Land Acquisition – Higher Compensation – BDA Act vs. 2013 Act – LA Act incorporated into BDA Act remains applicable – High Court erred in applying 2013 Act to BDA acquisitions – 2013 Act provisions not applicable where BDA Act governs acquisition – Repeal of LA Act does not affect ongoing BDA proceedings [Paras 1-24].

Legislation by Incorporation – Provisions of LA Act within BDA Act – Section 36 of BDA Act mandates that LA Act provisions as incorporated remain effective – Subsequent amendments to LA Act do not alter incorporated provisions – Consistent legal precedent upholding this principle [Paras 12-16].

Judicial Precedent – Misapplication of Offshore Holdings Private Limited Case – High Court misinterpreted principles of incorporation vs. reference – BDA Act remains self-contained code with selective incorporation of LA Act – Constitutional Bench’s findings in Offshore Holdings reaffirmed [Paras 22-23].

Decision: Applications allowed – High Court judgment in Sri Sudhakar Hegde case overruled – 2013 Act not applicable to acquisitions under BDA Act – LA Act provisions, as incorporated, continue to govern BDA acquisitions.

Hindu Law – Succession – Self-acquired Property – Inheritance Rights – Property of a male Hindu dying intestate – Daughter’s right to inherit – Property to devolve by inheritance, not survivorship – Daughter entitled to inherit father’s self-acquired property in preference to collaterals – Recognized under old customary Hindu Law and judicial pronouncements [Paras 1-79].

Hindu Succession Act, 1956 – Section 15 – Order of Succession – Female Hindu’s property – Scheme under Section 15 – Property to devolve on her own heirs, failing which, on heirs of her father – Distinction between property inherited from father/mother and husband/father-in-law – Ensuring inherited property of issueless female reverts to the source [Paras 66-76].

Decision: Appeal allowed – Judgment and decree of the Trial Court and High Court set aside – Suit decreed – Ramasamy Gounder's daughters entitled to 1/5th share each in the suit properties.

Specific Performance – Readiness and Willingness – Financial Capacity and Conduct – Court must assess both financial capacity and conduct of the plaintiff in determining readiness and willingness – Delay in performance, conduct inconsistent with agreement obligations, or inequitable benefit to plaintiff can bar specific performance – Contractual obligations, particularly regarding discharge of encumbrances, must be clear and adhered to by both parties [Paras 1-29].

Equitable Relief – Discretionary Nature – Section 20 of Specific Relief Act – Specific performance is discretionary – Court considers conduct of parties, escalation of property prices, and fairness in granting relief – Plaintiff’s failure to consistently demonstrate readiness and willingness impacts entitlement to specific performance [Paras 30-36].

Decision: Appeal allowed – High Court judgment set aside – Specific performance not granted due to respondent’s lack of demonstrated readiness and willingness – Appellants directed to refund advance amount with interest.

Land Tax – Vested Forest Lands – Validity of Ownership – Respondents' claims to ownership based on canceled jenmam rights and purchase certificates – Forest Tribunal's ruling against respondents stands unchallenged – Acceptance of basic tax from respondents would wrongly imply ownership – Appeal allowed [Paras 1-7].

Judicial Review – Role of Civil Courts – Forest Tribunal Jurisdiction – Civil courts lack jurisdiction over vested forest land disputes – Exclusive jurisdiction of Forest Tribunal upheld – High Court’s mandamus for tax acceptance reversed to prevent creation of implied ownership rights [Paras 6-7].

Decision: Appeal allowed – High Court’s judgments set aside – No acceptance of basic tax from respondents for vested forest lands.

Competition Law – Jurisdiction of CCI – Anti-competitive Practices – CCI's role in investigating bid rigging, collusive bidding, and cartelization in lottery tenders – Lottery business regulated under Lotteries (Regulation) Act but CCI jurisdiction affirmed for anti-competitive aspects – Premature High Court intervention criticized – Proceedings remanded to CCI for completion [Paras 1-44].

