Guardianship and Custody – Jurisdiction Based on Minor's Ordinary Residence – Application Returned - The appellant sought custody of her minor daughters, invoking Muslim Personal Law, where the mother has deemed custody of a minor girl until she attains puberty. The Family Court dismissed the petition for lack of jurisdiction, holding that the minors were residing with their father in Poonch, and not with the mother in Jammu. The High Court upheld this ruling, reiterating that under Section 9 of the Guardian and Wards Act, the jurisdiction lies with the court where the minors ordinarily reside, regardless of the mother's custody under personal law. [Paras 1-10].

Residence of Minor vs. Natural Guardian – Determination of Jurisdiction - The court emphasized that the minor’s ordinary residence is distinct from the residence of the natural guardian, and temporary residence elsewhere does not affect the jurisdiction. The appellant's argument that the minors should be deemed to reside with her under Muslim law was rejected as it did not align with the statutory framework of the Guardian and Wards Act. [Paras 7-9].

Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the Family Court’s decision to return the application for presentation before the proper court was upheld. [Para 10].

Cheque Dishonour – Section 138 of the NI Act – Quashing of Proceedings – Petition Dismissed – Petitioner sought quashing of criminal proceedings for cheque dishonour under Section 138 of the NI Act, contending that the cheque was issued as part of a housing loan agreement, and unauthorized amounts were withdrawn from his account by the respondent. The petitioner argued that the cheque was dishonoured due to a breach of trust and collusion by the bank manager. Held: The petitioner's arguments based on statements recorded under Section 161 CrPC had no merit, as such statements hold limited evidentiary value. The jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC cannot be invoked to quash proceedings under a special statute like the NI Act without compelling evidence of misuse of process [Paras 9, 10, 11].

Statements under Section 161 CrPC – Limited Evidentiary Value – No Ground for Quashing – The petitioner relied on statements recorded under Section 161 CrPC during police inquiry to claim that no offence under Section 138 NI Act was made out. Held: Statements under Section 161 CrPC are not substantive evidence and cannot be the sole basis for quashing proceedings under Section 138 of the NI Act. The Court reiterated that these statements can be used only for contradiction purposes during trial [Paras 7, 9].

Special Code – NI Act Provisions Override CrPC – The High Court affirmed that the Negotiable Instruments Act, being a special statute, overrides provisions of the CrPC. The special code for cheque dishonour cases under Sections 142 to 147 of the NI Act aims to expedite trials and prevent delay, thereby limiting the scope of Section 482 CrPC in such matters [Paras 8, 10].

Decision: The petition under Section 482 CrPC was dismissed, and the proceedings under Section 138 of the NI Act were upheld. The Court found no grounds for interference, as the petitioner failed to present any compelling evidence of abuse of process. The trial was directed to continue in the JMFC, Aron District Guna, without further delay [Paras 10-11].

Criminal Law – Murder – Conviction Upheld - Dying Declaration – Admissibility and Evidentiary Value – The conviction was primarily based on the dying declaration of the deceased, Munish Kumar, implicating the appellant for stabbing him. The appellant questioned the reliability of the dying declaration on the grounds that the doctor who declared the deceased fit to make a statement was not examined – Held: The Investigating Officer's testimony and the circumstances surrounding the declaration confirmed its validity. The dying declaration was corroborated by other evidence and was held to be credible and admissible [Paras 15-19].

Recovery of Weapon – Corroboration of Guilt – The appellant's conviction was further supported by the recovery of the weapon (knife) used in the crime, which was recovered pursuant to the appellant’s disclosure statement – Held: The recovery was made in accordance with the law, and no evidence suggested that the recovery was planted or fabricated. The recovery of the weapon corroborated the dying declaration and medical evidence [Paras 20-24].

Medical Evidence – Consistency with Injuries – The post-mortem report and the medical examination of the deceased revealed injuries consistent with the use of a knife. The Court noted that the injuries matched those described in the dying declaration and confirmed by the recovered weapon – Held: The medical evidence strongly supported the prosecution's case and linked the appellant to the crime [Paras 40-43].

Appeal Dismissed – The appellant's contentions regarding false implication and misappreciation of evidence were rejected. The Court found no merit in the appeal and upheld the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court – Held: The life sentence awarded under Section 302 IPC was affirmed, and the appeal was dismissed [Paras 47].

