Civil Law - Specific Performance - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Section 96 and Order XLI Rule 1 - Appeal against Trial Court judgment refusing specific performance of sale agreement dated 12.01.2005 - Plaintiff and Defendant 7 jointly agreed to purchase agricultural land from Defendants 1-6 - Performance was contingent on an MOU with Defendant 8 to cancel a prior 2004 agreement - Plaintiff's cheques for Rs. 1.11 crores issued to Defendant 8 were dishonoured - Trial Court found Plaintiff lacked financial capacity as his bank balance was only Rs. 4,166 against a required contribution of Rs. 35 lakhs - Trial Court ordered refund of advance with 12 percent interest but denied specific performance - During High Court proceedings parties filed an unsigned joint memo for settlement of Rs. 5 crores - Held - Trial Court correctly found lack of readiness and willingness due to financial incapacity - Appeal disposed of in terms of the settlement for Rs. 5 crores as full and final satisfaction of all claims - [Paras 1-51].

Evidence Law - Readiness and Willingness - Specific Relief - Financial Capacity - Assessment of financial resources - Plaintiff produced a letter from his father-in-law promising financial assistance of Rs. 45 lakhs - Letter was not corroborated and the author was not examined as a witness - Plaintiff's bank statements showed negligible balance during the performance period - Held - Financial capacity is a fundamental requirement to prove readiness and willingness - Mere self-serving documents without corroborative evidence are insufficient to establish the ability to perform a contract - [Paras 25-28].

Civil Law - Conditional Contract - Unenforceability - Linked Agreements - Sale agreement validity was subject to the cancellation of a prior 2004 agreement through a separate MOU - MOU required payment to a third party which failed due to dishonour of cheques - Held - When a contract is contingent upon the performance of a secondary obligation which remains unfulfilled - the primary agreement remains unenforceable - No fraud found in subsequent alienation of property to a third party when the original purchasers failed to perform - [Paras 40-47].

Civil Law - Settlement - Full and Final Settlement - Compromise during appeal - Respondents agreed to pay Rs. 5,00,00,000 to the Appellant via banker's cheque after TDS deduction - Appellant agreed to relinquish all claims over the suit schedule property - Held - Settlement accepted voluntarily without coercion - Respondents directed to pay the amount within four weeks - Trial Court decree modified to reflect the settlement - [Paras 48-51].

Decision: Appeal disposed of in terms of the settlement – Respondents directed to pay Rs. 5,00,00,000 to the Appellant within four weeks – Judgment and decree of the Trial Court affirmed with modification regarding the settlement amount.

Civil Law - Decree on Admissions - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Order XII Rule 6 - Suit for possession and recovery of rent - Respondent landlord inducted Appellant No 1 as tenant via registered lease - During subsistence of tenancy Respondent entered into Agreement to Sell with Appellant No 2 father of Appellant No 1 - Agreement stipulated that the purchaser would continue as tenant and pay monthly rent until execution of Sale Deed - Appellants defaulted on rent and failed to execute Sale Deed - Respondent terminated tenancy via legal notice - Trial Court passed decree for possession based on admissions regarding landlord-tenant relationship and termination of tenancy - Appellants challenged decree contending possession was protected by the Agreement to Sell - High Court found that the Agreement was unregistered and the Sale Deed never materialized - Held - Trial Court rightly identified that ingredients for decree under Order XII Rule 6 being relationship of landlord-tenant and termination of tenancy were satisfied - appeal dismissed - [Paras 1-46].

Property Law - Part Performance - Transfer of Property Act 1882 - Section 53A - Registration Act 1908 - Section 17(1)(A) - Protection of possession under unregistered agreement - Appellants claimed right to protect possession based on Agreement to Sell dated 03.08.2011 - Documents containing contracts to transfer immovable property for consideration must be registered to claim benefit of Section 53A of Transfer of Property Act as per 2001 amendment to Registration Act - Unregistered Agreement to Sell has no legal effect for the purposes of Section 53A - Prospective buyer has no right to seek protection of possession particularly when inducted as a tenant - Held - Appellants cannot use unregistered agreement as a shield to resist eviction - [Paras 38-42].

Property Law - Contract for Sale - Transfer of Property Act 1882 - Section 54 - Right in personam vs Right in estate - A contract for sale does not of itself create any interest in or charge on property - It merely creates a right to obtain another document in the form of a registered sale deed - It is a right created in personam and not in estate - No privity in estate arises from a contract for sale to bind the estate unlike a mortgage or lease - Till a decree for specific performance is obtained and sale deed executed the vendor remains entitled to full enjoyment of the property - Held - The status of the Appellants as tenants continues until the execution of a Sale Deed - [Paras 35-37].

Decision: Appeal dismissed – Trial Court judgment and decree for possession under Order XII Rule 6 CPC affirmed – Pending applications disposed of.

