SHANKARLAL NADANIversusSOHANLAL JAIN
2022 INSC 42012 April 2022Dismissed
The appellant, a tenant, sought possession of a shop owned by the respondent. A civil suit for possession was filed in 2013, before the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 (the Act) applied to the area. During the suit, the State Government notified that the Act would become effective on 11 May 2015, and the civil court p…
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusM/S. ANANT RAJ AGENCIES PVT. LTD.
2016 INSC 30812 April 2016Appeal(s) allowed
The Delhi Development Authority (DDA) leased a plot to Balraj Virmani for 20 years with an option to renew for another 20 years. The lessee breached lease conditions, was served notice, and after the lease expired on 10‑08‑1968 the DDA issued a termination notice on 01‑09‑1972. The lessee later sold the property to M/s…
S. KALADEVIversusV.R. SOMASUNDARAM AND ORS.
2010 INSC 20512 April 2010Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, S. Kaladevi, filed a suit for specific performance of a sale agreement for an immovable property, seeking execution of a fresh sale deed and an injunction. The sale deed dated 27‑02‑2006 had been executed but could not be registered because of an attachment on the property, and the trial court refused to…
R. SAVITHRI NAIDUversusM/S THE COTTON CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED AND ANOTHER
2026 INSC 15012 February 2026Dismissed
The dispute arose from a sale of cotton bales between CCI and M/s Lakshmi Ganesh Textiles Ltd, which led to an arbitral award for recovery of money in 2001. The award was challenged but the challenge was dismissed in 2013. Subsequently, ICICI Bank, as a secured creditor, attached the debtor's properties under the SARFA…
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusM/S. KARAMDEEP FINANCE & INVESTMENT (I) PVT. LTD. & ORS.
2019 INSC 18612 February 2019Disposed off
The Delhi Development Authority (DDA) auctioned a lease‑hold residential plot that had been acquired by the Income Tax Department under Section 269UD of the Income Tax Act, which had already paid the unearned increase to DDA. M/s. Karamdeep Finance & Investment (I) Pvt. Ltd. purchased the plot at auction, later applied…
KISHORILAL (D) THR. LRS & ORS.versusGOPAL & ORS.
2026 INSC 4812 January 2026Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiff Gopal sued the deceased vendor Kishorilal for specific performance of a sale agreement; the vendor's heirs and the purchasers (appellants 2 and 3) were joined in the suit which was decreed in Kishorilal's favour. An appeal (F.A. No.213 of 2000) was filed, but Kishorilal died and his four legal heirs were …
ASMA LATEEF & ANRversusSHABBIR AHMAD & ORS
2024 INSC 3612 January 2024Dismissed
The appellants filed a suit for permanent injunction over a property, alleging an oral gift, while the defendants contested the suit's maintainability under the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act. The trial court, ignoring the written statement of one defendant and the pending jurisdictional objecti…
DALIBEN VALJIBHAI & ORS.versusPRAJAPATI KODARBHAI KACHRABHAI & ANR.
2024 INSC 104911 December 2024Appeal(s) allowed
The appellants filed a suit in 2017 seeking cancellation of a sale deed dated 04‑12‑2004, alleging fraud and claiming they only became aware of the deed on 31‑03‑2017 when a revenue notice was issued. The defendants moved to dismiss the suit under Order 7 Rule 11 of the CPC, arguing that the suit was barred by the thre…
SMT. NARESH KUMARI & ORS.versusSMT. CHAMELI & ORS.
[2024] 12 S.C.R. 69311 December 2024Dismissed
The appellants, heirs of Rai Bahadur Randhir Singh, claimed that a 1953 oral gift of 38 Bighas of land to the respondents was conditional on the donees rendering lifelong services to the donor and his heirs, and that the cessation of such services entitled the donors to resume possession. The trial court and first appe…
SURAJ LAMP & INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.versusSTATE OF HARYANA & ANR.
2011 INSC 73911 October 2011Disposed off
The Supreme Court examined the legality of transactions that rely on Sale Agreements, General Power of Attorney or Wills (collectively termed SA/GPA/Will transfers) as a mode of transferring immovable property. It observed that such arrangements are used to evade stamp duty, registration fees and to facilitate black‑mo…
CHIEF CONTROLLING REVENUE AUTHORITYversusCOSTAL GUJARAT POWER LTD. AND OTHERS
2015 INSC 56311 August 2015Appeal(s) allowed
Coastal Gujarat Power Ltd obtained loans from thirteen financial institutions which formed a consortium and appointed State Bank of India as a security trustee. The borrower executed a single mortgage deed (Indenture of Mortgage) with the trustee, paying Rs 4.21 lakh stamp duty. The Gujarat revenue authority demanded a…
ASHA RANI GUPTAversusSRI VINEET KUMAR
2022 INSC 68411 July 2022Appeal(s) allowed
Asha Rani Gupta, the plaintiff‑lessor, filed an eviction suit against Sri Vineet Kumar, the defendant‑lessee, for non‑payment of rent and damages. The trial court struck off the defendant’s defence under Order XV Rule 5 of the CPC for failing to deposit the admitted rent, a decision affirmed by the revisional court. Th…
RAM MURTI DEVIversusPUSHPA DEVI AND OTHERS
2017 INSC 60411 July 2017Appeal(s) allowed
The landlord let a ground‑floor shop to the tenant and later terminated the tenancy, suing for eviction on the grounds of rent arrears and alleged sub‑letting. The landlord claimed the tenant had allowed Mohd. Ezaj Khan to occupy part of the shop and charge Rs.50 per day for watch‑repair work, while the tenant asserted…
SIDDAGANGAIAH (D) THR. LRS.versusN.K. GIRIRAJA SHETTY (D) THR. LRS.
2018 INSC 50611 May 2018Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant (defendant) sought to enforce a maintenance decree against her husband, during which the husband executed a sale deed of the disputed property to the plaintiff. The decree was later executed by a court auction, where the decree‑holder purchased the property, and the sale was confirmed after the plaintiff'…
RUPA AND CO. LIMITED AND ANOTHERversusFIRHAD HAKIM AND OTHERS
2025 INSC 24511 February 2025Directions issued
The appellants Rupa & Co. Ltd paid Rs.4,00,92,000 for a plot of land in New Town, Kolkata, based on HIDCO's promise to convey it on a free‑hold basis. HIDCO later altered the terms to a 99‑year lease and subsequently demanded additional payment at market rates, prompting the appellants to file a writ petition which the…
SRIDHAR & ANR.versusN. REVANNA & ORS.
2020 INSC 16511 February 2020Dismissed
The grandfather of the parties gifted a property to his grandson, N. Revanna, on 5 June 1957, inserting a condition that the donee and any younger brothers born thereafter could not alienate the property. Revanna later sold the property to four other persons in 1985. The plaintiffs, minor sons of Revanna, sued for a de…
RAJ KISHORE (DEAD) BY LRS.versusPREM SINGH & ORS.
