Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

Judgments of 1996

1,257 judgments, newest first — showing 201–400.

ADAIR DUTTA AND CO. INDIA PVT. LTD.versusTHE APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT

1996 INSC 111225 September 1996Disposed off

Adair Dutta & Co. India Pvt. Ltd., a tenant in a Madras building, challenged an order under Section 269 UD of the Income Tax Act that required surrender of possession after the building was purchased by the Central Government under Section 269 UE, which stated the property would vest free from all encumbrances. The com

SURJA RAMversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

1996 INSC 111325 September 1996Dismissed

Surja Ram was convicted of murdering his brother Raji Ram, the brother's two minor sons and their aunt, and of attempting to murder the brother's wife and daughter. The killings were carried out in a cool, calculated manner during the night while the victims were asleep, using a sharp cutting instrument to sever their

SMT. HIMI AND ANR.versusSMT. HIRA DEVI AND ORS.

1996 INSC 111625 September 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Bai Lachhmu, the daughter of Bali Ram, filed a suit to enforce her half‑share in agricultural lands under her father's will against her step‑mother Bai Utti. The parties compromised in 1947, whereby Utti acknowledged Lachhmu's title and was allowed to retain possession of the disputed half during her lifetime, with the

G.B. KASHIRASAGARversusL.A. NARODE

1996 INSC 110525 September 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The landlord filed an eviction petition under Section 31 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, leading to a 1954 order that, by compromise, required the tenant to surrender three acres while retaining 1 acre 38 guntas. Later the landlord attempted a second eviction on the ground of bona‑fide personal

YESHODA AND ANR.versusK. NAGARAJAN

1996 INSC 110625 September 1996Dismissed

In a suit for specific performance, the trial court passed a conditional decree requiring the respondent to deposit Rs.1,80,000 by 21 April 1994. The Karnataka High Court, on the respondent’s application, extended the time by three months. The petitioners then filed an application under Section 28 of the Specific Relie

M/S STAR WIRE (INDIA) LTD.versusTHE STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 110725 September 1996Dismissed

Mis Star Wire (India) Ltd. purchased land that had been subject to a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, published on 1 June 1976. After the award of acquisition was made on 3 July 1981, the company filed a writ petition in 1994 challenging the notification, declaration and award, claimin

STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.versusRAJPAL SHARMA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 78525 July 1996Dismissed

The respondents were teachers in privately managed aided schools in Haryana who, after acquiring higher qualifications, claimed pay scales and dearness allowances equal to those of teachers in government schools. The State Government refused, but the Punjab and Haryana High Court granted relief, directing parity in pay

JOG RAMversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS .

1996 INSC 78625 July 1996Dismissed

Jog Ram, the appellant, possessed 30 bighas 13 biswas of land that had been evacuee property taken over by the State of Haryana for distribution. In 1967 the land was auctioned and Fateh Singh (respondent No.5) was the highest bidder; the sale was confirmed. In 1968 Jog Ram applied for confirmation of sale and was conv

MIS. MALWA OIL MILLS AND ANR.versusSTATE OF M.P. AND ORS.

1996 INSC 78725 July 1996Dismissed

The appellants, Malwa Oil Mills, purchased plots 4 and 5 from the erstwhile owners after taking possession of land that had been notified under Section 71 of the Madhya Pradesh Town Improvement Trust Act, 1960 for a housing scheme, and later sought to retain a sign‑board placed on the property. The State of Madhya Prad

RAM SINGHversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ORS.

1996 INSC 78925 July 1996Dismissed

The appellant, Ram Singh, had cut down trees that existed on his land as of 24 January 1971 and replanted new trees. The issue before the Supreme Court was whether the newly planted trees could be classified as "grove land" under Section 23(8) of the Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960, which

SMT. DAROTHI CLARE PARREIRA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 79025 July 1996Dismissed

The appellants, former owners of surplus urban land in Pune, were deemed to possess excess land under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976. After objections were rejected, a notification under Section 10(3) was published vesting the surplus land in the State, before the appellants' applications under Secti

MIS. EVEREST COPIERS THROUGH R.A. PARTNER ETC.versusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

1996 INSC 79125 July 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Everest Copiers, a photocopying business, was assessed sales tax for two assessment years on the ground that it sold xerox copies to customers. The issue before the Supreme Court was whether the making and delivery of photocopies constituted a sale of goods under Section 2(1) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 19

UJAGAR SINGH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

1996 INSC 79225 July 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Collector, under the PEPSU Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1955, determined that Inder Singh held 18.82 standard acres of surplus land and ordered its surrender in July 1961, after which the land was taken over by the State and redistributed to landless persons. Subsequent consolidation proceedings revealed tha

RAJ MANIversusTHE COLLECTOR, RAIPUR

1996 INSC 79325 July 1996

The appellant's land was acquired and a compensation award of Rs.1,000 per acre was made. He applied for a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, but the court’s notice was not properly served; the notice was allegedly served on a deceased father. The reference court dismissed the case ex‑parte f

M/S. UNITED COPIEX (INDIA) PVT. LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX

1996 INSC 43525 March 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, manufacturers of rubber flaps used to protect tyre tubes, were taxed under sub‑entry (2) of Entry 43 of the Uttar Pradesh Sales Tax Act, 1948 as accessories of motor vehicles. They contended that the flaps were not accessories of a motor vehicle but only of tyres or tubes and should therefore be taxed a

DILWAN SINGH AND ORS. ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS ETC. ETC.

1996 INSC 43625 March 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined an appeal by ex‑servicemen challenging the State of Haryana's recruitment policy that required the selection board to consider ex‑servicemen and their dependent children together for posts reserved for ex‑servicemen. The appellants argued that the policy undermined the purpose of reservation,

MAJOR RADHA KRISHANversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 43725 March 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Major in the Indian Army, was served a notice under Section 19 of the Army Act, 1950 and Rule 14 of the Army Rules, 1954, proposing termination of his service for misconduct alleged to have occurred about seven years earlier. The notice claimed that a court‑martial trial was impracticable because the t

UNION OF INDIAversusPALIWAL ELECTRICALS (P) LTD. AND ANR.

1996 INSC 43825 March 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India appealed a decision of the Allahabad High Court that struck down paragraph 7 of Central Excise Notification No. 175 of 1986, which excluded from exemption any small‑scale manufacturer that affixed the brand or trade name of a person not eligible for the exemption. The Court examined whether this amen

MOST REV. P.MA. METROPOLITAN AND ORS. ETCversusMORAN MAR MARTHOMA MATHEWS AND ANR. ETC.

1996 INSC 43425 March 1996Disposed off

The Supreme Court was asked to resolve a dispute between the two factions of the Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church over the fairness of clause 68 (renumbered as clause 71) of the 1934 Constitution, which gave equal representation to each Parish Church irrespective of its size. The Court held that the clause was not fair

BALBIR SINGH NEG!versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1996 INSC 43925 March 1996Dismissed

Balbir Singh Neg, after completing 33 years of service, filed an application for voluntary retirement under Rule 48‑A of the Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972, which was accepted to take effect on 30 June 1991. He later sought to withdraw the application before it became effective, but the Central Administrative Tri

PILLA SITARAM PATRUDU AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 44025 March 1996Dismissed

The case concerned K.R. Ramanandan, a direct recruit selected in 1977 as Assistant Executive Engineer but appointed only in 1981 due to administrative delays. After passing his test, he was not considered for promotion to Executive Engineer, prompting an appeal before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT). The CAT

JAGBIR SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS .

1996 INSC 44325 March 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, recruited as a Constable in the Haryana Police under the sports quota, was promoted to Head Constable in 1984 and confirmed in 1987. He later received a show‑cause notice for de‑confirmation and was promoted on an ad‑hoc basis to Assistant Sub‑Inspector in 1990. While undergoing training, his name was re

TARLOK SINGHversusVIJAY KUMAR SABHARWAL

1996 INSC 44425 March 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, owner of certain lands, was bound by a sale agreement dated December 21, 1984, which was later extended to require execution of the sale deed within 15 days of the vacating of an injunction. A suit for perpetual injunction was filed on December 23, 1987, and later amended on July 17, 1989, under Order 6

NAGAMMAI COTTON MILLS ETC.versusASSTI. DIRECTOR, REGIONAL OFFICE OF THE TEXTILES COMMISSIONER, MINISTRY OF TEXTILES ETC.