Criminal Law - Rape and Sexual Assault - Indian Penal Code 1860 - Section 376 - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012 - Section 6 - Appellant-neighbor accused of abducting a 10-year-old girl from her home at midnight and raping her in a village school - Victim found unconscious with multiple internal and external injuries including hymen laceration - Victim identified the appellant by name upon regaining consciousness - Trial Court convicted appellant under Section 376 IPC and Section 6 POCSO Act sentencing him to life imprisonment - Appellant challenged the conviction citing inconsistencies and alleging the victim was a tutored witness - High Court found the victim testimony consistent and medically supported by the testimony of the doctor - Held - Prosecution proved the case beyond reasonable doubt - Conviction and sentence affirmed - Appeal dismissed - [Paras 1-39].

Evidence Law - Sole Testimony of Prosecutrix - Indian Evidence Act 1872 - Section 118 - Sterling Witness - Conviction based on solitary evidence of the victim in sexual offences - High Court revisited the settled law that if the victim evidence is found to be wholly reliable and inspires total confidence it can be made the sole basis for conviction without further corroboration - Court categorized oral testimony into wholly reliable-wholly unreliable-and neither wholly reliable nor wholly unreliable - Held - The victim was a sterling witness who stood firm during cross-examination - Her evidence was natural and consistent with the case of the prosecution - Minor contradictions or insignificant discrepancies should not be a ground for throwing out an otherwise reliable prosecution case - [Paras 24-35].

Criminal Law - Sentencing - POCSO Act 2012 - Objective of Stringent Punishment - Protection of children from sexual abuse - Court noted the gruesome nature of the crime and its lifelong impact on the minor victim mind and growth - Held - The POCSO Act was enacted to provide more stringent punishments for such obnoxious acts to protect children - The severity of the offence and its impact on the victim health and growth justify the stringent life imprisonment sentence - [Paras 36-37].

Decision: Appeal dismissed – Judgment and order of conviction dated 24.08.2018 affirmed – Appellant directed to serve the remaining sentence.

Civil Law - Second Appeal - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Section 100 - Recovery of Professional Fees - Appellant engaged Respondent as Advocate in labor litigations - Employer paid Rs 80000 total compensation to Respondent on behalf of Appellant - Respondent retained Rs 60000 and returned only Rs 20000 - Appellant sued for recovery of balance - Respondent filed counterclaim for Rs 36000 as professional fees - Trial Court decreed main suit but dismissed counterclaim citing lack of evidence of fee bill - First Appellate Court upheld main decree but allowed counterclaim finding consensus between parties on fee amount and lack of proof of payment by Appellant - High Court observed that while Respondent conduct in retaining entire amount was unfair the oral evidence established the agreed fee and Appellant failure to pay - Held - No substantial question of law arises as First Appellate Court rightly appreciated evidence regarding non-payment of fees - Second Appeal dismissed - [Paras 1-50].

Civil Law - Counterclaim - Indian Evidence Act 1872 - Sections 3 and 101 - Proof of Debt - Respondent-Advocate failed to prove original fee bill Mark DW1/A in accordance with Law - Appellant however did not state in pleadings or evidence that he had paid the agreed fee amount - Oral evidence and party conduct established the professional fee was due and unpaid - Held - Decree of counterclaim is sustainable as non-production of a bill is not fatal when consensus on the debt exists and no proof of payment is rendered - [Paras 47-49].

Decision: Appeal dismissed – Judgment and decree dated 22.12.2023 passed by the First Appellate Court stands affirmed.

Writ Law - Custodial Death - Constitution of India - Article 21 - Mandatory Compensation - Petitioner’s husband Santosh Hojai was forcibly picked up from his residence by gunmen in civil dress later identified as police personnel - Victim was taken to the office of the Superintendent of Police Dima Hasao and tortured in a room called CDR Room - Victim died in a police vehicle while being moved after suffering severe lathi blows and physical abuse - Accused police officials including a Superintendent of Police and Deputy Superintendent of Police buried the body in a jungle and destroyed evidence by tearing General Diary pages and erasing arms registers - CID investigation resulted in a charge sheet under Sections 302 and 120(B) IPC - State contended that compensation cannot be granted until the criminal trial reaches finality and that no provision exists for high compensation amounts - High Court found that the fact of custodial death was established through the charge sheet and investigation - Held - use of third-degree methods is offensive to Article 21 - State is liable for the barbaric acts of its officials - Palliative compensation of Rs. 20,00,000 awarded in addition to Rs. 5,00,000 already paid - [Paras 1-61].

Constitutional Law - Public Law Remedy - Article 226 - Nature of Relief - Compensation for violation of fundamental rights is a remedy available in public law based on strict liability - Sovereign immunity does not apply to contravention of fundamental rights - Award in public law is in addition to remedies in private law for tort - Award is palliative in nature to make the right to life meaningful - Held - compensation can be awarded during the pendency of a trial or even before the trial starts if the infringement of the right to life is established - [Paras 31-43].

