Monday, 11 May 2026

Supreme Court: On which ground, the court can order revocation of Succession certificate?

Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 governs

applications for grant of succession certificates, whereas Section

383 provides for revocation of such certificates on specified

grounds. Where an application is defective or material facts have

been suppressed or misstated, the certificate issued pursuant

thereto is liable to be revoked under Section 383 of the Act.

NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO…………………………OF 2026

(@ Special Leave Petition (Civil)No.11006 of 2021)

DEEPESH MAHESWARI AND ANR. Vs RENU MAHESWARI

AND ORS 

Author: SANJAY KAROL, J.

Citation: 2026 INSC 306.

Dated: April 1, 2026.

Read full judgment here : Click here.

Print Page

Supreme Court: Order IX Rule 13 CPC Application Not Barred By Dismissal Of Appeal Against Ex-Parte Decree

 The Supreme Court on Wednesday (April 1) observed that the filing of an appeal against an ex-parte decree would not bar the filing of an application for setting aside the ex-parte decree under Order IX Rule 13 Code of Civil Procedure (CPC).

NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO…………………………OF 2026

(@ Special Leave Petition (Civil)No.11006 of 2021)

DEEPESH MAHESWARI AND ANR. Vs RENU MAHESWARI

AND ORS 

Author: SANJAY KAROL, J.

Citation: 2026 INSC 306.

Dated: April 1, 2026.

Read full judgment here : Click here.

Print Page

Supreme Court: What is distinction between jurisdiction of court under Section 96 of CPC vs. Order 9 Rule 13 of CPC?

 The settled principle of law is that the scope of proceedings

under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure and Order IX

Rule XIII CPC are distinct. Order IX Rule XIII CPC confers a

wider jurisdiction, enabling the applicant to demonstrate

sufficient cause for non-appearance and seek setting aside of an

ex parte decree (Bhanu Kumar Jain v. Archana Kumar) (2005) 1 SCC 757-3J.

NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO…………………………OF 2026

(@ Special Leave Petition (Civil)No.11006 of 2021)

DEEPESH MAHESWARI AND ANR. Vs RENU MAHESWARI

AND ORS 

Author: SANJAY KAROL, J.

Citation: 2026 INSC 306.

Dated: April 1, 2026

Print Page

Sunday, 10 May 2026

Can a Sessions Judge Consider the Accused’s Defence While Deciding Revision Against an Order Under Section 156(3) CrPC?

 Revision Is Not a Mini-Trial:

An order under Section 156(3) CrPC often marks the beginning of criminal investigation, but the challenge that follows in revision frequently tempts the revisional court to travel beyond its proper limits. The central question is not whether the accused may be heard at all, but whether the Sessions Judge can evaluate the accused’s defence on merits while deciding a criminal revision against such an order.

The answer, in law, is nuanced but clear. The Sessions Judge may hear the accused where the revisional order is likely to prejudice him, and may examine the legality, propriety, regularity, and jurisdictional soundness of the Magistrate’s order. But the revisional court cannot convert the hearing into a factual adjudication of the defence or a premature evaluation of disputed material.

Print Page