The Supreme Court ruled that an uncle-in-law cannot adopt his niece’s husband as a “ghardamad” for inheritance unless such a custom is legally proved. Setting aside three concurrent judgments, the Court held that the alleged Oraon tribal custom lacked sufficient evidence under customary law.
The Supreme Court set aside NCLT and NCLAT orders in the Essel Infraprojects insolvency case after finding reliance on fake AI-generated judicial precedents. The Court adopted a zero-tolerance approach, holding that citing unverified AI-generated judgments amounts to professional misconduct by advocates.
The Supreme Court held that advocates cannot surrender or compromise a client’s substantive property rights without explicit authorisation. The Court ruled that a compromise decree based solely on a lawyer’s consent, without the client’s signature or approval, is legally unsustainable under the Civil Procedure Code.
The Supreme Court held that injuries caused by a falling tree branch on a stationary autorickshaw do not automatically qualify as a motor vehicle accident. However, invoking Article 142, the Court enhanced compensation for the claimant, emphasizing that a proximate connection between the vehicle and accident is necessary.
The Supreme Court held that loss of a wife’s domestic care constitutes an independent head of compensation in motor accident claims. Granting enhanced compensation to a widower, the Court recognised homemakers’ invaluable contribution and observed that they should be regarded as “nation-builders” in society.
