - Prosecution case hinged on solitary testimony of complainant (PW1), who had a chequered criminal history and inconsistencies in his account of bribe demands – Held: His evidence lacked corroboration, was not wholly reliable, and recovery of tainted money not from A1 – Conviction reversed [Paras 17-29].

Recovery of Tainted Money – Mere Possession by A2 Insufficient – Knowledge and Intent Not Proven - A2, a petition writer, was found with tainted notes but gave plausible explanation that money was handed over without his knowledge of its purpose – No evidence linking A2 to A1’s alleged demand – Held: No case made out under Section 12 of the Act – Acquittal justified [Paras 30-31].

Prosecution Case – Inconsistencies and Lack of Credibility – Entire Narrative Collapsed - Alleged bribe demands on festival or improbable dates contradicted by official duty registers – PW1’s inconsistent statements and prior disputes with A1 suggested motive for false implication – Court found prosecution story not proved beyond reasonable doubt [Paras 25-29].

Decision – Appeals Allowed – Acquittal Ordered - Trial court’s conviction of both appellants under the Prevention of Corruption Act held unsustainable – Convictions and sentences set aside – Appellants acquitted and fine amounts directed to be refunded [Para 32].
 

Negotiable Instruments Act – Appeal Against Acquittal – Cheque Dishonour for Stopped Payment – Appeal Dismissed – The complainant alleged that the accused borrowed ₹10 lakhs and issued a cheque that was dishonoured due to “Payment Stopped by Drawer” – Trial Court acquitted the accused due to contradictions in complainant's evidence, lack of proof of financial capacity, and established part repayment by accused – Held: Appellate court must not interfere with acquittal unless findings are perverse – Complainant’s inconsistencies, failure to disclose loan particulars, and lack of explanation for ₹1.5 lakhs repayment undermine credibility – Judgment of acquittal upheld; appeal dismissed [Paras 5–25].*

Labour Law - Employment Termination – Abandonment of Job – Long Unauthorized Absence – Reinstatement Set Aside – The workman went on ex-India leave and remained absent beyond sanctioned period, followed by repeated spells of unauthorized absence despite notice by the employer – Labour Court treated it as wrongful termination due to lack of enquiry – Held: Facts disclose clear abandonment of service – No disciplinary enquiry was required in such a case – Reinstatement order was contrary to settled law and therefore quashed [Paras 4–21].

Back Wages – No Right on Reinstatement Being Illegal – Labour Court denied back wages while ordering reinstatement – Held: Since reinstatement is found invalid and contrary to law, the claim for back wages also fails – Petition by workman for back wages dismissed [Paras 22].

Labour Law – Abandonment of Service – No Enquiry Required – Reliance on Supreme Court precedents (Vijay S. Sathaye, Prem Nath, and B.S. Bhadoriya) – It was held that in case of long unauthorized absence, the relationship of employment ceases automatically without need for formal enquiry or termination order – Reinforced as a settled legal principle [Paras 15–20].

Decision: The award dated 03.02.1999 passed by the Labour Court ordering reinstatement of the workman was quashed—Petition filed by the Bank (CWP-8387-1999) allowed—Petition by the workman seeking back wages (CWP-11349-1999) dismissed—No costs.

Criminal Law – Quashing of FIR – Serious Sexual Offences – Petition Dismissed – Petitioner sought quashing of FIR registered under Sections 354, 354-A, 451, 506, 376, and 511 IPC alleging false implication – FIR based on prosecutrix's complaint and corroborated by her Section 164 CrPC statement alleging attempted rape and physical assault – Court held that material on record disclosed prima facie case – FIR and chargesheet not liable to be quashed at pre-trial stage [Paras 1-4, 11-13, 22].

Inherent Powers – Section 482 CrPC – Caution in Exercise – Principles Reiterated – Citing Supreme Court precedents, Court emphasized that Section 482 powers are exceptional and should not be used to assess sufficiency of evidence or short-circuit criminal trials – Allegations were not so absurd or improbable to justify quashing – No procedural abuse shown [Paras 5-10, 13-21].

Victim Statement – Section 164 CrPC – Considered Credible at Prima Facie Stage – Prosecutrix’s detailed allegations of assault, attempted rape, and threats held sufficient to sustain continuation of prosecution – Court declined to assess credibility or merits at this stage [Paras 3, 22].

Decision – Petition Dismissed – High Court declined to quash proceedings under Section 482 CrPC – Held that trial must proceed in view of nature of allegations and supporting statements – No abuse of process demonstrated [Paras 22-23].