1996 INSC 44525 March 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appeal concerned Nagammayi Cotton Mills' liability under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and the Textile (Control) Order, 1986/1993 regarding the mandatory production of hank yarn. The petitioner sought to have past liability waived for the periods April 1 1993‑March 31 1995 and April 1 1990‑September 30 1992,

BHARMAPPA NEMANNA KAWALE AND ANR.versusDHODI BHIMA PATIL AND ORS.

1996 INSC 44625 March 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The civil court had decreed an eviction suit against the appellant, holding that he was not a tenant, and the decree became final. During execution, the appellant raised a fresh objection that there was no jural relationship because he claimed to be a tenant. The Bombay High Court, in Writ Petition No. 3319 of 1992, di

INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE AND ANR.versusTHAVASIAPPAN

1996 INSC 13125 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

A Sub‑Inspector of Police was charged with accepting a bribe and failing to register a criminal case. A Deputy Superintendent of Police framed the charge‑memo, conducted the inquiry and sent a report to the Deputy Inspector General, who imposed compulsory retirement. The Sub‑Inspector appealed to the Tamil Nadu Adminis

STATE OF U.P. AND ANR.versusRAJENDRA SINGH

1996 INSC 13225 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of U.P. acquired 5.357 acres of agricultural land in Azamgarh for a project. The Land Acquisition Officer initially fixed compensation at Rs 3,658.87 per acre, which the claimant challenged under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The reference court raised the award to Rs 30,000 per acre, and the

BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD AND ORS.versusM/S. ALLIED REFRACTORIES (PVT.) LTD. AND ORS.

1996 INSC 13325 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Bihar State Electricity Board entered into a contract with Mis. Allied Refractories requiring the consumer to pay a minimum guaranteed charge for electricity. The consumers failed to consume the guaranteed amount because of frequent trippings, load shedding and power cuts, and under Clause 13 of the contract they w

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusS.S. AKOLKAR

1996 INSC 13425 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh appealed against the dismissal of its appeal in a civil suit where the respondent, S.S. Akolkar, had died. The State filed an application under Order 22 Rule 4 of the CPC to substitute the legal representatives of the deceased, but the application was filed 15 days after the court was inform

STATE OF U.P.versusBANKE SINGH AND ANR

1996 INSC 13525 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State appealed against the order that excluded a parcel of land from surplus land on the basis of a will executed in 1978. The respondents claimed a one‑fourth share in the surplus land, arguing that the will of Smt. Gajraji bequeathing the share to her nephew should exempt the land from ceiling provisions. The iss

S. SWVIGARADOSSversusZONAL MANAGER, F.C.I.

1996 INSC 13625 January 1996Dismissed

The petitioner, born in 1941 to parents who had converted to Christianity before his birth, later reconverted to Hinduism at age 14 and claimed to be an Adi‑Dravida Scheduled Caste to obtain SC benefits in his employment with the Food Corporation of India. He filed a suit for a declaration of Scheduled Caste status; th

PIECO ELECTRONICS AND ELECTRICALS LTD.versusCOLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, PUNE

1996 INSC 121224 October 1996Dismissed

Pieco Electronics manufactured plastic parts that fell under Entry 15A(2) of the Central Excise Tariff but were exempt from duty by Notification No. 68/71. The Finance Bill, 1982 proposed to amend Entry 15A(2) so that the parts would be classified under Entry 68 and become liable to excise duty, and the Bill contained

GODABARISH MISHRAversusKUNTALA MISHRA AND ANR.

1996 INSC 121424 October 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The accused, Kuntala Mishra, a midwife, was alleged to have murdered her daughter‑in‑law Geeta by strangulating her with a petticoat string after a dowry dispute. Geeta had undergone a D&C operation and was under the effect of phenargan, rendering her drowsy. She was found dead in the accused's quarters; the accused cl

DIVYA DIP SINGH AND ORS.versusRAM BACHAN MISHRA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 121524 October 1996Dismissed

The father of three minor sons filed a title suit in which the minors were added as co-plaintiffs and a court‑appointed guardian was assigned. After the suit was compromised, the father, acting as natural guardian, sold the suit land to the first respondent without obtaining prior court sanction, and the sale was recor

CHANDIGARH ADMINISTRATIONversusSH. SUMESH KUMAR ETC.

1996 INSC 121624 October 1996Dismissed

The Chandigarh Administration issued show‑cause notices to several teachers who had been promoted from Classical and Vernacular posts to Master/Mistress (TGT) positions, alleging that the promotions violated the Chandigarh Education Service (School Cadre) Group ‘C’ Recruitment Rules, 1991 which, it claimed, allowed pro

S. JAFFAR SAHIBversusSECRETARY A.P.P.S.C. AND ORS.

1996 INSC 121724 October 1996Dismissed

S. Jaffar Sahib, a general‑category candidate, was denied appointment as Deputy Collector for the 1980‑81 recruitment, where five posts were reserved and five were open. He challenged the appointment of six candidates from reserved categories, alleging that the reservation rules were violated. The Andhra Pradesh Admini

STATE OF U.P. AND ORS. ETCversusPURUSHOTTAM PANDEY AND ORS. ETC.

1996 INSC 121824 October 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents were employees of a privately managed agricultural school that received grant-in-aid and offered a two‑year Agricultural Extension Diploma. After the State of Uttar Pradesh abolished the diploma course, the employees were terminated and sought post‑retirement benefits under the Uttar Pradesh State Aided

DEVENDRA NARAYAN SINGH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

1996 INSC 121924 October 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, recruited to the Bihar State Police Service in 1969, were promoted to the Indian Police Service (IPS) after being placed in a select list prepared in 1985 pursuant to a Supreme Court direction to prepare a list for the year 1983. Although the list was approved by the Union Public Service Commission in 1

RAIZUR REHMAN KHAN AND ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

1996 INSC 122024 October 1996Dismissed

The appellant, a family waqf (Waqf Alai Aulad) created before May 1, 1959, sought exemption from land‑ceiling provisions on the ground that its income was used for charitable and religious purposes as well as for the welfare of the settler’s family. The claim was made under clause (f) of Section 6(1) of the U.P. Imposi

THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANR.versusTALIB KHAN AND ORS. ETC.

1996 INSC 121124 October 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents were detained under Section 3(1) of the National Security Act, 1980 by the District Magistrate, Jaisalmer on 7 January 1987. Grounds of detention were not supplied within the statutory five‑day period; the magistrate recorded “exceptional circumstances” on 11 January and supplied the grounds on 16 Janua

BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARDversusHOTEL SATKAR PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS

1996 INSC 110424 September 1996

The Bihar State Electricity Board (BSEB) issued a notice under Section 24(1) of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 to disconnect electricity to Hotel Satkar for non-payment of bills based on contract demand, which the hotel contested, arguing that charges should be on actual consumption and that the dispute should be ref

HAFIZ WASHI AHMEDversusKUTUBUDDIN AND ORS.

1996 INSC 109924 September 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Hafiz Washi Ahmed filed a suit for injunction to protect his possession of a portion of land and a structure, claiming exclusive title based on an alleged gift, while the land was partly declared evacuee property. The trial court held that the factual question of whether the disputed portion was part of the evacuee pro

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusSWAROPCHANDRA

1996 INSC 110024 September 1996Dismissed

The truck bearing No. 9493 was seized by a Divisional Forest Officer for carrying 22 logs of timber without a permit under the Madhya Pradesh Ven Upaj Vyapar Viniyaman Act, 1969. The driver compounded the offence by paying Rs.1,000, but the truck was not released because its value was not paid, leading to its confiscat

JAGANNATH KASHINATH PATILversusNARAYAN BALUGAIKAR

1996 INSC 110124 September 1996Dismissed

The respondent filed a suit to remove a structure erected by the appellant and to restrain interference with his possession of a 50 ft x 30 ft plot. The plot originally belonged to the respondent's maternal grandmother, who had executed a possessory mortgage in favor of Pukharaj, who later returned the mortgage deed an

STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR.versusUPPEGOUDA AND ORS. ETC.

