In a pivotal 2026 judgment, the High Court of Madhya Pradesh ruled that an eviction suit for a commercial property under statutory grounds does not automatically qualify as a commercial dispute under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. Read the comprehensive analysis of Kanhaiya Lal Aswani v. Deepak Manohar Lal Chawala.
When a railway employee transitions from a physically demanding “running” post to a “stationary” role, they often face administrative hurdles regarding their pay fixation. A recurring flashpoint is the “Running Allowance”—a special pay element granted to running staff. What happens…
Petitioner was an elected official, and her peers vote her out of office. But what if the formal letter inviting her to that exact meeting arrived a few days late? Does a technical delay invalidate a democratic vote? In a…
This blog explores a Judgment of MPHC in a POCSO matter discussing rarest of rare doctrine.
MPHC ruled in Vijay Kumar Sharma's case that an acquittal does not guarantee back wages for suspended public servants. The law allows discretion in salary decisions based on suspension justification, emphasizing that an acquittal's nature and the department's prior actions significantly influence outcomes.
For many government employees working from a long time but having not been regularised, the transition from active service to a peaceful retirement is often obstructed by a single, technical word: "Ad-hoc." By applying the 10-year Uma Devi mandate, the Court quashed the State's rejection order and directed full regularization of service from 1987. This judgment serves as a vital shield for long-term employees, reinforcing that the State cannot "take the benefit of its own wrong" to deny earned retirement security.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has reiterated that a suit for permanent injunction is maintainable without seeking a declaration of title when the plaintiff’s title is clear and not under a legal “cloud.” A mere wrongful claim by the defendant cannot compel the plaintiff to file a declaratory suit.
In a significant ruling, the Madhya Pradesh High Court (Indore Bench) has clarified that payment by cheque constitutes a valid legal tender for satisfying a court decree unless the decree specifically requires another mode of payment.
In Parth Credit and Capital Market Pvt. Ltd. v. Ideal Electronics Pvt. Ltd., Justice Alok Awasthi held that an executing court cannot impose new conditions beyond the terms of the decree. The Court emphasized that in modern commercial practice a cheque represents cash, and if honored, payment legally relates back to the date of its tender.
The ruling reinforces a key principle of execution law: courts must prioritize substance over technical objections when a judgment debtor shows bona fide intent to comply with a compromise decree.
In the recent judgment of Ayyaz Mohammad vs. State of MP, the High Court reaffirms that an ossification test is a last resort. Learn how the "first available basis" rule under the JJ Act prioritizes school registers over medical opinions.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has clarified that non-filing of the FSL report along with the charge-sheet does not automatically entitle an accused to default bail under NDPS law. Here’s what the court held and what it means for your case.