2010 INSC 87010 December 2010Dismissed
The plaintiff Raj Kishore executed a sale deed in 1974 transferring land to Prem Singh for Rs 6,000, claiming it was a security for a loan and that an agreement for re‑conveyance would revert the land upon repayment by 6 July 1981. He sued for a declaration that the sale deed was void and that he remained the owner. Th…
RASHEEDA KHATOON (D) THROUGH LRS.versusASHIQ ALI S/O LT. ABU MOHD (D) THROUGH LRS.
2014 INSC 70110 October 2014Dismissed
The case concerned an alleged oral gift (hiba) of a house by Abdul Haq, a Muslim, to Rasheeda Khatoon about seven years before his death. After Haq's death, his heirs sought possession, prompting Rasheeda to file a suit for declaration of ownership. The trial court and first appellate court held the oral gift valid, de…
NEW OKHLA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (NOIDA)versusARMY WELFARE HOUSING ORGANIZATION & ORS.
2010 INSC 59810 September 2010Disposed off
The New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (NOIDA) allotted land to several housing societies, including the Army Welfare Housing Organization (AWHO), under a 99‑year lease deed that required the societies to construct residential buildings. After the societies built the super‑structures, NOIDA issued notices direc…
DUNI CHANDversusVIKRAM SINGH AND OTHERS
2024 INSC 51610 July 2024Case Allowed
The plaintiff, Tota Ram, claimed ownership of a land based on a registered Will dated 12‑12‑1988 executed by the deceased Beli Ram, while the defendants relied on a later Will dated 16‑05‑1994 to transfer the land to themselves and subsequent purchasers. The trial court dismissed the suit, but the first appellate court…
YOGESH GOYANKAversusGOVIND & ORS.
2024 INSC 51010 July 2024Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant purchased farming land from a seller during the pendency of a suit challenging earlier release deeds, and obtained a registered sale deed while fully aware of the litigation. He applied to be impleaded as a defendant under Order 1 Rule 10 of the CPC, but the Additional District Judge dismissed the applica…
M/S SHAHA RATANSI KHIMJI & SONSversusPROPOSED KUMBHAR SONS HOTEL P. LTD. & ORS.
2014 INSC 48210 July 2014Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, M/s Shaha Ratansi Khimji & Sons, held a lease over a godown on a portion of land. The respondent, Proposed Kumbhar Sons Hotel Ltd., purchased the lessor's interest, demolished the building and dug a trench that threatened the godown, and asked the appellant to vacate. The appellant claimed that the lease…
M/S. L.K. TRUSTversusEDC LTD. & ORS.
2011 INSC 37410 May 2011Dismissed
The appellant L.K. Trust claimed that a concluded contract existed between it and EDC Ltd. for the sale of a mortgaged hotel property, arguing that the mortgagor (Falcon Retreat Pvt. Ltd., respondent No.3) had lost its statutory right of redemption under Section 60 of the Transfer of Property Act. The Supreme Court hel…
SRI M.V. RAMACHANDRASA SINCE DECEASED REPRESENTED BY LEGAL HEIRSversusM/S MAHENDRA WATCH COMPANY REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNERS & ORS.
2026 INSC 34810 April 2026Appeal(s) allowed
The landlord, the legal heirs of the deceased Sri M.V. Ramachandrasa, sued M/s Mahendra Watch Company and its partners for unlawful sub‑letting of a shop premises in Bengaluru. The trial court held that the original tenant had part‑ed with legal possession to respondents No.2 and No.3, who were strangers to the lease, …
R. HEMALATHAversusKASHTHURI
2023 INSC 33610 April 2023Dismissed
The appellant (original defendant) challenged the High Court's order that an unregistered Agreement to Sell, executed on 10‑09‑2013, could be admitted as evidence in a suit for specific performance. The dispute centered on whether the Tamil Nadu Amendment Act, 2012, which made agreements to sell immovable property of R…
THE ANDHRA PRADESH INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUCTURE CORPORATION LIMITED ANDversusS. N. RAJ KUMAR AND ANOTHER
2018 INSC 32310 April 2018Dismissed
The Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation (APIC) allotted industrial plots to transport entrepreneurs with a condition that units be established within two years, failure of which would lead to cancellation. The parties later executed sale deeds transferring absolute marketable title to the respondents a…
PRATIMA CHOWDHURYversusKALPANA MUKHERJEE & ANR.
2014 INSC 8710 February 2014Appeal(s) allowed
Pratima Chowdhury, a member of a West Bengal cooperative housing society, sought to transfer her flat and membership to Kalpana Mukherjee, claiming the transfer was a gift without consideration. The arbitrator found the transfer invalid, noting that the letters effecting the transfer were likely drafted by Partha Mukhe…
MATHEW VARGHESEversusM. AMRITHA KUMAR & ORS.
[2014] 2 S.C.R. 73610 February 2014Disposed off
The case concerned the sale of a mortgaged property by a bank under the SARFAESI Act. The Supreme Court examined whether the bank, as a secured creditor, had complied with Section 13(8) of the Act and Rules 8 and 9, which require a 30‑day individual notice and a public notice before any sale. It held that the sale effe…
ALAGAMMAL AND ORS.versusGANESAN AND ANR.
2024 INSC 2810 January 2024Appeal(s) allowed
The sellers (Alagammal and others) entered into a registered agreement of sale on 22‑Nov‑1990 with the buyers (Ganesan and others) for Rs.21,000, stipulating that the balance be paid within six months. The buyers paid only a fraction of the amount and failed to complete the purchase before the deadline, while the selle…
RESIDENT’S WELFARE ASSOCIATION AND ANOTHERversusTHE UNION TERRITORY OF CHANDIGARH AND OTHERS
2023 INSC 2210 January 2023Appeal(s) allowed
The Resident’s Welfare Association filed a public‑interest litigation alleging that developers in Phase‑I of Chandigarh were converting single‑dwelling units into three separate apartments by selling fractional shares and executing MoUs, thereby breaching the statutory prohibition on fragmentation. The High Court held …
NADIMINTI SURYANARAYAN MURTHY (DEAD) THROUGH LRS.versusKOTHURTHI KRISHNA BHASKARA RAO & ORS.
2017 INSC 10159 October 2017Disposed off
The plaintiff (respondent No. I) entered into a genuine sale agreement on 18‑01‑1983 with defendants Nos.1‑5 for a house, paying Rs.1,000 as advance. Instead of executing the sale deed, the defendants sold the same house to defendant No.6 on 09‑02‑1983, relying on a purported earlier agreement dated 04‑01‑1983, which t…
VITHAL TUKARAM KADAM AND ANOTHERversusVAMANRAO SAWALARAM BHOSALE AND OTHERS
2017 INSC 7219 August 2017Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiff executed a deed in 1953 that was styled as a sale of land for a nominal sum of Rs.700, but included a clause that the land would be returned if the amount was repaid within ten years. The parties were long‑time acquaintances, with the plaintiff having repeatedly borrowed money from the defendant, establis…
MAHARAJ SINGH & ORS.versusKARAN SINGH (DEAD) THR. LRS. & ORS.