1996 INSC 110224 September 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State appealed against a Karnataka High Court order that denied registration of occupancy to a tenant, Puppegouda, who had been in possession of 2 acres 30 gunthas of land since 1950 under successive lease renewals. The Karnataka Tenancy Act, 1961 protected his possession, and the Land Reforms (Amendment) Act, 1974

SMT. FATIMA BEEversusMAHAMOOD SIDDIQUI ETC.

1996 INSC 78224 July 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined appeals filed by landlady Fatima Bee against the Andhra Pradesh High Court, which had set aside earlier findings that she required the non‑residential premises bona fide for her bangle‑manufacturing business and that the tenants' claim of permanent tenancy was mala fide. The lower Rent Contro

J.H. PATELversusSUBHAN KHAN

1996 INSC 77724 July 1996Appeal(s) allowed

In the Channagiri Legislative Assembly election, Subhan Khan's nomination was rejected because he had not taken the oath required under Article 173 of the Constitution on the day of scrutiny. He argued that an oath taken earlier on 27 October 1994 in another constituency (Davanagere) should suffice, and the High Court

M/S. L.D.L. CHEMICALS LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 78324 July 1996Appeal(s) allowed

M/s IDL Chemicals Ltd. manufactures explosives using 80% ammonium nitrate melt purchased from SAIL. An exemption notification dated 11 June 1969 exempted such ammonium nitrate from excise duty under Tariff Item 14HH, provided the licence and bond were obtained. The Central Board later reclassified the nitrate under Tar

THE STATE OF WEST BENGALversusLOHIT KUMAR ROY

1996 INSC 77924 July 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of West Bengal acquired 985.95 acres of land in Durgapur for industrial purposes under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, with an initial notification in 1956 that later lapsed and a second notification in 1964. The Land Acquisition Officer fixed compensation at Rs. 2,310 per acre, but the reference court enhanc

SHRI PREM BALLABH BELWALversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

1996 INSC 77824 July 1996Dismissed

The appellant, Prem Ballabh Belwal, was a tenure‑holder of 182 acres of bhumiswami land under the U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960. His wife, Basanti Devi, held 24 acres as an Asami (occupancy) right. The question before the Supreme Court was whether the wife's land, held only in occupation, should

KASHI VIDYAPITHversusMOTILAL AND ORS.

1996 INSC 78124 July 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned Kashi Vidyapith, a deemed university under the U.P. State Universities Act, which sought acquisition of land for its campus, staff quarters, hostels and playground. The High Court had set aside the declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, holding that the university was not an “other

SMT. DEOKALIversusNAND KISHORE AND ORS.

1996 INSC 57824 April 1996Dismissed

The appellant Deokali challenged the validity of a will executed by her father Shivnarayan on 2 May 1972, which bequeathed all his movable and immovable property to the three grandsons (sons of her elder sister Ramkali). She alleged six suspicious circumstances: the first page lacked signatures and was on stamp paper w

M/S DEWAN ENTERPRISESversusCOMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX, U.P.

1996 INSC 57624 April 1996Appeal(s) allowed

MIS Dewan Enterprises, a manufacturer of cycle rims, was assessed by the Uttar Pradesh Sales Tax Officer at an 8% rate, treating the rims as cycle parts. The company argued that under Section 14(iv)(xiv) of the Central Sales Tax Act, cycle rims are "declared goods" and, per Section 15, should be taxed at a maximum of 4

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ZILLA PARISHAD, BEED AND ORS.versusSYED YASIN AND ORS.

1996 INSC 58124 April 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Maharashtra issued a 1970 resolution authorising Zilla Parishads to upgrade primary school teachers to Head Masters with retrospective effect from 1 April 1966, subject to specific vacancy conditions. Four teachers filed a writ petition claiming entitlement to the upgraded pay scale. The Chief Executive Of

TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD AND ANR.versusN. RAJU REDDIAR AND ANR.

1996 INSC 58224 April 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents (plaintiffs) sued the T.N. Electricity Board for Rs. 46,08,820, claiming that the freight rates for transporting iron and steel were to be paid on a multi‑slab basis as indicated in a handwritten addition to a letter appended to their tender. The High Court Division Bench accepted this claim, holding th

KIRLOSKAR BROTHERS LTD.versusEMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPN.

1996 INSC 12124 January 1996Dismissed

Kirloskar Brothers Ltd., a manufacturer with factories in Maharashtra and Deewas, set up regional offices in Secunderabad and Bangalore to sell its products. The State Governments of Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka treated these offices as establishments under Section 2(g) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 and i

STATE OF ORISSA AND ORS.versusARNAB KUMAR DUTTA

1996 INSC 12624 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Orissa appealed against an Orissa Administrative Tribunal order that a draughtsman be retained in service up to the age of 60. The central question was whether a draughtsman qualifies as a "workman" under the second proviso to Rule 71(a) of the Orissa Service Code, which would entitle him to such retention

S.B. INTERNATIONAL LTD. ETC.versusASSTT. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF F.T. AND ORS. ETC.

1996 INSC 12824 January 1996Disposed off

S.B. International Ltd., an exporter of marine products, applied for advance licences under the Duty Exemption Scheme of the Export and Import (Control) Act, 1947 between May and September 1992. On 25 September 1992 the government raised the value‑addition norm from 1000% to 1900% and later issued the licences in Febru

KARAN SINGH AND ORS. ETC.versusBHAGWAN SINGH (DEAD) BY L.R. AND ORS. ETC.

1996 INSC 12924 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Bhagwan Singh, a co‑owner of undivided joint‑family agricultural land, sold portions of the land in specie to strangers who later sold parts to Karan Singh (the appellant). Bhagwan Singh filed a suit for pre‑emption under the Punjab Pre‑emption Act, 1913, claiming his co‑owner right. The trial court dismissed the suit,

YADAVRAO P. PATHADE (DEAD) BY LRS. ETC.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

1996 INSC 12224 January 1996Disposed off

The appellants, heirs of Yadavrao P. Pathade, appealed against the State of Maharashtra seeking interest on the solatium awarded under Section 23(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The compensation had been enhanced by the reference court and further by the High Court to Rs 42,056.15, but the High Court refused inte

STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ANR.versusS. SUBRAMANIAM

1996 INSC 12324 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, S. Subramaniam, a Deputy Tehsildar, was charged with demanding and accepting illegal gratification for effecting land‑record mutations. A disciplinary inquiry found the charge proved and ordered his removal from service. The Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, on review, re‑appreciated the evidence, con

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESHversusSURESH KUMAR VERMA AND ANR.

1996 INSC 12424 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents, Suresh Kumar Verma and another, were re‑engaged as Assistant Development Officers on a daily‑wage basis after the project they were working on ended. The Himachal Pradesh High Court had directed the State to re‑engage them despite existing vacancies, treating the daily‑wage appointment as a regular pos

RAMJILAL AND ORS. ETC.versusGHISA RAM ETC.

1996 INSC 12524 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents, co‑owners of land sold by a widow who possessed only a limited estate, filed a suit under Section 15(1)(b) of the Punjab Pre‑emption Act, 1913 seeking pre‑emption of the sale. The trial court decreed in their favour and the decree was upheld on appeal, but the second appeal was dismissed. While these p

SHIV SAGAR TIW ARIversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 153323 December 1996Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained a public interest writ under Article 32 challenging large‑scale out‑of‑turn allotments of government residential quarters in Delhi, alleged to be made on a ‘Special Compassionate Ground’ and constituting a housing scam. A three‑member Gupta Committee examined the allotments and categorized

THE HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ANR.versusROOCHIRA CERAMICS AND ANR.

1996 INSC 120323 October 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA) allotted an industrial plot to the respondent, who was required to pay 25% of the price upfront and the balance in six instalments. After paying only the first instalment, the respondent defaulted; HUDA issued a show‑cause notice under section 17(3) of the HUDA Act, a pena

MRS. SEEMA KUMARI SHARMAversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND ANR.