Criminal Law - Police Misconduct - Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Section 50 and 50-A - Arrest Procedure - Police personnel kidnapped the victim and detained him without complying with the mandate of law regarding arrest and notification to relatives - Violation of Articles 22(1) and 22(5) of the Constitution of India - Ratio Decidendi - Custodial torture is a naked violation of human dignity and the State must repair the damage done by its officers to individual rights - [Paras 29-30 and 56].

Decision: Petition allowed – Respondent State directed to pay a sum of Rs. 20,00,000 to the petitioner as palliative compensation in addition to Rs. 5,00,000 already paid – State at liberty to recover the total amount from erring officials found guilty in trial.

Criminal Law - Bail - Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985 - Sections 21, 25, 27-A and 29 - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 - Section 483 - Arms Act - Section 25 - Petitioner arrested following a tip-off regarding a drone-based smuggling network - Recovery of 1 kg heroin from a car occupied by co-accused Jaskaran and Amritpal while petitioner was later intercepted with 6 pistols and cash - State opposed bail citing the recovery of commercial quantity of heroin and the statutory bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act - Petitioner argued parity with co-accused already released and highlighted 8.5 months of incarceration with the investigation complete - Court observed that the contraband heroin was not recovered from the direct possession of the petitioner and that the trial was unlikely to conclude in the near future - Held - Prolonged incarceration militates against the precious fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution and in such situations the constitutional principles must override the statutory embargo contained under Section 37 of the NDPS Act - Petition allowed - [Paras 1-25].

Criminal Law - Statutory Embargo vs Fundamental Rights - Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985 - Section 37 - Constitution of India - Article 21 - Conflict between the twin conditions for bail in commercial quantity cases and the right to liberty - Court followed the principles laid down in Mohd. Muslim and Rabi Prakash - Grant of bail on account of undue delay in trial is not fettered by Section 37 of the NDPS Act - Right to a speedy trial is a part of reasonable fair and just procedure - Prolonged incarceration and inordinate delay in trial conclusion justify the grant of bail even in commercial quantity cases - Held - Constitutional principles of liberty and speedy trial override statutory restrictions when incarceration is prolonged and trial progress is slow - [Paras 10-15, 21-22].

Criminal Law - Parity and Judicial Discretion - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 - Section 483 - Entitlement to bail based on release of co-accused and lack of direct possession - Petitioner sought parity with co-accused Amandeep and Harkirat who were previously granted bail - Court noted that the only allegation against the petitioner involved the recovery of pistols and not the commercial quantity of narcotics - Observed that the detention of the petitioner in judicial lock-up was not serving any further purpose as the investigation was complete - Held - Principles of parity and the fundamental postulate of presumption of innocence necessitate the grant of bail where no evidence exists of potential evidence tampering or flight risk - [Paras 7, 18-20].

Decision: Petition allowed – Petitioner ordered to be released on bail upon furnishing personal bond and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial court – Subject to conditions of non-interference with witnesses, notification of address changes, and restrictions on leaving India without prior permission.

Civil Law - Title Suit - Limitation - Abatement - Second Appeal filed against reversal of trial court decree which had initially favored the plaintiff - Original owner Ganesh Mahto died in 1942 leaving widow Nirsi Devi and biological son Bhakti Mahto - Widow had two sons from a previous marriage who were uterine brothers of the plaintiff - In 1946 widow executed a registered Batwaranama or partition deed allotting half share to her sons from the first marriage while the plaintiff was a minor - Plaintiff attained majority in 1950 but failed to challenge the deed within three years - Uterine brothers executed sale deeds in 1973 and 1976 in favor of defendant no. 3 - Trial court decreed the suit holding that uterine brothers had no title and the partition deed was a mere paper transaction - First Appellate Court reversed the decree holding the suit barred by Article 58 and Article 60 of the Limitation Act and found defendants in adverse possession - During pendency of the second appeal respondent no. 1 who was defendant no. 2 died and his legal heirs were not substituted - High Court found that the estate of the vendors was unrepresented and a contrary view would lead to conflicting decrees - Held - Non-substitution of a necessary party whose interest is inseparable from the surviving parties leads to the abatement of the entire appeal - technically no relief can be granted to the appellants - [Paras 1-32].

Civil Law - Limitation - Limitation Act 1963 - Article 60 - Challenge to transfer by guardian - Registered partition deed executed by mother as natural guardian in 1946 while plaintiff was minor - Plaintiff attained majority in 1950 - Contented the deed was void ab initio - Court found the deed was voidable because it was executed by a guardian acting beyond authority but with a registered instrument - Article 60 prescribes a three-year limitation to set aside a transfer of property made by a guardian starting from the date the ward attains majority - Held - Having failed to challenge the registered Batwaranama within three years of attaining majority in 1950 the plaintiff cannot seek a declaration against the same in a suit filed in 1980 - [Paras 49-62].