2024 INSC 4919 July 2024Case Partly allowed
The case concerned a registered agreement for sale of 2.90 acres of land executed in 1981, which the plaintiffs sought to enforce by specific performance. The defendants argued that the agreement was a sham, forged, and that they were bona‑fide purchasers without notice of the agreement. The Supreme Court held that Sec…
DAHIBENversusARVINDBHAI KALYANJI BHANUSALI (GAJRA) (D) THR LRS & ORS.
2020 INSC 4509 July 2020Dismissed
The plaintiffs sold agricultural land to respondent No.1 in 2009 and alleged that only a small part of the sale consideration was paid, seeking cancellation of the sale deed. They filed the suit in December 2014, more than five years after the deed, claiming the cause of action arose only when they discovered alleged f…
RAJ DADARKAR & ASSOCIATESversusACIT-CC-46
2017 INSC 4579 May 2017Dismissed
The appellant, a partnership firm, obtained lease‑hold rights to a stilt portion of a municipal market through auction and constructed a shopping centre, sub‑licensing shops to traders. The Assessing Officer re‑assessed the income from these sub‑licences under the head "Income from House Property" on the basis that the…
SHREE RAM URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS SHREE RAM MILLS LTD.versusTHE COURT RECEIVER, HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
2014 INSC 3889 May 2014Dismissed
Shree Ram Urban Infrastructure Ltd., a tenant of the immovable property "Dev Ashish" in Bombay, challenged an eviction suit filed by the Court Receiver appointed by the High Court. The appellant argued that the Receiver had no authority to sue without prior leave of the court, that the notice under Section 106 of the T…
RUSSI FISHERIES P. LTD. & ANR.versusBHAVNA SETH & ORS.
2026 INSC 3399 April 2026Dismissed
The case concerns a suit for specific performance of an 1988 agreement to sell agricultural land, where the plaintiff paid Rs.7,75,000 and claimed readiness to execute the sale deed, but the defendants alleged non‑payment of cash and lack of willingness. The trial court dismissed the specific performance claim, but the…
BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF PORT OF KANDLAversusHARGOVIND JASRAJ & ANR.
2013 INSC 259 January 2013Appeal(s) allowed
The Board of Trustees of Kandla Port terminated a lease of a 1891.64‑sq‑m parcel to Smt. Pushpa Shah after she defaulted on rent, issuing a termination order on 8‑Aug‑1977 effective 13‑Dec‑1978 and taking possession via a panchnama on 14‑Dec‑1978. The lessee’s own letter of 22‑Feb‑1979 admitted that possession had been…
DAULAT SINGH (D) THR. LRS.versusTHE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS
2020 INSC 6848 December 2020Appeal(s) allowed
Daulat Singh, the appellant, owned 254.2 bighas of land and gifted 127.1 bighas to his son in 1963, leaving him with 17.25 standard acres below the ceiling limit. The Rajasthan Revenue Ceiling Department later reopened the case in 1982, alleging excess holdings, and the High Court declared the gift deed invalid for lac…
T.G. ASHOK KUMARversusGOVINDAMMAL AND ANR.
2010 INSC 8638 December 2010Case Partly allowed
The appellant, T.G. Ashok Kumar, purchased a plot from the second respondent in 1990, unaware of a pending partition suit filed by the first respondent. The partition suit, which was not collusive, was decreed in 1994 and finally divided the property such that three‑quarters went to the first respondent and one‑quarter…
M/S SIDDAMSETTY INFRA PROJECTS PVT. LTD.versusKATTA SUJATHA REDDY & ORS.
2024 INSC 8618 November 2024
The petitioner, Siddamsetty Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd., entered into two agreements to sell agricultural land with the respondents in 1997, paid a substantial portion of the consideration, and sought specific performance after the respondents refused to execute the sale deed. The trial court dismissed the suit, the High …
SUZUKI PARASRAMPURIA SUITINGS PVT. LTD.versusTHE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR OF MAHENDRA PETROCHEMICALS LTD. (IN LIQUIDATION) AND OTHERS
2018 INSC 9378 October 2018Leave Granted & Dismissed
Suzuki Parasrampuria Suitings Pvt. Ltd. (the appellant) was assigned the debt of Mahendra Petrochemicals Ltd. (MPL) by IFCI for a nominal sum and sought substitution as a secured creditor under the SARFAESI Act. The Company Judge rejected the application, holding that the appellant was not a bank, financial institution…
YELLAPU UMA MAHESWARI &ANR.versusBUDDHA JAGADHEESWARARAO & ORS.
2015 INSC 7558 October 2015Case Partly allowed
In a partition suit, the defendants sought to introduce two unregistered documents (Exhibit B‑21, a deed of memorandum, and Exhibit B‑22, an agreement) to prove the division of property. The trial court and the Andhra Pradesh High Court held the documents inadmissible, reasoning that they were compulsorily registerable…
KAMMANA SAMBAMURTHY (D) BY LRS.versusKALIPATNAPU ATCHUTAMMA (D) AND ORS.
2010 INSC 6978 October 2010Dismissed
The vendee, Kammana Sambamurthy, entered into a sale agreement with the vendor, Kalipatnapu Kamaraju, for an entire house, paying an advance of Rs.10,000. The vendor's wife, Kalipatnapu Atchutamma, later claimed a half‑share in the property under Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act and sought cancellation of the agr…
HAR NARAIN (DEAD) BY LRS.versusMAM CHAND (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ORS.
2010 INSC 7008 October 2010Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, the legal representatives of the deceased Har Narain, entered into an agreement for sale of eight kanals of land with the owner, Mam Chand, who later executed a sale deed in favour of respondents 2‑6 on 2 August 1971. The deed was registered on 3 September 1971, after the appellant had filed a suit for s…
MAHARAJI EDUCATIONAL TRUSTversusHOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. & ORS.
2017 INSC 12888 May 2017Disposed off
Maharaji Educational Trust borrowed Rs.75 crore from HUDCO and mortgaged six properties. It later exchanged 21 acres of one mortgaged property with Avas Parishad and entered into a sale agreement for the entire 63.45 acres (including the exchanged land) with SGS Constructions, which was subject to an interim injunction…
DR. AMBICA PRASADversusMD. ALAM AND ANOTHER
2015 INSC 2998 April 2015Appeal(s) allowed
Dr. Ambica Prasad filed an eviction suit against Abdul Karim, claiming ownership of the tenanted premises through exchange deeds executed with his brother, the original owner. The trial court held that the appellant was not the landlord, but the appellate court reversed this, finding him to be the landlord based on ren…
BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE PORT OF MUMBAIversusM/S BYRAMJEE JEEJEEBHOY PVT. LTD. & ANR.