1996 INSC 120623 October 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a candidate for Junior Basic Teacher training in Himachal Pradesh, claimed extra marks under the selection criteria for candidates belonging to Integrated Rural Development Programme (IRDP) families. The Director of Education’s notice allotted 10 marks for IRDP status, but the appellant’s claim was rejec

UNION OF INDIA AND ORSversusBISHAMBER DUTT

1996 INSC 120723 October 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Court considered appeals by the Union of India against a Central Administrative Tribunal order directing the regularisation of certain Class IV employees appointed on a part‑time basis in the Controller of Defence Accounts. The respondents, appointed on specific dates between 1990 and 1994, received a consolidated

M/S ANAMALLAI CLUBversusTHE GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS.

1996 INSC 120823 October 1996Disposed off

The Anamalai Club held a licence for 28.70 acres of government land for sports and recreation. The State of Tamil Nadu terminated the licence under Section 3 of the Government Grants Act, 1895 and resumed possession with police assistance on the same day, without issuing a notice under the Tamil Nadu Public Premises (E

S. VALLINAYAGAM AND ORS.versusLUKE STEPHEN AND ANR.

1996 INSC 120923 October 1996Disposed off

The appeal arose from a Kerala High Court order in a suit seeking an injunction restraining the alienation of land. The petitioner, engaged in cardamom cultivation, argued that certain trees needed to be cut to allow uninterrupted plantation and to remove diseased plants. The respondent contended that no planting had y

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusHARISH BALKRISHNA MAHAJAN

1996 INSC 121023 October 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Harish Balkrishna Mahajan was appointed on a temporary, monthly basis as a Medical Officer in the Central Government Health Scheme from August 1982 to August 1987 during a doctors' strike. After his termination he approached the Central Administrative Tribunal, which ordered the Union of India to regularise his service

JASWANT SINGH AND ANR.versusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB

1996 INSC 109423 September 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, who were employed as drivers, became blind while in service and applied for alternative appointment. The employer removed them from service instead of providing a suitable post. The Supreme Court examined the issue in light of the precedent set in Anand Bihari v. Rajasthan S.R.T.C., which laid down a sc

HARJINDER SINGH SODHIversusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS,.

1996 INSC 109523 September 1996Dismissed

Harjinder Singh Sodhi challenged his non-selection to the Punjab Civil Services Executive Branch, arguing that the Punjab Public Service Commission (PPSC) failed to properly assess merit, that the government falsely claimed no vacancy existed, and that the 50% weight given to interview marks was arbitrary, especially s

THE AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE BY ITS SECRETARY ETC.versusTHE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND ANR. ETC.

1996 INSC 109623 September 1996Disposed off

The Agricultural Produce Market Committee sought acquisition of about 4.5 acres of land for its extension. The Land Acquisition Officer initially awarded compensation at Rs.0.76 per square foot, which the Civil Judge enhanced to Rs.8.50 per square foot, and the Karnataka High Court later reduced to Rs.7 per square foot

MADHAVKRISHNA AND ANR.versusCHANDRA BHAGA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 109723 September 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Mansaram, the father of Babula and Parasram, was held by a trial court to be the exclusive owner of a house and the decree became final. He later executed a will bequeathing the property to Babula's descendants (the appellants) and died in 1968. The appellants sued in 1977 for declaration of title and possession and ob

GUPTA STEEL INDUSTRIESversusM/S. JOLLY STEEL INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. AND ANR.

1996 INSC 109823 September 1996Disposed off

The parties entered into a compromise decree while an appeal was pending, obligating the respondents to deposit specified sums and the appellants to surrender possession of land and machinery. The respondents failed to deposit the amounts by the stipulated deadline; the High Court later accepted the delayed payment and

BALRAM S/O BHASA RAMversusILAM SINGH AND ORS.

1996 INSC 92623 August 1996Dismissed

The appellant, a decree‑holder, obtained a money decree against the respondent and sought execution by auctioning the respondent's agricultural land. Although the appellant was permitted to bid and his bid was accepted, he failed to deposit the full purchase price within the statutory 15‑day period, citing a set‑off of

NAYUDU SRIHARIversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

1996 INSC 92723 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Nayudu Srihari, and fourteen others were charged with the murder of Nagulu, a member of a rival faction, based solely on the testimony of PW‑1. The trial court and the Andhra Pradesh High Court upheld the conviction, despite inconsistencies in PW‑1's statements, the fact that his parents testified he was

RAI SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA

1996 INSC 92823 August 1996Dismissed

Rai Singh was convicted for the murder of Smt. Parkashi, who was shot with a pistol inside her house in the early hours of January 30, 1987. The prosecution established that Singh had an illicit relationship with the deceased, and that he was present at the house on the night of the murder, where he fired the pistol af

SURESH LOHIYAversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

1996 INSC 92923 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Suresh Lohia's bamboo mat was confiscated by forest authorities as alleged forest‑produce. The Additional Sessions Judge ordered its release, but the Bombay High Court reversed, holding the mat to be forest‑produce under the Indian Forest Act, 1927. Lohia appealed to the Supreme Court, contending that a bamboo mat, bei

SMT. SAWARNIversusSMT. INDER KAUR AND ORS.

1996 INSC 93223 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff, Smt. Sawarni, and her sister Roori claimed to be the daughters of the deceased landowner Gurbax Singh and sought a declaration of title and possession of the disputed land. A will executed by the widow Gurdip Kaur in favour of the two daughters and a succession certificate issued under the Indian Success

SITA DEVI & ORS. ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

1996 INSC 93323 August 1996Dismissed

The petitioners, non‑matriculate instructors in Haryana's Adult Literacy Programme, claimed that they performed the same duties as matriculate instructors and therefore deserved the same pay scale, invoking the doctrine of "equal pay for equal work" under Article 14. They sought regularisation, back wages, and recognit

M/S. JYOTI PRASHAD VINOD KUMAR AND ANR.versusYASH PAL AND ORS.

1996 INSC 93523 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The tenants appealed against an eviction order issued by the appellate authority and affirmed by the High Court, which was based on the alleged non‑payment of increased rent that included a newly levied house tax. Under Section 8(1) of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973, a landlord may shift the

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, SRIRANGAPATNAMversusNAGEGOWOA

1996 INSC 93623 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Special Land Acquisition Officer acquired 5 acres 21 gunthas of land for a canal under a Section 4(1) notification of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The officer initially awarded Rs 4,800 per acre, which was enhanced by a civil judge to Rs 20,000 per acre and upheld by the High Court. On appeal, the Supreme Court

JOYACHAN M. SEBASTIANversusTHE DIRECTOR GENERAL AND ORS.

1996 INSC 93723 August 1996Dismissed

Joyachan M. Sebastian was initially appointed as Clerk Grade‑II at the Doordarshan Television Station, Kohima on 21 September 1983. The post was abolished on 8 June 1983 and he was transferred, at his option, to the Doordarshan Kendra, Salem on 6 August 1984, and later, at his request, to Trivandrum on 26 March 1987. H

THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER AND ORS.versusS. NAGESHWARAMMA

1996 INSC 93823 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent held a mining lease granted in 1979 for extracting minerals in a forest area, which expired in 1984. The Forest Conservation Act, 1980, which came into force in 1980, requires prior central government approval for any mining in forest areas. In 1989 the respondent applied for renewal of the lease without

GUJARAT INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONversusNAROTTAMBHAI MORARBHAI AND ANR.

1996 INSC 93923 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation acquired 861,515 sq m of waste land on the outskirts of Surat for industrial development under a notification of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Land Acquisition Officer initially awarded compensation of Rs 5 per sq m, which was later enhanced to Rs 25 per sq m by an e

STATE OF KERALA AND ANR.versusRADHAMANY

1996 INSC 94023 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Kerala sought recovery of arrears owed by an abkari contractor, Vasudevan, who defaulted on dues as of 1 April 1969. A demand notice was issued on 17 June 1969, after which the contractor transferred three acres of agricultural land to his wife on 30 June 1969. The Tehsildar issued a notice of attachment o

PAPAIAHversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 94123 August 1996Dismissed

The appellant, Papaiah, purchased five acres of agricultural land that had been assigned to Scheduled Caste persons under Mysore Land Revenue Code Rule 43(8) in 1940. The sale deed was executed in 1958, but the Karnataka Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 declares a

FERTILIZER CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD. AND ANR.versusSARATCHANDRA RATH AND ORS.

