A Party Who Relinquishes a Claim in a Suit Cannot File a Subsequent One on That Claim

Posted inCivil Cases & ProceeduresNo Comments
A plaintiff who intentionally omits or relinquishes a part of their claim is permanently barred from filing a subsequent suit to recover that claim, as per Order II Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC). The Supreme Court held this in Cuddalore Powergen Corporation Ltd. vs. M/s Chemplast Cuddalore Vinyls Limited [2025 INSC 73].

Inclusion in Promotion Select List Not Possible When Vigilance Preliminary Establishes Charge

Posted inCorruption Cases and Related MattersNo Comments
An officer against whom a vigilance proceeding is initiated following a preliminary enquiry, which prima facie establishes the charge, is ineligible for inclusion in a promotion select list under the Kerala State and Subordinate Services Rules (KS&SSR), observed the Kerala High Court in Anoop Varkey v. G.S. Sajiprasad & Ors. [2025: KER:31193].

Supreme Court Cautions Against Growing Trend of Vexatious Matrimonial Cases

Posted inFamily, Marriage & DivorceNo Comments
In Ishwar Chand Sharma & Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another [2026 INSC 587], the Supreme Court observed that a growing trend of vexatious matrimonial litigation involving omnibus allegations, false POCSO complaints, and misuse of criminal law as an "arm-twisting tactic" is burdening courts and causing harassment to innocent persons, while simultaneously overshadowing genuine cases that deserve urgent judicial attention.

Limitation Does Not Apply to a Probate Petition so long as The Object of the Will Survives

Posted inWill & Related MattersNo Comments
In Sanjay Sharma @ Sanjay Bhardwaj v. Krishnadhan Khaware and Ors. [2026 INSC 708], the Supreme Court, while considering the limited issue of whether an application for probate was barred by limitation, held that the right to apply for probate is a continuous right that can be exercised at any time so long as the object of the Will survives.

Well-Founded Material Evidence, Not Mere Suspicion or Association, Required to Prove Criminal Conspiracy

Posted inCode of Criminal Procedures (CrPC)No Comments
In State of Kerala v. P. Sugathan & Anr. [AIR 2000 SC 3323] Supreme Court of India underscored the need for strict material evidence for proving criminal conspiracy under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code. It ruled that an agreement is the core of conspiracy, requiring clear, physical manifestation rather than mere suspicion.

Proving the Signature of the Testator and Its Attestation Not Sufficient to Prove the Will When Suspicious Circumstances Exist

Posted inWill & Related Matters
Proof of a will is not just proving the signature of the testator on the Will and its attestation in terms of Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act; rather it is an exercise to satisfy the Court's conscience that the testator had signed the Will with free will being aware of its contents and after understanding the nature and effect of the dispositions in the Will, observed the Supreme Court in Sardari Lal v. Bishan Dass & Ors [2026 INSC 669].

Prior Sanction Not Needed in Cases Relating to Misappropriation of Funds

Posted inCorruption Cases and Related Matters
Prior Sanction under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 is required only where the alleged offence is relatable to any recommendation made or any decision taken, by the public servant in discharge of official functions or duties and in all other cases, prior approval is not required, observed Kerala High court in Mini M. v. State of Kerala and Another [2026:KER:36757].