2011 INSC 2848 April 2011Appeal(s) allowed
The Board of Trustees of the Port of Mumbai, as landlord, sued M/s Byramjee Jeejeebhoy Pvt. Ltd. (tenant) and its sub‑tenant Wadi Sunder Cotton Press Co. for eviction on the ground of unlawful sub‑letting under the Bombay Rent Act, 1947. The trial court and the High Court held that the sub‑lease breached the lease deed…
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, AHMEDABADversusSOLID & CORRECT ENGINEERING WORKS & ORS.
2010 INSC 2028 April 2010
The case concerned whether the erection of an Asphalt Drum/Hot Mix Plant using duty‑paid components constitutes the manufacture of excisable goods under Section 2(d) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and whether the manufacturers of the plant’s parts were eligible for exemption under Notification No.1/93‑CE. The Supreme…
RAKESH & ORS.versusBOARD OF REVENUE U.P. & ORS. ETC.
2019 INSC 3368 March 2019Case Partly allowed
Pursottam, a Sirdar, deposited twenty times the land revenue and applied for Bhumidhari rights for three plots, subsequently executing a sale deed. His applications for two plots were rejected and a revision petition was pending when the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms (Amendment) Ordinance, 1977 (la…
SADASHIV PRASAD SINGHversusHARENDAR SINGH & ORS.
2014 INSC 178 January 2014Appeal(s) allowed
The Supreme Court examined a dispute arising from the public auction of Plot No.722, attached in a debt recovery proceeding against a partnership firm. Sadashiv Prasad Singh, the highest bidder, was confirmed as the purchaser, took possession and obtained mutation of the property. Harendar Singh, brother of the origina…
GOPAL SINGH (DEAD) BY LRS.versusSWARAN SINGH & ORS.
2018 INSC 11687 December 2018Appeal(s) allowed
The land in question was sold under a restricted auction pursuant to the Punjab Package Deal Properties (Disposal) Act, 1976 and later the sale was cancelled by an order of the Deputy Commissioner dated 28 March 1985, which became final. The plaintiffs filed a suit claiming they were bonafide purchasers and seeking a d…
M/S. GOVIND IMPEX (P) LTD. AND ORS.versusAPPROPRIATE AUTHORITY, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT
2010 INSC 8567 December 2010Dismissed
The appellants leased premises for nine years with a clause allowing the lessee to extend the lease for a further nine years, subject to conditions. The Income Tax Department treated the lease as exceeding twelve years, invoking Chapter XXC of the Income Tax Act and requiring filing of Form 37‑1. The appellants contend…
SAMIULLAHversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.
2025 INSC 12927 November 2025Appeal(s) allowed
The appellants challenged the Bihar Registration Rules, 2008 amendments that introduced sub‑rules (xvii) and (xviii) to Rule 19, which made the production of jamabandi or holding‑allotment proof a condition precedent for registering sale or gift documents. The High Court of Patna dismissed the writ petitions, holding t…
PREM AGGARWALversusMOHAN SINGH & ORS.
2025 INSC 12147 October 2025Dismissed
The appellant, Prem Aggarwal, entered into an agreement to purchase a property in 1989, paid Rs.25,000 as earnest money and later sued for specific performance, which the Supreme Court dismissed on the ground of bar under Order II Rule 2 of the CPC, but awarded her Rs.2 crore as compensation. The respondents deposited …
DHARMRAO SHARANAPPA SHABADI AND OTHERSversusSYEDA ARIFA PARVEEN
2025 INSC 11877 October 2025Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiff, Syeda Arifa Parveen, claimed ownership of 24 acres of agricultural land on the basis of being the sole daughter of Khadijabee and of an oral gift (hiba) of 10 acres made by her mother. The trial court rejected the oral gift but granted her a 3/4 share of the remaining land, while the Karnataka High Court…
STATE OF HARYANA & OTHERSversusNAVIR SINGH AND ANOTHER
2013 INSC 6877 October 2013Appeal(s) allowed
K. NAINA MOHAMED (DEAD) THROUGH LRS.versusA.M. VASUDEVAN CHETTIAR (D) BY LRS. & ORS.
2010 INSC 3727 July 2010Dismissed
The testator’s 1951 Will gave life interest in two houses to her sisters and, after their deaths, vested absolute title in the male heirs, subject to a clause that any sale must be to the other male heirs at market price and not to strangers. After a partition, Rukmani Ammal and her son sold one house (property B) to K…
ANNAYA KOCHA SHETTY (DEAD) THROUGH LRSversusLAXMIBAI NARAYAN SATOSE SINCE DECEASED THROUGH LRS & OTHERS
2025 INSC 4667 April 2025Dismissed
The plaintiff, a hotel operator, entered into a 1967 agreement with the owner (defendant) described as an “agreement for conducting” the hotel business, wherein the plaintiff paid a monthly royalty and was responsible for expenses, while the owner retained ownership. After the owner served notice to vacate, the plainti…
KARAM KAPAHI & OTHERSversusM/S. LAL CHAND PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST & ANOTHER
2010 INSC 2007 April 2010Dismissed
The Lal Chand Public Charitable Trust leased property to the South Delhi Club and later terminated the lease for non‑payment of rent. The Trust sued for possession; the Club contested the Trust’s title and sought relief under Section 114 of the Transfer of Property Act, while also admitting non‑payment of rent in its s…
C.S. VENKATESHversusMURTHY (D) BY LRS. & ORS.
2020 INSC 1437 February 2020Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, C.S. Venkatesh, appealed a High Court order that had declared a 1975 sale deed executed by the deceased plaintiff, A.S.C. Murthy, as a nominal security transaction and directed specific performance of a reconveyance agreement. The Supreme Court examined whether the sale deed was an outright sale or a mor…
LAKSHMI ALIAS BHAGYALAKSHMI AND ANR.versusE. JAYARAM (D) BY LR.
2013 INSC 807 February 2013Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiffs claimed ownership of a property purchased from the defendant, although the sale deed was unregistered, and filed a suit for permanent injunction together with an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC for interim relief. The trial court granted an interim injunction protecting the plaintiff …
RAHEJA UNVIERSAL LIMITEDversusNRC LIMITED & ORS.
2012 INSC 777 February 2012Dismissed
NRC Ltd, a sick industrial company, entered into a memorandum of understanding and subsequent agreements with K. Raheja Universal Ltd for the sale of 344 acres of land to raise funds for restructuring. The sale was only partially paid and the company later sought a corporate debt restructuring (CDR) scheme, which was a…
KESHAR BAIversusCHHUNULAL
2014 INSC 157 January 2014Disposed off
BIRMA DEVI & ORS.versusSUBHASH & ANR.
2024 INSC 9496 December 2024Dismissed
The petitioners, who claim to be subsequent purchasers of a suit property, challenged a High Court order directing the execution court to grant possession to the decree‑holders (plaintiffs) in a suit for specific performance of a sale agreement. The trial court had decreed specific performance but did not expressly awa…
BALWANTBHAI SOMABHAI BHANDARIversusHIRALAL SOMABHAI CONTRACTOR (DECEASED) REP. BY LRS. & ORS.