1996 INSC 94323 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the revision of pay scales and fringe benefits for officers and workmen of Fertilizer Corporation of India Ltd. (FCI). Workmen who were promoted to the lowest officer scale before 1 January 1987 were already officers, whereas those promoted after that date were still workmen at the time of the 1987 p

KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARDversusN. SUKESEN AND ORS.

1996 INSC 76923 July 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Kerala State Electricity Board (KSEB) created a separate Secretariat Service in 1964, appointing officers without competitive tests. In 1981 KSEB integrated this Secretariat into its general establishment through regulations, and in 1985 amended the seniority rules to base inter‑se seniority on length of service in

TATA IRON AND STEEL CO. LTD. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

1996 INSC 77023 July 1996Dismissed

Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. (TISCO) sought a second renewal of its chromite mining lease under Section 8(3) of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation & Development) Act, 1957. The Central Government reduced the lease area and later further reduced it, prompting TISCO to challenge the orders, arguing that the concept of ca

KAPPUSWAMYversusTHE AUTHORISED OFFICER AND ASSISTANT COMMISIONER (LAND REFORMS)

1996 INSC 77123 July 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The testator's 1948 will granted his two wives equal life interests in the estate, stipulating that the survivor would enjoy the whole property and that after both wives' deaths the daughter would have a life interest followed by her children in fee simple. After the second wife died in 1967, the Tamil Nadu Land Reform

STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS. ETC. ETC.versusRANCHI TIMBER TRADERS ASSOCIATION

1996 INSC 77223 July 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Bihar issued 1983 rules requiring owners of saw‑pits and timber depots to obtain licences, invoking powers under sections 41, 42 and 76 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927. The Patna High Court held that the statutes did not empower such regulation and set aside the rules. The State appealed, arguing that the p

CHIKKATAYAMMA AND ORS.versusR. BALAKRISHNAPPA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 77323 July 1996Disposed off

The appeal (Civil Appeal No. 6149 of 1983) arose from a dispute over several parcels of land in Survey Nos. 194, 115 and 82 claimed by the appellants Chikkatayamma and others and the respondents R. Balakrishnappa and others. The parties filed a compromise memo before the Supreme Court, detailing the division of the lan

THE SPECIAL TEHSILDAR, LAND ACQUISITION, KERALAversusK.V. AYISUMMA

1996 INSC 77423 July 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Special Tehsildar appealed against a Kerala High Court order that set aside a subordinate judge’s condonation of delay in filing a review of a land‑acquisition award. The award dated 31 March 1989 had enhanced compensation and the appellant filed a review application on 29 July 1991 after a delay. The subordinate j

KRISHI UTPADAN MANDI SAMITI BULANDSHAHAR ETC.versusGANGA SAHAI AND ORS. ETC.

1996 INSC 77623 July 1996Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined appeals concerning compensation awarded under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for land acquired to establish an agricultural market yard. The High Court had enhanced the compensation from Rs.10 to Rs.15 per square yard and also increased solatium, interest, and an additional amount under Secti

J. ASHOH KUMARversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ORS.

1996 INSC 57323 April 1996Dismissed

J. Ashok Kumar appealed against the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal’s dismissal of his claim that he was entitled to a 5% weightage in marks as an NCC-qualified candidate under the amended Rule 4 of the Andhra Pradesh Excise Service Rules (G.O. Ms. No. 1136, 13‑September‑1986). The petitioner had applied for the

ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIAversusDR. SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY AND ANR.

1996 INSC 56923 April 1996Disposed off

The Election Commission of India appealed against a Madras High Court decision that had prohibited Chief Election Commissioner T.N. Seshan from expressing the Commission’s opinion on a disqualification petition against Chief Minister J. Jayalalitha, on grounds of alleged bias. The Supreme Court examined whether the Chi

NATHU RAM AND ORS.versusMANPHOOL AND ORS.

1996 INSC 57523 April 1996Dismissed

Nathu, who was in utero when the limitation period began, filed a suit to challenge an ancestral land gift made by Puran's adoptive mother to a stranger, also contesting Puran's adoption. Birbal and Aaidan, other reversioners, were defendants but later sought to be transposed as plaintiffs. Nathu settled with Puran and

PRABHUDEV MALLIKARJUNAIAHversusRAMACHANDRA VEERAPPA AND ANR.

1996 INSC 57023 April 1996Dismissed

The appellant, Prabhudev Mallikarjunaiah, filed a nomination as a Scheduled Caste (Beda Jangamma) candidate for the Bidar‑1 (SC) Lok Sabha seat in 1991. The Returning Officer rejected his nomination, holding that he belonged to the Veerashiva Lingayath community, not the Beda Jangamma caste listed in Presidential Notif

SH. BHOGENDRA JHAversusSH. MANOJ KUMAR JHA

1996 INSC 57123 April 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Sh. Bhogendra Jha, was elected to the 10th Lok Sabha from Madhubani, Bihar. Two other candidates, Pawan Kumar Pathak (PW‑4) and Lal Bahadur Singh (PW‑6), had their nominations rejected by the Returning Officer because the proposers' names and electoral‑roll numbers did not match the electoral roll. The r

SH. HARCHARAN SINGH JOSHversusSH. HARI KISHAN

1996 INSC 57223 April 1996Dismissed

The appellant, an unsuccessful candidate in the 1993 Delhi Assembly election, filed an election petition alleging corrupt practices under Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition but held that the respondent was not supplied with the requisite true copy of t

RAVINDRA TRIMBAK CHOUTHMALversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

1996 INSC 30223 February 1996Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Ravindra Trimbak Chouthmal, conspired with his father to murder his wife Vijaya for dowry, severing her head and cutting her body into nine pieces to conceal evidence, also causing the death of the unborn child. He was convicted of murder under s.302 read with s.1208, and of offences under s.201/34, s.31

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER BOMBAYversusMAFATLAL INDUSTRIES AND ORS., ETC.

1996 INSC 30323 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay billed Mafatlal Industries for electricity duty on guest houses it maintained for its employees, classifying them under Category C of the 1981 tariff. The company contended that the guest houses should fall under Category R, which is applicable to premises "exclusively used a

KRISHI UTPADAN MANDI SAMITI, HALDWANI ETC. ETC.versusM/S. INDIAN WOOD PRODUCTS LTD AND ANR.

1996 INSC 30423 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether, under Section 17(iii)(b) of the Uttar Pradesh Agricultural Produce Market Act, a purchasing trader remains liable to pay the market fee when the selling trader does not collect it. The dispute arose from a sale of specified agricultural produce between two traders. The Court held tha

COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER AND ORS.versusEMKAY INVESTMENTS PVT. LTD.

1996 INSC 30523 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

EMKAY Investments Pvt Ltd, a newly set up small‑scale plywood manufacturer, claimed exemption from sales tax under Rule 3(66a) of the West Bengal Sales Tax Rules, 1941. The company used the brand name “Merinoply,” which belonged to another firm, Marinoply and Chemicals Ltd. The tax authorities denied the exemption, inv

CALCUTTA IRON MERCHANTSversusCOMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES AND ANR.

1996 INSC 30623 February 1996Disposed off

The case concerned dealers of iron and steel who, under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, were required to transport goods with a declaration signed by the consignor as mandated by Rule 89A(2). The dealers contended that the rule unfairly placed the burden of producing the declaration on them while sellers were

RAMESH SINGH AND ANR.versusCINTA DEVI AND ORS.

1996 INSC 30723 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

An accident on 27 May 1988 gave rise to a compensation claim under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, which was filed on 23 December 1988. The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 came into force on 1 July 1989, repealing the 1939 Act, but the claim was finally decided on 29 June 1992, creating a right to appeal that was exercised on 2

SURINDER KAURversusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

1996 INSC 30823 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Surinder Kaur, who had served as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Dialgarph for 15 years, attempted to file her nomination papers for the Sarpanch election scheduled on 18 January 1993. On 17 January, her husband was detained by police and the 7th respondent, Tara Singh, forcibly seized and destroyed her nomination papers. D

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusCORPORAL AK. BAKSHI AND ANR.