Legal Interpretation – Service Definition – Inclusive Definition of Service under Section 2(u) of Competition Act – Services related to lottery distribution fall under Competition Act – Doctrine of res extra commercium not applicable to anti-competitive practices in regulated businesses [Paras 36-39].

Decision: High Court judgment set aside – CCI to proceed with investigation – State of Mizoram's writ petition closed – Private parties' writ petitions dismissed – Proceedings to conclude per Competition Act.

Trade Marks – Infringement – Identical Marks – Defendant’s use of a mark identical to the plaintiff’s registered mark – Presumption of confusion – Section 29 of Trade Marks Act applied – High Court erred by not acknowledging the legislative scheme presuming confusion when identical marks are used for similar goods/services – Appeal allowed with injunction granted [Paras 1-29].

Trade Marks – Honest Concurrent Use – Defendants' claim of good faith use rejected – Evidence showed deliberate adoption of plaintiff’s well-known mark – Registration and prior use rights upheld – Plaintiff's extensive use and reputation recognized [Paras 30-36].

Decision: Appeal allowed – High Court judgment set aside – Injunction granted against respondents from using "SAI RENAISSANCE" or any deceptively similar mark – Permanent injunction and removal of infringing materials ordered.

Promotion – Inspector General of Police's Authority – Punjab Police Rules – IG's power to review SP's recommendations for promotion under the 10% outstanding performance quota – Rule 13.7(14) empowers IG to scrutinize and approve SP's list – SP's recommendation not final until IG's approval – Three-stage scrutiny required for selection as Head Constable under 10% quota – State level comparative merit considered – Appeal dismissed [Paras 1-9].

Judicial Review – Decision-Making Process – Courts to review process, not decision – No arbitrariness in selection process – IG's scrutiny and approval justified – No indefinite right to promotion based on SP's recommendation [Paras 8-9].

Decision: Appeal dismissed – High Court judgment upheld – IG's scrutiny and approval powers affirmed – No right to retrospective promotion based on SP's initial recommendation.

Criminal Law – Murder vs. Grievous Hurt – IPC Sections 302 and 326 – Conviction converted by High Court – Deceased died due to head injury after six days – Head injury considered fatal and on a vital part of the body – Mere absence of fracture not sufficient to downgrade conviction – High Court’s conversion of conviction to Section 326 IPC erroneous – Appeal allowed [Paras 1-8].

Evidence – Medical Evidence – Post-Mortem Report – Cause of death due to head injury – Congestion and subdural hematoma over both temporal lobes – Internal injuries can be fatal despite absence of external fractures – High Court failed to consider full medical evidence [Para 7].

Judicial Review – Appellate Interference – High Court’s erroneous application of law – Reinstatement of trial court’s judgment – Conviction under Section 302 IPC for intentional causing of fatal head injury upheld [Paras 7-8].

Decision: Appeal allowed – High Court’s judgment set aside – Conviction under Section 302 IPC and Section 302/34 IPC restored – Respondents to undergo life imprisonment as ordered by the trial court.

Service Law – Departmental Proceedings – Jurisdictional Error – High Court erred in acting as an appellate court on merits – Departmental inquiry found respondent guilty of misconduct based on preponderance of evidence – Tribunal's findings on fraud and forgery upheld – Evidence led by the bank sufficient – High Court's remittance to Tribunal for expert opinion unnecessary – Appeal allowed [Paras 14-20].

Standard of Proof – Departmental vs. Criminal Proceedings – Standard of proof in departmental inquiries lower than criminal proceedings – Preponderance of probability sufficient – Handwriting expert not essential when sufficient evidence exists – Legal precedent supports lower standard for disciplinary actions [Para 17].

Decision: Appeal allowed – High Court's judgment set aside – Industrial Tribunal's award upheld – Respondent's dismissal from service justified and proportionate to misconduct.