2023 INSC 8056 September 2023Dismissed
The Gujarat High Court recorded an undertaking, made by counsel on behalf of the respondents, that certain property would not be sold until the main petition was decided. Despite this, the appellants executed multiple sale deeds in favour of various purchasers, breaching the undertaking. The High Court held the appella…
INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD.versusSUDERA REALTY PRIVATE LIMITED
2022 INSC 9286 September 2022Dismissed
The Supreme Court examined a dispute between Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (appellant) and Sudera Realty Private Ltd. (respondent) over a lease of three floors in a Kolkata building. It held that the 1968 agreement and the 1969 supplementary deed constituted a valid 21‑year lease, with possession of the 2nd and 3rd floor…
KARAN KAPOORversusMADHURI KUMAR
2022 INSC 6616 July 2022Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, Karan Kapoor, was a tenant of a residential property owned by the respondent, Madhuri Kumar, under lease agreements from 2011 to 2014. After the lease expired, the appellant stopped paying rent and the respondent filed a suit for possession, rent, and mesne profits. The appellant claimed that subsequent …
TAHIR V. ISANIversusMADAN WAMAN CHODANKAR, (SINCE DECEASED) NOW THROUGH HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES & ORS.
2025 INSC 10446 May 2025Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, Tahir V. Isani, purchased a property in 2007 from M/s Rizvi Estate & Hotels Pvt. Ltd., a bona‑fide buyer who derived title from the original owner and not from the judgment‑debtor (the Maliks). The Maliks, as judgment‑debtors, had obtained a decree in a 1996 suit for ejectment, which was later executed a…
TRILOKI NATH SINGHversusANIRUDH SINGH (D) THR. LRS. & ORS.
2020 INSC 3856 May 2020Dismissed
The appellant, who purchased land by a sale deed in 1984, filed a suit seeking a declaration that a compromise decree passed by the High Court in 1994 in a partition suit was illegal, fraudulent and void. The decree was passed in a second appeal concerning parties other than the appellant, who was a stranger to the com…
UNION OF INDIA & ANR.versusDINSHAW SHAPOORJI ANKLESARI & ORS.
2014 INSC 3616 May 2014Appeal(s) allowed
The dispute concerned a 0.90‑acre parcel of land in Pune Cantonment held under an 1827 government grant. The respondents had purchased the lease‑hold rights and the superstructure on the land, while the Union of India (Pune Cantonment Board) issued a resumption notice in 1971 claiming the land remained government prope…
NI PRA CHANNABASAVA DESHIKENDRA SWAMIGALU MATADHIPATHIGALU KANNADA MUTTversusC.P. KAVEERAMMA & ORS.
2013 INSC 3166 May 2013Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, a religious Mutt, held land that had been mortgaged in 1955 and 1967. After the Karnataka Certain Inams Abolition Act, 1977 abolished the inams, the Mutt was granted occupancy rights over the entire land on 11‑02‑1993. The mortgagees (respondents) claimed occupancy rights based on the old mortgages and r…
PRADEEP OIL CORPORATIONversusMUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI AND ANR.
2011 INSC 2786 April 2011Dismissed
Pradeep Oil Corporation was granted land by the Government under the Government Grants Act to erect petroleum storage tanks and related structures. The Municipal Corporation of Delhi assessed property tax on the tanks, treating them as "buildings". The corporation argued the grant was a lease, making the corporation li…
DWARIKA PRASADversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ORS.
2018 INSC 2106 March 2018Disposed off
The appellant, a guarantor, created an equitable mortgage over his property to secure a loan that later defaulted. The bank invoked the SARFAESI Act and initiated auction proceedings, which the appellant attempted to halt by offering partial payment and filing writ petitions. The High Court stayed the sale until the ap…
THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI & ORS.versusCENTURY TEXTILES AND INDUSTRIES LIMITED & ORS.
2025 INSC 366 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed
Century Textiles entered into a lease for Block‑A in 1928 under the Bombay Improvement Trust Transfer Act, 1925, with a 28‑year term that expired in 1955. The lease required the construction of poorer‑class dwellings and contained no clause obligating the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai to convey the land after…
BALWANT VITHAL KADAMversusSUNIL BABURAOI KADAM
2017 INSC 11705 December 2017Dismissed
The respondent sued the appellants for specific performance of two agreements to sell a share of land, having paid earnest money but no deed was executed. The trial court dismissed the suit, but the first appellate court set aside that decree and ordered specific performance. The appellants appealed, arguing that the a…
REVANASIDDAYYAversusGANGAMMA @ SHASHIKALA & ANR.
2017 INSC 11715 December 2017Disposed off
The appellant purchased land from the original owner, Veerabasayya, and was given possession after paying earnest money, but the owner died before the sale deed was executed. The respondents, as legal heirs, sued for a declaration of ownership and possession, and the trial court declared them owners but denied possessi…
VINOD KUMARversusASHOK KUMAR GANDHI
2019 INSC 8605 August 2019Directions issued
The appeal arose from tenants of a non‑residential shop challenging an eviction order under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, and seeking to have the Supreme Court’s decision in Satyawati Sharma case referred to a larger bench. The petitioners contended that the Satyawati Sharma judgment was per inc…
SHYAM LALversusDEEPA DASS CHELA RAM CHELA GARIB DASS
2016 INSC 4965 July 2016Appeal(s) allowed
Shyam Lal held an agricultural lease from 29 May 1996 to 28 May 2005, but the lease was not registered. After the lease expired he continued to occupy the land and filed a suit for injunction to restrain the landlord from ousting him. The landlord cross‑claimed a mandatory injunction for vacation, arguing that the tena…
ITC LTD.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.
2011 INSC 4585 July 2011Disposed off
The Supreme Court examined the cancellation of leases and allotments of commercial plots in Noida granted to hotel developers under the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 and the Uttar Pradesh Industrial Area Development Act, 1976. It held that a lease governed by a statute can be cancelled only if …
VINOD SETHversusDEVINDER BAJAJ AND ANR.
2010 INSC 3475 July 2010Case Partly allowed
The plaintiff, a builder, sued the owners of a residential property for specific performance of an alleged oral collaboration agreement to develop the land. The High Court, noting the suit's low chance of success and heavy court dockets, ordered the plaintiff to furnish an undertaking to pay Rs.25 lakhs as damages if h…
HAFEEZA BIBI & ORS.versusSHAIKH FARID (DEAD) BY LRS. & ORS
2011 INSC 3575 May 2011Appeal(s) allowed
In a partition suit governed by Sunni law, the defendant claimed that his father had gifted him immovable property by a written hiba deed dated 5‑2‑1968 and that the deed, though unregistered, was valid. The trial court held the gift valid, but the High Court set it aside on the ground that an instrument of gift of imm…
M/S. JAIPRAKASH INDUSTRIES LTD. (PRESENTLY KNOWN AS M/S. JAIPRAKASH ASSOCIATES LTD.)versusDELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
2024 INSC 2735 April 2024Dismissed
The appellant, Jaiprakash Associates Ltd., was created by the amalgamation of Jaiprakash Associates Pvt Ltd (the original lessee) and Jaypee Rewa Cement Ltd, pursuant to a scheme sanctioned by the High Court in 1986, which transferred four perpetually leased plots to the amalgamated entity. The Delhi Development Author…
ASGAR & ORS.versusMOHAN VARMA & ORS.