1996 INSC 30923 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Corporal AK Bakshi and Corporal Sobhanan, each having accrued six punishment entries for misconduct, were discharged from the Indian Air Force under the Policy for Discharge of Habitual Offenders, which directs that such cases be dealt with under Rule 15(2)(g)(ii) of the Air Force Rules, 1969. They challenged the disch

GURBACHAN SINGH AND ANR.versusSHIVALAK RUBBER INDUSTRIES AND ORS.

1996 INSC 31023 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The landlords (Gurbachan Singh & Anr.) sought eviction of Shivalak Rubber Industries & Ors. under Section 13(2)(iii) of the East Punjab Rent Restriction Act, 1949, alleging that the tenants had made extensive unauthorised alterations—removing roofs, walls, doors, converting shops into sheds, stores and residential unit

VINEET KUMAR MATHURversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 11823 January 1996Disposed off

The Supreme Court had ordered the closure of Mohan Meakin's plant on 1 April 1993 for failure to meet anti‑pollution standards. The company’s managing director and CEO operated the plant from 7‑11 April and later obtained a consent from the Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board on 21 April, restarting operations despit

NITASHA PAULversusMAHARISHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY ROHTAK AND ORS.

1996 INSC 11523 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Nitasha Paul, a second‑year B.D.S. student from Karnataka, applied to migrate to the Government Dental College, Rohtak for the 1993‑94 academic year. A sub‑committee recommended her for one of the eight vacant seats based on merit and her domicile certificate, but the Vice‑Chancellor ignored the recommendation and admi

HARBANS LALversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

1996 INSC 12023 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Harbans Lal was convicted for the murder of his wife Punni Devi, who died from burns, along with his two sons. The trial court sentenced all three to life imprisonment; the High Court acquitted the sons but upheld the husband's conviction. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined the prosecution's case, which rested mainl

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusRAM NARAIN AND ORS.

1996 INSC 11623 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan prosecuted Ram Narain and two others for abducting, wrongfully confining, and raping a minor girl aged between 15 and 17. The trial court convicted all three under IPC sections 376, 366 and 342 and imposed rigorous imprisonment of seven, five and one years respectively, with a fine on the first a

SH. BRIJ MOHAN SURI (DEAD) BY LRS.versusTHE DISTT. JUDGE, KANPUR AND ORS.

1996 INSC 11723 January 1996Granted

The appellant, the legal heir of the deceased owner of three plots in Kanpur, challenged the computation of excess urban land under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976. The plots comprised a dwelling unit on 501.64 sq m and two industrial factories on larger plots. The authorities declared the appellant h

IN RE: BALWAN SINGHversusNO RESPONDENT

1996 INSC 137322 November 1996Disposed off

A writ petition (Cr) No. 296 of 1993 was filed by Smt. Birmati alleging that her two minor daughters had been kidnapped. The petition was supported by Mahila Dakshita Samiti. The Secretary of the Samiti claimed that she was threatened by Anand Singh Dangi and the village Sarpanch, Balwan Singh, to desist from pursuing

BANSILAL FARMS ETC.versusUMARANI BOSE AND ORS.

1996 INSC 137422 November 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute concerned the Nalban Fishery, which was part of a partition suit among members of the Sarkar family. While the suit was pending, the State of West Bengal requisitioned the fishery under Section 3(1) of the West Bengal Land Requisition and Acquisition Act, 1948, and took possession in 1969. After a compromis

BIHAR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION AND ANR.versusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

1996 INSC 137522 November 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Bihar State Subordinate Service Selection Board conducted an examination and, after being abolished, issued a revised list of candidates including the respondent. The respondent filed a writ petition alleging that junior candidates had been appointed while he remained unappointed, and the Patna High Court issued a

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusD.R.R. SASTRI

1996 INSC 137622 November 1996Dismissed

The respondent, a former Indian Railways employee who was deputed and later absorbed by the Heavy Engineering Corporation, sought to exercise his option to join the liberalised pension scheme introduced in 1973, but was not informed of the scheme and his request was rejected by the Railway Board. The Central Administra

BALARPUR INDUSTRIES LTD.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS.

1996 INSC 137722 November 1996Disposed off

Balarpur Industries Ltd. sought to quash a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 that acquired land needed for a public purpose, contending that the acquisition would block ingress and egress to its factory. The respondents, including the acquiring authority and a fourth respondent who would

C. PADMA AND ORS.versusTHE DY. SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS.

1996 INSC 137822 November 1996Dismissed

The appellants owned land that was acquired by the Government of Tamil Nadu in 1962 under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for a synthetic resin plant of Reichold Chemicals. The acquisition became final, compensation was paid, and the land vested in the State. Subsequently, the land was transferred to subsidiaries of the

SHIMLA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ORSversusSMT. SANTOSH SHARMA AND ANR.

1996 INSC 138022 November 1996Dismissed

The case concerned land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 where the acquisition officer initially fixed compensation at Rs 40,000 per bigha. The District Judge enhanced the amount to Rs 1,00,000 per bigha, but the High Court, on appeal, deducted 40 % of the enhanced compensation as development charges, in l

ALL INDIA FEDERATION OF CENTRAL EXCISE ETC.versusTHE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHER

1996 INSC 137122 November 1996Disposed off

The petitioners challenged the constitutional validity of Rule 18(2) of the Customs and Central Excise Service Group ‘A’ Rules, 1987, which governed promotion from three Group B feeder cadres to Group A posts. They argued that the rule’s method of determining seniority and the promotion quota would prejudice their chan

GANPATI BAYAJI PATILversusSBRIDHAR BABAJI VIBHUTE (D) BY LRS. AND ORS.

1996 INSC 92222 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a tenant, occupied the land on Tillers' Day (1‑April‑1957) when the landlord was a joint family. After a partition on 31‑March‑1958, the respondent obtained a share and applied for a Section 88C exemption certificate on 14‑April‑1959 without notifying the tenant. The respondent later sought possession un

JOTE SINGH (DEAD) BY LRS.versusRAM DAS MAGTO AND ORS.

1996 INSC 92322 August 1996Dismissed

Smt. Udhwantia, a limited owner, gifted her estate to her grandson Ramdas Mahto, who later sold the property twice and it was eventually sold at a court‑ordered auction. Ram Deiya sued to recover the property, and the trial court and lower appellate courts decreed in her favour. After her death, her son Ram Das Mahto s

SMT. SHANTI DEVI AND ANR.versusHUKUM CHAND

1996 INSC 92522 August 1996Dismissed

The land in dispute was transferred to the appellant in 1980, after which the respondent filed a suit for pre-emption that was decreed on 27 August 1983. The decree was affirmed by the court of appeal and a second appeal was dismissed by the High Court on 5 April 1984, making the decree final. When the respondent sough

STATE OF PUNJABversusKESAR SINGH

1996 INSC 76422 July 1996

Kesar Singh was convicted of murder under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment on 28 May 1987. After serving a little over eight years, he filed a petition under Section 482 of the CrPC in the Punjab & Haryana High Court seeking premature release. The High Court entertained the petition and

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANR.versusBADRINARAYAN ACHARYA ETC. ETC.

1996 INSC 76522 July 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents, who were assistant teachers, were deputed at the Government's expense in 1966 to obtain higher qualifications such as graduation and B.Ed. The Government issued a Finance Department memo on 22 October 1964 stating that only employees who attended training at their own cost would be eligible for two adv

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.versusJIT SINGH

1996 INSC 76622 July 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a work‑charged employee of the Punjab Public Works Department, went on leave on 10 April 1986 and failed to return without any sanction, remaining absent until August 1986. The department issued a termination notice on 3 September 1986, giving him ten days to report, and subsequently terminated his serv

R. PARANGUSAM ETC.versusCHIEF ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR AND ANR.

1996 INSC 76822 July 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a retired government employee, challenged a compulsory retirement order. The Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal set aside the retirement order and directed the Government to conduct a fresh enquiry and fix his pension. The appellant contended that a fresh enquiry was unnecessary after his retirement. The

RAMESH NARAIN SAXENA AND ORS.versusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI

1996 INSC 56022 April 1996Dismissed

The appellant, an exporter of hides and skins, pledged goat skins to a bank and obtained an overdraft. The skins were damaged due to the bank's improper storage, leading the appellant to file a criminal complaint. A compromise was reached whereby the bank waived Rs 1,93,159 owed by the appellant, which the appellant tr

FAUJA SINGHversusJASPAL KAUR

1996 INSC 56122 April 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Fauja Singh, contested the attachment of his residential house in an execution proceeding, invoking Section 60(c) of the Code of Civil Procedure which renders a residential house non‑attachable. The executing court ignored the plea, and the Punjab & Haryana High Court dismissed the subsequent civil revis

UNION OF INDIAversusBANT RAM (DEAD) BY LRS. ETC.