Decision: The appeal is dismissed. The conviction and life sentence awarded to the appellant by the trial court are upheld.

Permanent Lok Adalat – Scope of Jurisdiction – Complex Legal and Factual Issues – Petition Dismissed – The petitioners sought quashing of orders passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services) in a dispute concerning a housing loan and the rejection of an insurance claim after the co-applicant’s death – The Court held that the Permanent Lok Adalat had rightly declined to adjudicate the matter, as it involved complex issues requiring voluminous evidence and cross-examination, which fall outside the summary jurisdiction of the Lok Adalat – The Court emphasized that Permanent Lok Adalats are not meant to decide intricate legal and factual issues [Paras 15-25].

Summary Proceedings – Judicial Restraint in Complex Matters – The Court endorsed the Permanent Lok Adalat's decision to allow the petitioners to approach an appropriate forum, reiterating that complex matters requiring detailed evidence are beyond the scope of summary proceedings under the Legal Services Authorities Act [Paras 21-24].

Decision: The petition was dismissed, and the orders of the Permanent Lok Adalat dated 16.02.2024 and 23.08.2024 were affirmed.

Service Law - Administrative Law – Public Employment – Dismissal for Fraudulent Appointments – Petitioners were appointed as Chowkidars based on a newspaper advertisement issued in “Komi Den Sangrur” – Their appointments were later annulled due to non-compliance with procedural rules, including the lack of proper advertisement and merit list – The inquiry held that the petitioners, in connivance with officials, fraudulently secured appointments without proper selection – Held: The appointments were made in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution as no proper procedure for recruitment was followed, rendering the appointments null and void [Paras 8-9].

Principles of Natural Justice – Opportunity to be Heard – Petitioners contended that their services were terminated without a fair hearing – Earlier, this Court had quashed their termination orders for violating the principles of natural justice, granting the respondents liberty to proceed in accordance with law – The subsequent inquiry, however, confirmed fraudulent appointments, and the petitioners were afforded the opportunity to present their case – Held: Principles of natural justice were complied with during the second termination, and the petitioners' dismissal was lawful [Paras 7-8].

Fraudulent Appointments – Nullity of Actions – The Court relied on precedents from the Supreme Court, holding that appointments obtained through fraudulent means are void ab initio – Held: Fraud vitiates everything, and the petitioners cannot claim reinstatement based on fraudulent appointments [Paras 12-14].

Decision:

Writ petition dismissed – The dismissal orders dated 24.07.2015 and 03.08.2015 are upheld – The petitioners’ appointments were found to be fraudulent, and they cannot be reinstated in service – No order as to costs [Paras 14-15].

Section 138 N.I. Act - Forensic Examination – Application for Further Examination Denied - The petitioner, accused under Section 138 of the NI Act, sought to send the disputed cheques for a second forensic examination by the Central Forensic Science Laboratory after receiving an unfavorable report from the State Forensic Science Laboratory. The Court upheld the Magistrate's decision, rejecting the request as an attempt to delay the trial. It was held that repeated requests for expert examination without justification could not be entertained [Paras 9-12].

Summoning Private Expert – Application Dismissed – Evidence Not Substantive - The petitioner also sought to summon a private handwriting expert to testify regarding the signature on the cheques. The Court ruled that the opinion of a private expert, especially when obtained without court intervention, is not substantive evidence and thus the Magistrate was justified in declining to issue summons to the private expert [Paras 13-14].

Request for Document Production – Dismissed Due to Irrelevance - The petitioner requested the production of certain documents related to chit transactions. The Court held that the documents were irrelevant to the defense of discharge since the petitioner had already admitted to receiving the chit amount. The Magistrate's decision to deny the production request was upheld [Paras 15-16].

Final Decision – Petition Dismissed – Delay Tactics Not Permitted - The High Court dismissed the petitions, noting that the petitioner’s actions were aimed at delaying the trial. The trial court was directed to expedite the disposal of the case without further delays [Paras 17-19].
 

Execution of Decree – Bonafide Purchasers – The appellants, claiming to be bonafide purchasers of flats constructed on the disputed plot, objected to the execution of the decree, arguing they were not parties to the original suit – The court dismissed their objections, holding that the appellants acquired the property during the pendency of the suit, making the transfers subject to the doctrine of lis pendens – Held: Subsequent purchasers during the pendency of litigation cannot defeat the decree holder’s rights [Paras 3, 6, 12].