2019 INSC 1445 February 2019Dismissed
The appellants, Asgar and others, were lessees occupying a large tract of land in Kerala and sought a declaration that they could remain in possession and claim compensation for improvements under the Kerala Compensation for Tenants Improvements Act, 1958. They first raised this claim in an execution application under …
MOTILAL OSWAL FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITEDversusSANTOSH CORDEIRO AND ANOTHER
2026 INSC 55 January 2026Dismissed
The dispute arose from a Leave and License Agreement between Motilal Oswal Financial Services Ltd. and Santosh Cordeiro, which contained an arbitration clause in Clause 33. The respondent filed a Section 11 application under the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of a sole arbitrator, which the Hi…
OM PRAKASH (DEAD) TH. HIS LRS.versusSHANTI DEVI & ORS.
2015 INSC 15 January 2015Dismissed
The appellant claimed ownership of a disputed immovable property on the basis of a registered Gift Deed dated 15‑05‑1970, asserting that Section 90 of the Evidence Act, 1872 would give a presumption of proper execution because the deed was over thirty years old. The trial court, and subsequently the High Court, rejecte…
INDUSTRIAL INVESTMENT BANK OF INDIA LTD.versusM/S JAIN CABLES PVF. LTD. & ORS.
2011 INSC 145 January 2011Appeal(s) allowed
The Industrial Reconstruction Bank of India (IRBI) sanctioned a loan to Jain Cables Ltd., which defaulted. After the Industrial Reconstruction Bank (Transfer of Undertaking and Repeal) Act, 1997 transferred IRBI's undertakings to the Industrial Investment Bank of India Ltd. (IIBL), the latter issued a notice under s.38…
M/S. SESHASAYEE STEELS P. LTD.versusASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE VI(2), CHENNAI
2019 INSC 13204 December 2019Dismissed
M/s Seshasayee Steels Ltd entered into an agreement to sell land to Vijay Santhi Builders Ltd and granted a licence to commence construction, later executing a Power of Attorney and a compromise deed that reduced the consideration and stipulated payment by post‑dated cheques, all of which were encashed. The Assessing O…
HARBHAJAN SINGH ETCversusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS
2019 INSC 13154 December 2019Dismissed
The appellants, tenants of shops in a Gurudwara, challenged the Punjab Religious Premises and Land (Eviction and Rent Recovery) Act, 1997 on the ground that it withdrew the protection afforded to them under the East Punjab Urban Rent Restrictions Act, 1949 and violated Article 14. The Supreme Court held that the State …
UNITECH LTD. &ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.
2015 INSC 8264 November 2015Appeal(s) allowed
Vidarbha Engineering, a lessee of three plots of land, entered into a collaboration agreement with Unitech to develop a commercial complex, whereby Unitech would construct the building, retain 78% of the built‑up area and transfer 22% to Vidarbha. The parties filed a statement under Section 269UC stating a consideratio…
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXversusBALBIR SINGH MAINI
2017 INSC 10024 October 2017Dismissed
The respondents, members of a cooperative housing society, entered into a Joint Development Agreement (JDA) with developers to develop 21.2 acres of land. Only two instalments were paid and 7.7 acres were conveyed, for which capital gains tax was paid. The Assessing Officer and the ITAT treated the unreceived considera…
AMEER MINHAJversusDIERDRE ELIZABETH (WRIGHT) ISSAR AND ORS.
2018 INSC 5784 July 2018Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant filed a suit for specific performance of a 2003 agreement to sell land, relying on an unregistered sale deed, a registered power of attorney, and an earlier unregistered 1995 agreement. The respondents challenged the admissibility of these documents, arguing that the 2003 deed required registration under …
MRS. SARADAMANI KANDAPPANversusMRS. S. RAJALAKSHMI & ORS.
2011 INSC 4464 July 2011Disposed off
The appellant entered into an agreement of sale for immovable property, paying an advance and agreeing to pay the balance in three instalments, with clause 6 expressly making timely payment the essence of the contract. The respondents cancelled the agreement when the appellant failed to pay the second and third instalm…
DAMODHAR NARAYAN SAWALE (D) THROUGH LRSversusSHRI TEJRAO BAJIRAO MHASKE & ORS
2023 INSC 4914 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant sought possession of a 3‑acre agricultural field based on a registered sale deed dated 21‑04‑1979. The defendants argued that the deed was a sham, executed as collateral for a money‑lending transaction, and that the sale violated the Maharashtra Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Ac…
OFFICIAL LIQUIDATORversusUJJAIN NAGAR PALIKA NIGAM & ORS
2023 INSC 4894 May 2023Dismissed
The Official Liquidator (OL) of IISCO Ujjain Pipe and Foundry Co. Ltd., wound up under the Companies Act, sold the company's assets on an "as is where is whatever there is" basis. Ujjain Nagar Palika Nigam (respondent No.1) claimed arrears of property tax and water tax for the period from the winding‑up order (10 July …
ATUL CHANDRA DAS (D) THROUGH LRS.versusRABINDRA NATH BHATTACHARYA (D) THR. LRS. & ORS. ETC.
2019 INSC 4634 April 2019Dismissed
The appellants, Atul Chandra Das, sought ejectment of the respondents, the Bhattacharyyas, from a property alleging a valid sale, while the respondents contended that the original sale to Bholanath was a mortgage by conditional sale and that the appellants colluded to defeat the redemption period. The trial court dismi…
THE COSMOS CO. OPERATIVE BANK LTD.versusCENTRAL BANK OF INDIA & ORS.
2025 INSC 2434 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed
The Cosmos Co. Operative Bank Ltd. (appellant) challenged a High Court order that held Central Bank of India (respondent No.1) had the first charge over a flat mortgaged by the original borrowers. Both banks had received security documents: the appellant bank held the share certificate of ownership, while the responden…
SKILL LOTTO SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.