1996 INSC 56222 April 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the validity of a compensation award made by the Collector under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, after the High Court had already determined compensation under Section 54. The petitioners argued that a Section 28A application could not be filed once a Section 54 judgment was rendered,

KM. PREETA SINGH ETCversusHARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ORS.

1996 INSC 56322 April 1996Dismissed

The appellants, allotted a site by the Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA) under a housing scheme, paid the original sale price but were later directed to pay an additional amount of about Rs. 1 lakh as per a calculation memo dated 9 August 1990. They contended that HUDA lacked authority to demand this extra sum

SMT. SARADA AND ORS.versusMANIKKOTH KOMBRA RAJENDRAN

1996 INSC 56422 April 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The suit concerned possession of 17 cents of land sold by T. Sekharan, who later died; the appellants (his heirs) claimed the sale was a collateral security for a loan and that an agreement dated 4 January 1983, executed in the presence of a police sub‑inspector, evidenced receipt of Rs 35,000 and the condition that th

VIJAYWADA-GUNTUR-TENALI URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ORS.versusMOVVA RANGA RAO AND ORS.

1996 INSC 56522 April 1996Disposed off

The appellant, Vijayawada‑Guntur‑Tenali Urban Development Authority, challenged the fee claimed by the respondent counsel, who had acted as Government Pleader and later as private counsel in land acquisition reference cases. The respondent sought a minimum fee of Rs.2,000 per case, relying on a certification by the Adv

STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.versusBALWANT SINGH AND ORS.

1996 INSC 56622 April 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Haryana Subordinate Service Selection Board advertised and selected 45 candidates for Family Welfare Educators in 1971-72, but a writ petition prevented their appointment until 1985-86. After the writ was dismissed, the selected candidates received letters of appointment and joined service between September 1985 an

STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.versusMAHANTH BALRAM DAS

1996 INSC 56722 April 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appeal concerned proceedings initiated under Section 10 of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961. The question was whether the 1982 amendment, specifically Sections 32‑A and 32‑B, caused abatement of matters that had become final or were pending, thereby obligin

MANGAT RAM ETC.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 56822 April 1996Disposed off

The State of Haryana acquired 49 acres 1 canal 15 marlas of land in Sirsa for a commercial market. The Land Acquisition Officer fixed compensation at Rs 25,000 per acre, which was enhanced by the Additional District Judge to Rs 30,000 per acre, then by a single Judge to Rs 27.50 per square yard, and finally by the Divi

THE GOVT. OF ANDHRA PRADESHversusH.E.H., THE NIZAM, HYDERABAD.

1996 INSC 42622 March 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Government of Andhra Pradesh appealed a judgment that had awarded compensation for urban land of the Nizam acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The land lay within the Hyderabad Urban Agglomeration and had been declared excess under the Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation Act, 1976, which deemed such land v

MOHD. ASLAMversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 42422 March 1996Dismissed

Mohd. Aslam filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking reconsideration of the Supreme Court's judgment in Manohar Joshi v. Nitin Bhaurao Patil, alleging it was incorrect. The Court held that Article 32 cannot be invoked to challenge the correctness of a decision on its merits or to obtain its reconsideration. It fu

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusMAJOR GENERAL MADAN LAL YADAV (RETD.)

1996 INSC 42522 March 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Major General Madan Lal Yadav, a retired officer, was charged under Section 123 of the Army Act, 1950 for dereliction of duty in local purchases. After his retirement on 31 August 1986, he was kept under open arrest and a charge‑sheet was issued. A General Court‑Martial (GCM) was convened on 25 February 1987, but Yadav

K. JAYADEVAN NAIRversusKRISHNA PILLAI (DEAD) AND ORS.

1996 INSC 42822 March 1996Appeal(s) allowed

In this appeal, the appellant, a member of a Hindu undivided family, claimed that he was in possession of the entire family property based on a family arrangement dating from 1977. The respondents contended that the property was self‑acquired by their father and therefore not subject to partition, asserting that the ap

BASHIR AHMAD AND ORS.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

1996 INSC 43022 March 1996Dismissed

The appellants, originally employed as cleaners and later promoted to drivers in the Punjab Poultry Department, were retrenched as surplus. When the government announced direct recruitment for drivers, they applied but were rejected for lacking the prescribed qualifications of a light‑vehicle driving licence and knowle

SMT. GOWRAMMA ETC.versusLAO-CUM-MANDAL REVENUE OFFICER PARTI RANGAREDDY DISTRICT

1996 INSC 43322 March 1996Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined compensation for land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 where possession was taken in 1986 and an award was made in 1990. The High Court had relied on a prior judgment (Ex A‑2) to fix compensation at Rs 22 per square yard after adjusting for time lag, dismissing the claimants' app

UNION OF INDIAversusM/S G.S. ATWAL, AND CO. (ASANSOLE)

1996 INSC 29622 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India entered into a contract with M/s G.S. Atwaland Co. for excavation work, and a dispute over equipment hire charges was referred to a sole arbitrator, T. Raja Ram, in the fifth arbitration. The arbitrator unilaterally enlarged the reference to include additional claims not originally pleaded and issued

GOWRISHANKAR AND ANR.versusJOSHI AMBA SHANKAR FAMILY TRUST AND ORS.

1996 INSC 29422 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Joshi Ambashankar Family Trust, a charitable trust, sought High Court permission to sell a property after obtaining a modification order allowing sale with court approval and 3/4 trustee concurrence. While the trustees received an offer of Rs.9 lakh from a group of purchasers, the appellants (Gowrishankar and other

JUNJARAMversusBHAURAO AND ORS.

1996 INSC 29822 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Junjaram, a protected tenant under the Berar Regulation of Agricultural Leases Act, 1951, surrendered his lease by an unregistered deed in 1956 and within a year applied for restoration of possession. The initial authorities held the surrender illegal and ordered restitution, but the Deputy Commissioner set aside that

ASSOCIATION OF CHEMICAL WORKERSversusS.D. RANE AND ORS.

1996 INSC 29922 February 1996Dismissed

The Association of Chemical Workers, a rival union at Chemicals & Fibers of India Ltd., challenged the recognition of the respondent union by the Industrial Court, alleging that the investigating officer had illegally used spot verification and alternate numbers to count members. The High Court examined whether the off

PARSINI (DEAD) THROUGH LRS.versusATMA RAM AND ORS.

1996 INSC 30022 February 1996Dismissed

The Supreme Court heard a civil appeal (No. 1608 of 1979) challenging the genuineness of a will executed by Bhagwana on 15 October 1957, which left his property to Atma Ram. The appellant, Bhagwana's daughter, claimed that the will was not genuine and sought relief, arguing that she was not a party to the earlier suit

HIRA LAL (DEAD) BY LRS. ETCversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

1996 INSC 30122 February 1996Dismissed

The appellant filed a return under Section 12 of the Maharashtra Agricultural Land (Ceiling of Holdings) Act, 1961, claiming he had three sons and three daughters, and argued that the family was therefore entitled to two additional units of land under Section 6. He produced school certificates for the daughters but nev

THE STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR.versusDHARAM PAUL AND ORS.

1996 INSC 10922 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Punjab appealed a Punjab & Haryana High Court order that had allowed a group of industrial training institute instructors to have their salaries stepped up to match those of junior instructors who were receiving higher pay. Prior to 1961 all instructors were on a uniform pay scale, but in 1961 the pay scal

MANOHAR LALversusSTATE OF RAIASTHAN

1996 INSC 11122 January 1996Dismissed

Manoharlal appealed against his conviction under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, contending that Section 50 was not complied with because he was not given a choice to be searched in the presence of a gazetted officer or a magistrate. The petitioner argued that the statute obliges the accused

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusSMT. DARSHNA DEVI

1996 INSC 11222 January 1996IA disposed

The Supreme Court had earlier disposed of an appeal and dismissed review petitions filed against its order. Subsequently, the parties filed applications seeking clarification and modification of that order, claiming the Court's inherent power. The Court examined whether such applications could be entertained when a rev

M/S ELECTRONICS TRADE AND TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT CORPN., LTD., SECUNDERABADversusM/S. INDIAN TECHONOLOGISTS AND ENGINEERS (ELECTRONICS) PVT. LTD. ANR.

