Family Settlement – Consent Decree – Validity – Plaintiffs sought declaration of ownership of land based on a consent decree – Trial court upheld the claim, but the First Appellate Court reversed the decision, citing fraud and concealment – High Court reinstates the trial court's judgment, affirming the validity of the consent decree – Consent decrees are valid unless proven fraudulent or obtained through coercion or misrepresentation [Paras 1-24].

Joint Hindu Family Property – Self-Acquired Property – Dispute over whether the property was joint Hindu family property or self-acquired – Court finds the property was self-acquired based on admissions and evidence – The defendant's claim of joint family property rejected [Paras 13, 17].

Fraud and Misrepresentation – Burden of Proof – Allegations of fraud and misrepresentation must be substantiated with clear evidence – Mere non-disclosure of all family members does not invalidate a consent decree [Paras 14-15, 18].

Registration of Family Settlements – Supreme Court Precedents – Court refers to various Supreme Court decisions confirming that family settlements do not require registration if not in writing and are based on antecedent title or claims – Reinforces the principle that family settlements are binding if there is a semblance of claim [Paras 11-12].

Decision: Appeal allowed – Judgment and decree of the trial court restored – Plaintiffs' suit decreed – Consent decrees upheld as valid unless set aside by clear evidence of fraud or coercion [Paras 21-24].

Public Health – Food Adulteration – Suo motu action to address food adulteration impacting public health – Interim directions issued for implementation of Food Safety and Standard Act, 2006 – Monitoring and sampling of high-risk areas – Establishment of testing infrastructure – Public awareness campaigns to educate about food adulteration and its health impacts [Paras 1-20].

Constitutional Law – Article 21 – Right to life includes safe and healthy food – Article 47 imposes duty on the State to ensure public health – Food adulteration affects fundamental right to health – Directions issued to both Central and State Governments for effective implementation of food safety laws [Paras 7-8].

Food Safety and Standard Act, 2006 – Implementation – Act of 2006 aims to regulate food safety – Identifies the need for better enforcement and infrastructure – Gaps in the Act's implementation highlighted, particularly in unorganized sectors – Interim directions to improve enforcement and public awareness [Paras 8-12].

Public Awareness – Campaigns and Education – State and Central Governments directed to conduct public awareness campaigns about food adulteration – Utilization of various media to educate public – Inclusion of food safety education in school workshops [Paras 13-15].

Interim Measures – Immediate steps ordered to enhance food safety – State Food Safety Authority to conduct regular sampling – Establishment of a dedicated website for public complaints and information – Central and State Governments to report monthly compliance to Court [Para 15].

Decision: Interim directions issued for effective implementation of food safety measures and public awareness campaigns. Compliance reports to be submitted monthly. Further directions to be considered in future hearings.

Pre-emption Rights – Tenancy and Co-sharer Claims – Plaintiffs sought to pre-empt a sale based on tenancy claims over the suit land – Defendants claimed superior rights as tenants in possession – Rival pre-emptors, Samey Singh and Partap, also filed suit claiming rights as co-sharers and tenants.

Tenancy Rights – Evidence and Presumptions – Trial court and first appellate court found that plaintiffs failed to prove tenancy rights – Defendants Samey Singh and Partap found to be in possession as tenants – Presumptions under Section 44 of Punjab Land Revenue Act discussed.

Co-sharer Rights – Superior Right to Pre-empt – Samey Singh and Partap established as co-sharers by virtue of a prior sale deed – Court upheld their superior right to pre-empt the sale under Section 15 of the Punjab Preemption Act, 1913 – Tenancy rights of plaintiffs not supported by evidence.

Concurrent Findings – Scope of Second Appeal – Concurrent findings of lower courts based on proper appreciation of evidence – High Court cannot interfere with such findings unless specific exceptions are met – Reference to Supreme Court judgments on the scope of second appeals.

Decision: Appeals dismissed. Lower courts' judgments affirmed. Plaintiffs' suit to pre-empt the sale dismissed. Rival pre-emptors Samey Singh and Partap's suit decreed, affirming their right to pre-empt based on co-sharer status.

Habeas Corpus – Custody of Minor – Allegations of Sexual Offences – Mother filed writ petition for the release of minor daughter from Child Welfare Committee’s custody – Child taken into custody following registration of criminal case against father for sexual offences – Petitioner claimed allegations were false and child’s detention was unlawful – High Court directed child’s interim relocation to One Stop Centre for counselling and emotional support – Court emphasized child’s well-being and safety – Directions issued for child’s release to mother’s custody with strict conditions for protection and monitoring [Paras 1-16].

Parental Custody – Psychological Welfare – Court acknowledged significant distress and trauma experienced by minor due to institutionalization – Ordered child’s release to mother’s custody to prevent further emotional harm – Emphasized need for psychological support and continuous monitoring by Child Protection Officer – Ensured safety measures and non-contact with accused father [Paras 14-16].

Decision: Writ petition allowed – Child released from One Stop Centre to mother’s custody – Directions for protection, monitoring, and psychological support issued – Authorities directed to ensure non-contact with accused father [Paras 16a-16c].

Administrative Law – Decision-making by Regulatory Bodies – Pharmacy Council of India's decisions challenged – Colleges allege arbitrary rejection of approvals for conducting pharmacy courses – Court examines the procedure adopted by the Pharmacy Council and the adherence to regulatory standards – Emphasizes the need for reasoned and fair decision-making by statutory bodies [Paras 1-70].