2020 INSC 6763 December 2020Dismissed
Skill Lotto Solutions Pvt. Ltd., an authorised agent for Punjab lotteries, filed a writ petition under Art.32 challenging the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act) on the grounds that the definition of ‘goods’ in s.2(52) – which includes actionable claims – is unconstitutional and that taxing lottery, bet…
THE STATE OF KERALA & ORSversusM/S JOSEPH & COMPANY
2021 INSC 4423 September 2021Disposed off
The Kerala government auctioned 246.26 acres of forest land in 1953 and later executed a lease deed in 1979 in favour of K.K. Joseph, who represented the partnership firm M/s Joseph & Company. The lease prohibited sub‑letting or assignment without the lessor’s written consent (clause 14). In 1983 the lessee sold 50 acr…
D. N. JOSHI (D) THR. LRS. & OTHERSversusD. C. HARRIS & ANOTHER
2017 INSC 5783 July 2017Dismissed
The appeal concerned a suit for eviction filed by D.C. Harris (respondent) against tenants D.N. Joshi and others (appellants) who challenged the respondents' title to the premises. The title derived from a 1949 gift deed by Akhtari Begum to her brother Zamir Ahmad, followed by a 1965 sale deed to the respondents. The l…
A. NAWAB JOHN & ORS.versusV.N. SUBRAMANIYAM
2012 INSC 2633 July 2012Dismissed
The appellants filed a suit for specific performance but initially paid only a deficient court fee. After multiple representations and condonation of delay, the trial court allowed the deficit fee to be paid well beyond the limitation period. The second defendant, a pendente‑lite purchaser, was impleaded and challenged…
CHANDER BHAN (D) THROUGH LR SHER SINGHversusMUKHTIAR SINGH & ORS.
2024 INSC 3773 May 2024Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant entered into an agreement to sell 16 kanals of land with respondent No.3, paid earnest money and later obtained a temporary injunction against alienation of the property on 28 July 2003. On the same day respondent No.3 executed a release deed in favour of his son (respondent No.4), who subsequently sold t…
GOPALAKRISHNA (D) BY LRS. & ORS.versusNARAYANAGOWDA (DEAD) BY LRS. & ORS.
2019 INSC 4593 April 2019Dismissed
The case concerned the ownership of property originally belonging to Ramanna, who died in 1907 leaving a widow Seethamma and a daughter Venkamma. The appellants claimed title based on a 1955 sale deed executed by Jankamma, the granddaughter of Ramanna, while the respondents asserted possession derived from an earlier 1…
HARSHAD GOVARDHAN SONDAGARversusINTERNATIONAL ASSETS RECONSTRUCTION CO. LTD.
2014 INSC 9553 April 2014Appeal(s) allowed
The appellants, who were tenants of premises mortgaged to banks, challenged the seizure of those premises by the secured creditors under the SARFAESI Act. The Supreme Court examined whether a lease made by the mortgagor, either before or after the mortgage, remains valid and binding on the secured creditor, and whether…
KN ASWATHNARAYANA SETTY (D) TR. LRS. & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.
2013 INSC 8012 December 2013Dismissed
The petitioners purchased land that had been subject to a Section 4 notification under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, while the de‑notification of that acquisition was under appeal before the Supreme Court. The Court held that a purchaser after such a notification cannot challenge the acquisition and, under the doctri…
CITY MONTESSORI SCHOOLversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.
2024 INSC 5702 August 2024Dismissed
The dispute concerned a garden lease of a Nazul plot in Lucknow that vested in the State of Uttar Pradesh. City Montessori School (CMS) had the highest bid in a 1995 auction, but the State cancelled its bid and later converted the leasehold to freehold in favour of the alleged lessee for a nominal sum. CMS challenged t…
SHABBIR MOHAMMAD SAYEDversusMRS. NOOR JEHAN MUSHTER SHAIKH & ORS.
2022 INSC 7842 August 2022Dismissed
The plaintiff obtained a decree declaring her as tenant of a premises in Mumbai and ordered the landlord to hand over possession. The appellant, Shabbir Mohammad Sayed, claimed he had acquired leasehold rights from the alleged lawful tenant and also from the landlord on 24 January 2014, and sought execution of the decr…
SHEHAMMALversusHASAN KHANI RAWTHER AND ORS.
2011 INSC 5332 August 2011Dismissed
The case concerned the intestate estate of Meeralava Rawther, a Muslim who had executed deeds of relinquishment with five of his children (excluding his youngest son, Hassan) in exchange for consideration. After his death, Hassan claimed an oral gift of the entire property, while the other children and the petitioners …
SHYAM NARAYAN PRASADversusKRISHNA PRASAD AND ORS.
2018 INSC 5562 July 2018Dismissed
The case concerned a partition of ancestral Hindu Mitakshara property of Gopalji Prasad among his sons, after which the share allotted to defendant No.2 was claimed to be ancestral for his sons and grandson. The plaintiffs sought to set aside an exchange deed executed between defendant No.1 and No.2, arguing that it in…
N.K. RAJENDRA MOHANversusTHIRVAMADI RUBBER CO. LTD. & ORS.
2015 INSC 4712 July 2015Dismissed
In 1918 the plaintiffs leased 963.75 acres of land to Mr. Campbell Hunt for 36 years, allowing the lessee to cultivate any crop and clear forests. The lease later passed to Thiruvamadi Rubber Co., which continued possession after the lease expired, paying rent until 1978 and establishing a rubber plantation. The plaint…
VATHSALA MANICKAVASAGAM & ORS.versusN. GANESAN & ANR.
2013 INSC 4112 July 2013Appeal(s) allowed
A family of five members disputed the ownership of three houses. The mother, two sons and a daughter filed a partition suit against the eldest son, claiming a 4/5 share in the properties. The trial court, relying on the mother’s testimony and a letter (Ex.A‑17) written by the eldest son, held that all three houses were…
G. VIKRAM KUMARversusSTATE BANK OF HYDERABAD & ORS.
2023 INSC 4752 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed
The borrower (G. Vikram Kumar) failed to repay a loan to State Bank of Hyderabad, which invoked Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act and attached the borrower's properties. The Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) allowed the bank to sell the properties but excluded seven flats; Flat No.6401 was not among them. The borrower enter…
PATEL RAVJIBHAI BHULABHAJ (D) THR. LRS.versusRAHEMANBHAI M .. SHAIKH (D) THR. LRS. & ORS.
2016 INSC 11812 May 2016Dismissed
The parties executed a deed on 30‑December‑1960 titled a conditional sale for Rs 10,000, containing a clause that if the plaintiffs repaid the amount within five years the defendants would return possession of the land, and after five years the plaintiffs would have no right to claim it back. The plaintiffs later sued …
BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITEDversusRAMA CHANDRASHEKHAR VAIDYA AND ANR.
2013 INSC 2072 April 2013Dismissed
Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (the appellant) occupied land under a 1955 lease that granted a unilateral right to renew for another 25 years. After the Burmah Shell (Acquisition of Undertakings in India) Act, 1976 came into force, the appellant gave notice of renewal in October 1979 but no fresh lease deed was exec…
BAINI PRASAD (D) THR. LRS.versusDURGA DEVI
2023 INSC 952 February 2023Dismissed
The respondent, Durga Devi, owned an 11‑biswas land parcel in Kullu and sued the appellant, Baini Prasad, for possession and demolition of a verandah he had constructed on that land in 1986, claiming he believed it to be his own. The trial court ordered demolition and restoration of possession to the respondent; the Fi…
RAMVILAS (DEAD) THR. LRS. & ANR.versusKARIM KHAN & ANR.