Evidence Law - Adverse Possession - Limitation Act 1963 - Article 65 - Hostile Title - Defendants claimed title via a registered instrument from 1946 and remained in possession - Plaintiff claimed property was recorded in father's name and defendants were strangers to the male line of succession - High Court observed that defendants asserted title based on the 1946 deed and adoption story - Possession was supported by rent receipts in the name of defendants and success in Section 145 CrPC proceedings - Held - Where possession can be referred to a hostile assertion in denial of the title of the true owner for the statutory period of twelve years it matures into a valid title by way of adverse possession - [Paras 33-48].

Decision: Appeal dismissed – Judgment and decree of the first appellate court affirmed – No relief granted due to total abatement of the appeal.

Civil Law - Possession and Recovery of Money - Arrears of Licence Fee - Suit for recovery of money decreed by Trial Court and counter-claim for return of advance dismissed - Appellant-defendant intended to lease premises for automobile service centre and purchased existing machinery from previous tenant - Possession was taken on 01.06.2016 with an agreed monthly rent of Rs 2,50,000 but formal lease deed remained unregistered and unsigned - Appellant contested liability citing lack of physical possession and misrepresentation by landlord regarding availability of statutory licences - Evidence showed appellant kept machinery on premises and engaged security personnel - Advocate Commissioner report and electricity payments confirmed appellant's control over premises - Held - Retention of machinery and deployment of security constitutes actual physical possession making the occupant liable for damages for use and occupation - Trial Court decree affirmed - [Paras 1-13].

Evidence Law - Misrepresentation and Tenant’s Duty - Burden of Proof - Appellant contended that landlord misrepresented the building's suitability for an automobile workshop in a residential zone - DW1 admitted during cross-examination that information about previous tenant's licence was hearsay and that the appellant never actually applied for necessary permits - Building permit and occupancy certificate (Exts. A4 and A5) proved the building was classified as commercial - Held - A landlord cannot be found at fault for a tenant’s failure to conduct due diligence or for the tenant’s folly in not applying for licences - contentions of misrepresentation are devoid of merit - [Paras 9-12].

Civil Law - Unregistered Documents - Indian Registration Act 1908 - Section 49 - Collateral Purpose - Appellant argued that the draft lease deed (Ext. A3) could not be considered due to lack of registration - Court observed that the document was neither signed nor registered - However the terms of occupation and agreed rate of rent were established through admissions in the written statement and oral testimony of DW1 - Held - The absence of a registered deed does not absolve an occupant in actual possession from the liability to pay for use and occupation when the arrangement is otherwise proved by record - [Paras 14-16].

Decision: Appeal dismissed – Trial Court decree for realisation of licence fee/damages at the rate of Rs 2,50,000 per month from 01.12.2016 to 04.04.2018 with 6% interest per annum affirmed – Appellant to bear costs of the appeal.

Writ Law - Suspension of Look Out Circular - Constitution of India 1950 - Article 226 - Permission to travel abroad - Petitioner engaged in running a hospital sought interim suspension of LOC to attend four professional conferences in United Kingdom Netherlands and Switzerland - Respondent/SFIO opposed the application stating it was the fifth such request in thirteen months and that the investigation into serious financial irregularities was at a crucial stage - Respondent further alleged that the petitioner failed to furnish complete financial records despite previous undertakings - Court observed that the petitioner had been permitted to travel on four prior occasions and had returned to India each time while complying with conditions - Court noted that the petitioner’s family is settled in Chandigarh and he has deep roots in society which dilutes apprehension of being a flight risk - Held - Right to travel is balanced against the needs of an ongoing investigation - Application allowed and LOC suspended for the period from 09.06.2026 to 23.06.2026 subject to stringent conditions including furnishing security of Rs. 25 lacs and a personal bond - [Paras 1-20].

Criminal Law - Investigation - SFIO - Look Out Circular - Cooperation with Investigating Agency - Serious Fraud Investigation Office contended that the applicant failed to comply with previous undertakings to supply documents and that his physical availability was necessary for effective scrutiny of financial records - Petitioner asserted that he had been cooperating and providing necessary information - Court held that while investigation requires presence of the party the past conduct of the petitioner in returning to India supports the grant of temporary travel liberty - Held - Petitioner directed to furnish all documents sought by the investigating agency including bank statements and details of Key Managerial Personnel prior to traveling abroad - [Paras 11-15].

Decision: Application allowed – Look Out Circular (LOC) suspended from 09.06.2026 to 23.06.2026 – Petitioner permitted to travel abroad subject to furnishing security of Rs. 25 lacs and additional conditions regarding cooperation with the investigation.