Allahabad HC: Reassessment Notice to Deceased Person Void
The Allahabad High Court quashed income tax reassessment proceedings initiated over a year after the assessee’s death, holding such notices void from inception and incapable of cure under Section 292B. The Bench of Justices Saraf and Chaudhary clarified that proceedings can continue against legal representatives only if initiated while the assessee was alive. Legal heirs bear no obligation to inform the department of death, and Section 292BB estoppel doesn’t apply to them. Equity cannot validate a jurisdictionally defective notice, the Court held. (Smt Asha Dubey v. Union of India)
Supreme Court Restricts Monetisation of Court Proceeding Clips
The Supreme Court, via CJI Surya Kant and Justices Bagchi and Mohana, passed an interim order barring extraction, editing, dissemination, or monetisation of judicial proceeding recordings on social media without prior court permission, while exempting genuine news reporting. The order came in journalist Harshita Grover’s PIL alleging that decontextualised courtroom clips undermine judicial dignity. The Bench impleaded all High Courts, sought a Central Government proposal on nodal ministries, and asked High Courts to report on livestreaming guideline adoption. (Harshita Grover v. Union of India, W.P.(C) No. 751/2026)
Delhi HC Allows Withdrawal of PIL Seeking NIA Probe
The Delhi High Court permitted withdrawal of a PIL seeking an NIA investigation into the NEET protest and ‘Sansad Chalo’ march, ruling that transferring investigations to the NIA is a statutory decision resting with the Central Government under the NIA Act. The Court noted Section 6 requires a registered FIR before any such transfer, questioning how an inquiry could be ordered first and an NIA probe directed afterward. Courts cannot direct investigations merely on photographs or videos; authorities must first form their opinion following due statutory procedure. (Satish Kumar Aggarwal v. Union of India & Ors 2026)
Delhi HC Grants ₹7.5 Lakh Compensation for Loss of Foetus
The Delhi High Court awarded ₹7.5 lakh compensation to a woman for loss of foetus suffered in a motor accident, holding that an injured claimant can seek personal injury compensation on this ground, departing from the “born alive” rule. Justice Anish Dayal noted the claimant also suffered psychiatric injury and future infertility, warranting compensation. Applying Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar principles, functional disability was assessed at 60%, considering the physical demands of her teaching profession despite it not being manual labour. (Anshu Kashyap v. Iffco Tokio General Insurance, 2026 DHC 5591)
Delhi HC Quashes Refusal to Register “OFFER” Trademark
The Delhi High Court set aside the Trade Marks Registrar’s refusal to register the word mark “OFFER” for alcoholic beverages under Class 33, citing lack of distinctiveness. Justice Jyoti Singh held that Section 9(1)(a) requires assessing distinctiveness relative to specific goods, not uniqueness of the mark itself. The Registrar was directed to reconsider the application afresh within four months, after granting a hearing and considering all submissions, with the Court expressing no opinion on the mark’s ultimate registrability. (ADS Spirits Pvt Ltd v. Registrar of Trade Marks, 2026)
Join our WhatsApp Groups ( Click Here) and Telegram Channel ( Click Here) and get instant notifications.
Editorial Note: This article has been reviewed by the LegalRath Editorial Team to ensure legal accuracy, editorial quality, and clarity before publication.