2016 INSC 10851 December 2016Dismissed
The respondent-plaintiff obtained a loan from the appellants and executed a deed titled a Sale Deed on 14‑06‑1972, which was later alleged to be a mortgage by conditional sale. The parties also signed an agreement that the sale would be cancelled and the land returned if the loan (Rs.5,000) was repaid by 14‑06‑1973; th…
MOHIDEEN ABDUL KHADAR (DEAD)THROUGH LRS.versusRAHMATH BEEVI (D) THR. HER LRS. AND ORS.
2023 INSC 9691 November 2023Dismissed
The petitioners, legatees of the deceased Mohideen Abdul Khadar, challenged a Madras High Court judgment that upheld the title and possession of Rahmath Beevi over a second scheduled property measuring 15 × 18 feet. The dispute arose from earlier suits where Mohideen claimed title to a first scheduled property and soug…
SHAKEEL AHMEDversusSYED AKHLAQ HUSSAIN
2023 INSC 10161 November 2023Appeal(s) allowed
The respondent filed a suit for possession and mesne profits of a property relying on an unregistered power of attorney, agreement to sell, affidavit and will, while the appellant, who was in possession, claimed title through an oral gift (Hiba) from his brother. The trial court decreed possession in favour of the resp…
M/S HINDON FORGE PVT. LTD. & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH THROUGH DISTRICT MAGISTRATE GHAZIABAD & ANR.
2018 INSC 10341 November 2018Leave Granted & Allowed
The Supreme Court examined whether a borrower can invoke Section 17(1) of the SARFAESI Act before the bank or financial institution takes actual physical possession of the secured asset. The dispute arose from Hindon Forge Pvt. Ltd. and others challenging a Full Bench of the Allahabad High Court that had held the remed…
KORUKONDA CHALAPATHI RAO & ANR.versusKORUKONDA ANNAPURNA SAMPATH KUMAR
2021 INSC 5861 October 2021Appeal(s) allowed
The dispute arose from a partition of family property where the respondent sought a declaration of title and eviction of the appellants. The appellants relied on a family settlement document (Khararunama) dated 15‑04‑1986 and a receipt of Rs.2,00,000 as evidence of the parties' past arrangements. The trial court admitt…
RAMESH CHAND (D) THR. LRS.versusSURESH CHAND AND ANR.
2025 INSC 10591 September 2025Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiff claimed title to a Delhi property on the basis of an agreement to sell, a general power of attorney, a receipt of consideration, an affidavit and a registered will executed by his father, Kundan Lal. The trial court and High Court had upheld his claim, but the Supreme Court examined whether these document…
YADAIAH AND ANR.versusSTATE OF TELANGANA AND OTHERS
2023 INSC 6641 August 2023Dismissed
The case concerned land allotted in the 1960s to landless Scheduled Caste/Tribe persons in Manchirevula village, which the assignees later transferred through a General Power of Attorney to a third party who sold the land. The State of Telangana issued a second show‑cause notice (SCN) alleging violation of the Andhra P…
EIH LIMITEDversusNADIAVIRJI
2022 INSC 7741 August 2022Dismissed
The landlord (EIH Ltd.) and tenant (Nadia A. Virji) entered into a tenancy agreement for a commercial showroom with a fixed rent of Rs 10,000 per month, while the tenant also agreed to pay municipal taxes separately. The landlord terminated the tenancy under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act and filed an evic…
VANCHALABAI RAGHUNATH ITHAPE (D) BY LRversusSHANKARRAO BABURAO BHILARE (D) BY LRS. AND OTHERS
2013 INSC 3771 July 2013Dismissed
The appellant, Vanchalabai Raghunath Ithape (by legal representatives), executed a deed in 1967 transferring land to Shankarrao Baburao Bhilare for Rs.3,000 with a clause that the land would be returned if the amount was paid within five years. The appellant later claimed the deed was a mortgage by conditional sale and…
GUJARAT COMPOSITE LIMITEDversusA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED & ORS.
2023 INSC 4701 May 2023Dismissed
Gujarat Composite Ltd. entered into a licence agreement with A Infrastructure Ltd. in 2005 that contained an arbitration clause, and later entered into a tripartite loan agreement with the same party and Bank of Baroda that lacked any arbitration provision. Disputes arose over possession, loan repayment, and conveyance…
THULASIDHARA & ANOTHERversusNARAYANAPPA & OTHERS
2019 INSC 6031 May 2019Disposed off
The original plaintiff filed a suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction, claiming ownership of a property based on a registered sale deed. The defendants contended that the property had become part of a joint family and that the sale deed was merely a security instrument, not an operative transfer, and th…
RAJASTHAN HOUSING BOARDversusNEW PINK CITY NIRMAN SAHKARI SAMITI LTD. & ANR.
2015 INSC 3751 May 2015Disposed off
The Rajasthan Housing Board and the original Khatedars appealed against a Division Bench order that granted the New Pink City Nirman Sahkari Samiti Ltd. (the Society) a right to compensation and 25% of the developed land after the State acquired the land under the Rajasthan Land Acquisition Act, 1953. The Court held th…
SMT. UMA DEVI AND ORS.versusSRI. ANAND KUMAR AND ORS.
2025 INSC 4341 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiffs, grandchildren of Shivanna, filed a suit for partition of ancestral immovable property in 2023, alleging denial of their share. The defendants moved an application under Order 7 Rule 11 of the CPC, contending that the property had been orally partitioned in 1968 and that registered sale deeds executed in…
MRS. UMADEVI NAMBIARversusTHAMARASSERI ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESE REP BY ITS PROCURATOR DEVSSIA’S SON REV. FATHER JOSEPH KAPPIL
2022 INSC 3811 April 2022Appeal(s) allowed
Mrs. Umadevi Nambiar executed a general Power of Attorney (PoA) in favour of her sister in 1971, which was later cancelled, but the sister had used the PoA to execute four documents transferring the appellant's share of a family property to third parties. Those third parties subsequently sold the property to the respon…
JOGI RAMversusSURESH KUMAR & ORS
2022 INSC 1311 February 2022Appeal(s) allowed
The case concerned a Will dated 15 April 1968 in which Tulsi Ram bequeathed half of his self‑acquired property to his second wife, Ram Devi, as a limited life interest, with the remainder to pass to his son, Jogi Ram, after her death. The question was whether Ram Devi’s interest became an absolute ownership under Secti…
MUNSHI LALversusSMT. SANTOSH & ORS.
2017 INSC 941 February 2017Disposed off
The landlord, Munshi Lal, sought eviction of his tenant, Hakim Rai (deceased) and his successors, alleging that the tenant had sub-let a Kiraria shop to his son‑in‑law Raj Kumar under a partnership deed without the landlord's written consent. The Rent Controller held the partnership to be a ruse and that the son‑in‑law…
SRI MAHESHversusSANGRAM & ORS
2025 INSC 141 January 2025Case Partly allowed
The appellant, an adopted son, claimed entitlement to half of his adoptive mother's joint family property and challenged two alienations— a sale deed (2007) and a gift deed (2008) executed by the adoptive mother after his adoption. The dispute hinged on whether the adoption of a widow’s son relates back to the husband'…