Educational Institutions – Regulatory Approvals – Pharmacy colleges' eligibility for approval – Issues regarding compliance with infrastructure and faculty requirements – Court scrutinizes evidence and submissions from both parties – Highlights the importance of maintaining educational standards while ensuring fair regulatory oversight [Paras 11-45].

Writ Jurisdiction – Scope of Judicial Review – High Court's power to review decisions of regulatory bodies – Principles governing judicial intervention in administrative decisions – Court outlines the limits of judicial review, emphasizing deference to specialized bodies unless decisions are found to be arbitrary or lacking basis [Paras 50-60].

Decision:

Writ petitions partly allowed – Pharmacy Council of India's decisions set aside in specific cases – Directions issued for reconsideration of applications by the Pharmacy Council following proper procedure and criteria – Emphasis on transparency and reasoned decision-making in future approvals [Para 70].

Adverse Possession – Requirements – Plaintiff’s claim for adverse possession dismissed – Both the Trial Court and First Appellate Court found the plaintiff failed to establish the requisite animus for adverse possession – Emphasis on the necessity of proving continuous and hostile possession – Appeal dismissed on similar grounds, confirming lower courts’ findings [Paras 1-5].

Permanent Injunction – Proof of Possession – Plaintiff restricted his claim to permanent injunction on appeal – Courts reiterated that lawful possession must be proved to grant an injunction – Absence of substantial documentary or oral evidence led to dismissal – Appellant’s reliance on admissions by defendant’s witnesses deemed insufficient without corroborative evidence [Paras 3-5].

Substantial Question of Law – Non-existence – High Court declined to frame substantial questions of law as required under Section 100 CPC – Held that concurrent findings of fact by lower courts did not warrant interference – Emphasis on the principle that substantial questions of law arise only in the presence of significant errors in law or procedural misapplications [Paras 4-5].

Decision – Regular Second Appeal dismissed – High Court upheld the findings of both the Trial Court and the First Appellate Court – Reiterated that neither adverse possession nor lawful possession for the purpose of injunction was proved by the plaintiff [Para 5].

Foreign Exchange Regulation – Contravention Allegations – ITC Limited challenged proceedings initiated under FERA for alleged unauthorized foreign exchange transactions – Key allegations include remittance of funds generated through counter trade and failure to repatriate amounts to India – Searches at ITC premises and recording of statements of executives supported allegations [Paras 1-14].

Adjudication and Criminal Proceedings – Impact of Exoneration – Petitioner exonerated in departmental adjudication proceedings – High Court analyzed whether such exoneration on merits could quash criminal proceedings – Reference made to Supreme Court precedents emphasizing that criminal proceedings cannot continue if adjudication exoneration on merits demonstrates allegations are unsustainable [Paras 15-40].

Merits of Evidence – Reliance on Executive Statements – Examination of statements from ITC executives and directors revealed inconsistencies – Adjudicating authority found statements to be general, vague, and unsupported by concrete evidence – High Court upheld adjudicating authority’s conclusions, determining that continuation of criminal proceedings would be an abuse of process [Paras 41-55].

Decision – Revisional Application Allowed – Held – Complaint case pending before Metropolitan Magistrate quashed – High Court reiterated the principle that criminal prosecution must cease when adjudicatory findings on merits exonerate accused of all allegations – Emphasized adherence to higher standards of proof in criminal cases [Paras 56-60].

Civil Procedure – Production of Additional Documents – Petitioner challenged the order of the Trial Court that partially allowed the application under Order VII Rule 14 CPC – Contention that documents were highly relevant for adjudication of the matter and were improperly excluded – Trial Court found the reasons for delay in preparing documents irrelevant – High Court dismissed the petition on grounds of unreasonable delay in filing and lack of cogent explanation for not producing documents earlier [Paras 1-37].

Petition under Article 227 – Timeliness and Diligence – Petition filed 21 months after the impugned order without sufficient explanation for delay – Court emphasized need for timely filing and reasonable explanations for delays – Petitioner’s conduct and lack of urgency noted as factors against them [Paras 22-26, 37].

Order VII Rule 14 CPC – Requirements and Discretion – Rule mandates that documents should be produced with the plaint unless leave of court is obtained – Petitioner’s failure to justify delay and improper reasons for document preparation highlighted – Court stressed that discretion under Rule 14 must be exercised judiciously with sound reasons [Paras 27-28, 36].

Decision: Petition Dismissed – Held – No interference with the Trial Court’s order – Petitioner’s explanations deemed insufficient and their conduct noted as not diligent or vigilant in pursuing the case [Paras 37].

Execution of Decree – Back Wages Liability – Petitioner, an Education Officer, challenged orders directing her to pay back wages to the decree holder, a terminated Assistant Teacher – School Tribunal's judgment reinstating the teacher with back wages became final – High Court held State Government primarily liable for payment, not the individual officer – Orders of Executing Court directing personal recovery against Education Officer modified to impose liability on State Government – Petition dismissed with directions for the State to comply with the Tribunal’s judgment [Paras 1-35].

Superintendence of High Court – Article 227 of the Constitution – High Court's power to vary orders of the Executing Court – Emphasized need for prompt compliance with judicial orders to prevent frustration of decrees – Directed State Government to pay outstanding dues promptly and granted liberty to recover amounts from School Management [Paras 31-35].

Decision – Writ Petition dismissed – Held – Executing Court’s orders modified – State Government directed to pay full back wages to the decree holder and recover from the School Management if necessary – No stay on the judgment despite request from State Government [Paras 28-36].