#Fraud

Bombay HC Division Bench grants Section 9 injunction to doctor-investors, barring land alienation to protect specific performance claim after 21-year developer default on delivery and IOD, reversing Single Judge's denial. The decision underscores Section 9's role in preventing arbitration frustration where prolonged inaction threatens the subject matter.

The Delhi High Court held that a buyer’s awareness of existing mortgage defeats a fraud claim for refund of sale consideration. The court applied caveat emptor, holding that knowledge of encumbrances negates fraud claims and bars vexatious suits.

Delhi HC held that under Sections 101 and 111 Evidence Act, the burden to prove good faith in a fiduciary transaction lies on the party in confidence. It cancelled a daughter’s sale deed for inadequate consideration, restoring possession to legal heirs.

The Calcutta HC ruled that a separate suit to set aside a consent decree under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC is not maintainable; only the court that recorded the decree can decide its validity. This bars parallel litigation and upholds the sanctity of settlement agreements.

The Supreme Court ruled that escrow release under Regulation 15B(8) of the Buyback Regulations does not preclude independent PFUTP fraud proceedings, as the inquiries operate in distinct fields. The Court remitted to SAT for fresh adjudication, directing resolution of trading data discrepancies and contradictory SEBI reports within six months.

CESTAT Chandigarh sets aside a service tax demand of Rs. 9,22,761 after finding the extended limitation period was invoked without proving fraud or suppression of facts. The ruling clarifies that mere discrepancies in income tax and service tax returns do not suffice to justify extended period demands under Section 73(1) of the Finance Act.

Bombay High Court denies bail in a massive economic fraud case, emphasizing that the scale of financial misconduct and societal harm supersede the accused's long pre-trial detention. The ruling reinforces that economic offences involving breach of trust and large-scale fraud may justify stringent bail conditions despite prolonged incarceration.

The Andhra Pradesh High Court ruled that dominant parties in fiduciary relationships bear the burden of proving fairness in property transactions, especially when fraud or undue influence is alleged. The court upheld the cancellation of sale deeds obtained through coercion, reinforcing protections for illiterate and dependent individuals under property law.

Bombay HC rules that bail conditions cannot include deposit of Rs. 75 lakh bank guarantee or release of Rs. 1.89 crore to the complainant, as criminal courts lack authority to act as recovery agents in private fraud cases under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The judgment reinforces that bail conditions must align with criminal jurisprudence, not civil recovery mechanisms.

Punjab & Haryana HC rules that a party alleging fraud in a thumb-impressed loan document must provide concrete evidence, not just bare assertions. The court upheld the recovery decree, emphasizing that failure to respond to legal notices or prove forgery shifts the burden away from the lender.

The Punjab & Haryana High Court ruled that an attesting witness to a sale deed, with no proven role in concealing a subsisting loan, cannot be denied anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS. The court emphasized that mere attestation without active involvement in fraudulent concealment does not justify custodial interrogation, reinforcing bail as a right where cooperation is established.

MP High Court rules that fraudulent misrepresentation of branded goods constitutes a prima facie offence under IPC and Copyright Act, warranting criminal proceedings. Quashing under Section 482 CrPC is denied where allegations disclose cognizable offences, impacting manufacturers and brand owners facing counterfeit claims.

Bombay High Court holds that original cheques and receipts in fraud cases must be admitted under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC if beyond party's control and critical to adjudication.

Kerala High Court holds that ongoing investigation for fraud under IPC may justify deferring Section 138 NI Act trial to prevent prejudice to the accused.

Punjab and Haryana High Court holds that in transactions involving illiterate pardanashin women, the burden shifts to the beneficiary to prove informed consent, invalidating a Power of Attorney obtained by fraud.