Specific Performance – Inherent Relief of Possession – The court reiterated that in suits for specific performance, the relief of possession is inherently included even if not specifically mentioned in the decree – Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Manickam @ Thandapani vs. Vasantha and Babu Lal vs. Hazari Lal, it was held that possession must be granted to the decree holder as part of the execution of the decree – Held: The decree for specific performance inherently includes the relief of possession, and no separate suit for possession is required [Paras 5, 6, 10].

Doctrine of Lis Pendens – Subsequent Transfers Invalid – The appellants acquired their rights through a General Power of Attorney holder during the pendency of the suit, and thus, their rights are subject to the final outcome of the litigation – The court emphasized that transfers made during litigation are hit by the doctrine of lis pendens under Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 – Held: The appellants’ objections, based on subsequent transfers, were dismissed as invalid [Paras 12, 13, Conclusion].

Decision:

Appeal dismissed – The appellants, being purchasers during the pendency of litigation, cannot claim ownership or possession of the property in question – The execution of the decree for specific performance in favor of respondent S.V. Babber, including the relief of possession, is upheld [Paras 13, 14].

Civil Law - Third-Party Objections in Execution – Applicability of Lis Pendens – The appellants, claiming to be bona fide purchasers, challenged the execution of a decree for specific performance, arguing they were not party to the original suit and had purchased flats on the disputed property through subsequent transactions – Held: The appellants' objections were dismissed as the sale of the property during the pendency of the original suit was hit by the doctrine of lis pendens. Therefore, they could not claim any rights against the decree-holder [Paras 13, 14].

Doctrine of Lis Pendens – Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act – The Court reiterated that any transfer of property during the pendency of a suit is subject to the outcome of the litigation, and the subsequent transferees are bound by the decree – Held: The appellants’ claim of being bona fide purchasers for value was irrelevant as the property was transferred during the pendency of the suit, and they were bound by the decree passed in favor of the respondent-decree holder [Para 13].

Relief of Possession in Specific Performance – Inherent Right – The appellants argued that the decree for specific performance did not specifically grant possession to the decree-holder – Held: The relief of possession is inherent in a decree for specific performance, even if not explicitly mentioned. The decree-holder is entitled to possession once the sale deed is executed [Paras 6-8].

Decision: The appeal is dismissed. The Court upheld the orders of the Executing Court and the Additional District Judge, dismissing the objections filed by the appellants. The decree-holder is entitled to possession of the property, and the appellants, as transferees during the pendency of the suit, are bound by the decree [Paras 15-16].
 

Full Tank Level Dispute – Extent of FTL – Petitioners' objections regarding Durgam Cheruvu tank’s FTL not considered – Directions for Reconsideration – The petitioners argued that the FTL determined by the respondents exceeded the original extent of Acs. 65.12 Guntas, encroaching on their private property – Held: The Lake Protection Committee was directed to hear the petitioners’ objections and decide the FTL of Durgam Cheruvu through a speaking order – No demolition of the petitioners’ constructions until the FTL determination is finalized [Paras 1-6].

Administrative Law – Right to Hearing – Principles of Natural Justice – Petitioners entitled to a personal hearing before Lake Protection Committee – Petitioners had submitted objections within the prescribed time limit but were not considered – Held: The Lake Protection Committee must provide the petitioners with a personal hearing and finalize the FTL notification after considering the objections [Paras 10-12].

Land Rights – Private Property – Article 300-A Constitution of India – Encroachment Allegations – Petitioners’ claim of interference with peaceful possession – Petitioners' properties were alleged to fall under the extended FTL area – Held: The respondents were directed not to interfere with the petitioners' possession until the FTL is determined [Paras 8-10].

Judicial Remedy – No Final Relief Granted – Pending Decision by Committee – The court did not express any opinion on the merits of the petitioners' claims as the matter was left to be adjudicated by the Lake Protection Committee – Writ petitions disposed of with directions to the Committee [Paras 13-14].

Decision:

Writ petitions were disposed of with directions to the Lake Protection Committee to hear the petitioners' objections and notify the FTL of Durgam Cheruvu within six weeks. No demolition of the petitioners' constructions will take place until the FTL is determined.