LawLoveLegal

The Supreme Court of India, in a recent landmark judgment, has reaffirmed the interpretation of Section 108 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 , holding that a person who goes missing cannot be presumed dead on the date of disappearance. The presumption of death, according to law, arises only after the expiry of seven years , unless concrete evidence proves an earlier date of death. Facts of the Case The case originated from an appeal filed by the Nagpur Municipal Corporation against a Bombay High Court ruling that directed it to grant compassionate employment to the son of an employee, Gulab Mahagu Bawankule , who had gone missing on September 1, 2012 . The High Court had erroneously treated the date of disappearance as the date of death, thereby ordering compassionate appointment to the missing employee’s son. However, the Supreme Court, comprising Justices Pankaj Mithal and PB Varale , found this reasoning legally flawed. The Court clarified that, in the absence of proof regard...

Introduction In a landmark judgment impacting the transfer and inheritance of tenancy rights, the Bombay High Court held that tenancy rights cannot be bequeathed through a will if such transfer breaches the contractual terms between a tenant and landlord. Justice Gauri Godse delivered this ruling, emphasizing that permitting such bequests would effectively allow tenancy rights to be transferred to strangers, contrary to the intent and terms of tenancy agreements. Background of the Case The case involved a 2,000-square-foot flat and garage located in the Queen’s Court Building , near Oval Maidan, Churchgate, Mumbai . The property was owned by the Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) and leased to Dr. Darasahah Bharucha on May 19, 1986 . After the death of Dr. Bharucha’s wife, Tehmina, the tenancy was transferred to him. Following Dr. Bharucha’s death on September 11, 1994 , his niece Nilofer Marshall , the daughter of his cousin, continued to occupy the flat. Marshall cl...

The Supreme Court of India has referred a significant legal question to a larger bench —how should the income of Indians working abroad be assessed for calculating compensation in road accident cases within India? This development comes amid conflicting judicial precedents on whether to calculate compensation based on the deceased’s full foreign income or to adjust it in line with Indian cost-of-living standards. Background of the Case: The Death of Hari Shankar Brahma The matter arose from an appeal filed by the family of Hari Shankar Brahma , a 27-year-old system analyst employed with Nihaki Systems Inc., New Jersey (USA) , who tragically died in a road accident in India in 2009. At the time of his death, he earned $47,050 per year (around ₹21 lakh) . His parents and siblings sought compensation before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 . The Tribunal calculated compensation based on his US income with standard deductions, awarding ₹...

The Supreme Court of India has delivered a landmark judgment settling a long-standing ambiguity in property law concerning minors’ rights over property sales executed by their guardians without prior court approval. The decision, pronounced by a bench comprising Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice PB Varale , establishes that minors, upon attaining majority, are not required to move the court to cancel such transactions — repudiation through their actions or conduct is sufficient under the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 . Case Background: The Dispute Over Two Plots in Karnataka The judgment arose from an appeal filed by KS Shivappa , who purchased two adjoining plots in Davanagere, Karnataka, from two brothers after they attained majority. These plots were originally purchased in 1971 by their father and natural guardian, Rudrappa , in the names of his minor sons. Soon after, Rudrappa sold both plots without obtaining the mandatory court permission required under Section 8(...

Introduction In a significant ruling safeguarding the rights and safety of minors, the Bombay High Court rejected the bail plea of a 28-year-old man from Kharghar , accused of repeatedly sexually assaulting his 11-year-old niece . The judgment underscores the judiciary’s unwavering stance that protection of society and potential victims , especially children, must outweigh the personal liberty of habitual offenders under such serious charges. The bench of Justice Amit Borkar observed that granting bail to the accused would not only “send a wrong message to society” but also endanger the victim’s safety and compromise the integrity of the ongoing trial. Case Background The accused, a married man, was arrested by Panvel City Police for raping his 11-year-old niece , making this his fourth case of child sexual abuse. According to the prosecution, the accused exploited the young girl over several years, beginning when she was just 8 years old . The child’s father was incarcerate...

Fugitive diamantaire Nirav Modi , accused in the ₹14,000 crore Punjab National Bank (PNB) scam , has hinted at “sensational developments” in his ongoing extradition proceedings in the United Kingdom. The statement was made before Justice Simon Tinkler at the Royal Courts of Justice, London , where Nirav appeared in an unrelated debt recovery case filed by the Bank of India . Nirav, currently lodged in a London prison since 2019, told the court that he remains “extremely hopeful” of either being discharged or granted bail when the extradition case reopens next month. His remarks came as he continues to represent himself in multiple ongoing cases in the UK courts. Background: From India’s Most Wanted to UK’s High-Security Prison Nirav Modi is wanted in India for fraud and money laundering related to fake Letters of Undertaking (LoUs) issued by the PNB’s Brady House branch, which enabled him to siphon off nearly $2 billion . He was arrested in March 2019 in London and has been ...

Supreme Court’s Landmark Decision The Supreme Court of India upheld the Gujarat High Court’s decision permitting the partial demolition of the 400-year-old Mancha Masjid in Ahmedabad to facilitate a road-widening project . The Court emphasized that the move was driven by public interest and not a violation of religious freedom under the Constitution. A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi clarified that the main mosque structure will remain intact , with only a portion of the vacant land and platform being affected. The Court further noted that the development plan included similar demolitions of a temple , a commercial building , and a residential house , indicating that the action was not discriminatory or targeted . Religious Rights vs. Property Rights The Supreme Court categorically stated that Article 25 of the Constitution — which guarantees the right to freely profess, practice, and propagate religion — does not apply in this case. Instead, the dispute...

The Himachal Pradesh High Court, in a significant judgment delivered on October 14, 2025 , upheld the state government’s complete ownership of Mashobra Resort Limited (MRL) —the joint venture that once co-owned the prestigious Wildflower Hall property with East India Hotels (EIH) , part of the Oberoi Group . The verdict marks the end of a nearly three-decade legal battle between the state and the EIH Group, affirming the government’s exclusive rights over the property, assets, and profits associated with the luxury resort. Court Ruling: State Declared Sole Owner of Mashobra Resort Limited According to the Himachal Pradesh High Court’s order , the entire ownership of the joint venture company (MRL) and its assets now rest with the Himachal Pradesh government . The court declared that: The bank balance of approximately ₹320 crore belonging to the joint venture company would be transferred to the state . An additional ₹25 crore is to be paid to the state as per an arbitra...