1996 INSC 11422 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 alleging that a cheque dated 30‑06‑1990 was dishonoured due to insufficient funds and that the drawer had instructed the bank to stop payment, as indicated by the bank’s endorsement. A notice demanding payment was sent to the draw

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusJAIN SABHA, NEW DELHI AND ANR.

1996 INSC 135921 November 1996Disposed off

The Union of India appealed against a Delhi High Court order that reduced the consideration payable by Jain Sabha for an additional 0.787 acres of land allotted for a school. The government had originally allotted 1.363 acres in 1967 at Rs 5,000 per acre, and later, in 1990, offered 2.15 acres with the original portion

SHRI PRATAP SINGHversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 136021 November 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant appeared for the Civil Services Examination (CSE) in 1989 and 1990, receiving a supplementary list for a Group A/B service in 1991 but remaining silent, and later being allocated to the Indian Revenue Service (IRS) based on his 1990 rank. He was subsequently directed to join the Central Industrial Securit

CALCUTTA ELECTRIC SUPPLY CORPORATION LTD.versusSH. N.M. BANKA AND ANR.

1996 INSC 136121 November 1996Disposed off

The Calcutta High Court entertained a writ petition filed by a partnership firm and one of its partners seeking a mandamus directing the electricity supplier, CESC Ltd., not to disconnect supply and to refer disputed bills to an arbitrator. The petitioners had not availed the statutory remedy under Sections 26(4) and 2

SURESH KUMAR JAINversusSHANTI SWARUP JAIN AND ORS.

1996 INSC 136221 November 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a tenant inducted in 1973, challenged an eviction suit filed by the landlord in 1990, arguing that the suit was barred under Section 20 of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 because the ten‑year exemption period for newly constructed buildings had expired. The k

R.S. HARDASversusFRIENDS CENTRAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES HOUSE BUILDING SOCIETY LTD. AND OTHERS

1996 INSC 136321 November 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a member of the Friends Central Government Employees House Building Society Ltd., had fully paid for a plot and was not in arrears. Under a compromise order of the Delhi High Court, the Society was directed to send notices to members in arrears demanding affidavits and payment, failure of which would dis

AHMAD UMAR SAEED SHEIKHversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

1996 INSC 136421 November 1996Dismissed

The appellant, Ahmad Umar Saeed Sheikh, was charged under IPC sections 307, 332, 427, the Foreigners Act, and TADA sections 3 and 4. He contended that the FIR, lodged on a Sub‑Inspector's complaint, was invalid because it was recorded without the prior approval of the District Superintendent of Police required by TADA

N. VENKATESWARA RAO AND ORS ETC.versusS.T.A. AND ORS. ETC.

1996 INSC 136821 November 1996Dismissed

The appellants, owners of three‑axle transport vehicles, challenged a Central Government notification dated 18 October 1996 that prescribed maximum gross vehicle weight and maximum safe axle weight under Section 58(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. They argued that the phrase "whichever is less" and the reliance on m

RAMESH DUTTversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

1996 INSC 91321 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined an appeal by Ramesh Dutt, whose 180 acres of land in Bhatinda had been acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Dutt claimed compensation for the land and for loss of his poultry business. The trial court awarded market value compensation for the land and the High Court added compensati

TALLURRI VENKAIAH NAIDU AND ANR. ETC.versusPUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

1996 INSC 91221 August 1996Dismissed

The case concerned the murder of Pallamareddi Ramanareddi by bombs allegedly hurled by Tallurri Venkaiah Naidu (appellant) and co‑accused. The trial court acquitted several accused but convicted the appellant under sections 120‑B/302 IPC and related provisions. The High Court set aside the trial court's acquittals and

THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.versusM/S M.K.J. CORPORATION

1996 INSC 91421 August 1996Disposed off

The United India Insurance Company appealed against an order of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission directing it to pay Rs.5,04,453.23 to M.K.J. Corporation for leather spoiled during an employees' strike, together with interest. The insurer contended that a clause (b) of Section 2 of the Fire Policy C,

THE STATE OF GUJARATversusGOPALBHAI BECHARBHAI ETC.

1996 INSC 91721 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Gujarat obtained a land acquisition award on 26 June 1981 under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and a notice under Section 12(2) was issued on 18 September 1981. An application for reference to a civil court under Section 18 was filed only on 30 July 1985, more than three years after the awar

BABA PEER PARAS NATH AND ANR. ETC.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

1996 INSC 91821 August 1996Dismissed

Six accused were tried for a terrorist attack on a temple. All made confessional statements before a Superintendent of Police under Section 15 of the Terrorist and Disruptive (Prevention) Activities Act (TADA). Two of them, Baba Peer Paras Nath and Baldev Nath, were charged only under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for at

STATE OF U.P. AND ORS. ETC.versusSMT. MALTI KAUL AND ANR. ETC.

1996 INSC 92021 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 empowers a development authority to levy a development fee on applicants for plan sanction. The High Court had held that no such power existed, but the Supreme Court read Sections 14, 33, 41, 56 and related provisions as confe

SMT. GIAN KAUR ETC. ETC.versusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB ETC. ETC.

1996 INSC 41821 March 1996Disposed off

Gian Kaur and her husband were convicted under Section 306 of the IPC for abetting the suicide of Kulwant Kaur. They appealed, arguing that Section 306 (and Section 309) were unconstitutional because Article 21 of the Constitution includes a "right to die", as held in P. Rathinam. The Supreme Court, sitting as a Consti

LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, HYDERABAD ETC.versusMALE PULLAMMA AND ORS. ETC.

1996 INSC 42121 March 1996Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined an appeal concerning the acquisition of 89 acres of agricultural land in Siddanti village, Andhra Pradesh, under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Land Acquisition Officer and lower courts had progressively increased compensation, with the High Court fixing a market value of

SA. RAMACHANDRANversusS. NEELAVATHY

1996 INSC 152620 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a tenant, occupied a plot owned by the respondent and raised super‑structures. The respondent filed an eviction suit without first giving the tenant a written notice and observing the three‑month waiting period required under Section 11 of the Tamil Nadu City Tenant's Protection Act, 1921. The trial cour

RANDHJR SINGH RANAversusTHE STATE BEING THE DELHI ADMINISTRATION

1996 INSC 152720 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Randhjr Singh Rana, challenged a order by a Judicial Magistrate who, after taking cognizance of the offence and after the accused had appeared, directed further police investigation. The High Court refused relief and the matter reached the Supreme Court. The Court examined whether a magistrate, post‑cogn

SHRI JEE SALES CORPORATION AND ANOTHERversusUNION OF INDIA

1996 INSC 152520 December 1996Dismissed

The appellants, Shri Jee Sales Corporation and another, imported PVC resin relying on Notification No. 66 dated 15 March 1979 which exempted customs duty on such imports up to 31 March 1981. After they had opened letters of credit and the goods arrived, the Government issued Notification No. 205 on 16 October 1980 with

LOHARA STEEL INDUSTRIES LTD. AND ANOTHER ETC.versusTHE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ANOTHER

1996 INSC 152820 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Lohara Steel Industries Ltd., a dealer in iron and steel, bought scrap and ingots in Andhra Pradesh, sent them to its re‑rolling mill in Karnataka, and sold the re‑rolled products back in Andhra Pradesh. Under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, an exemption notification (G.O. Ms No 88, 1977) exempted such

NATHUNI YADAV AND ORSversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ANR

1996 INSC 152920 December 1996Dismissed

The appellants were convicted of murder for a shooting that occurred on an open terrace on a moonless night, where the victims and neighbours identified them as the assailants. The defence argued that darkness made identification impossible and that there was no discernible motive. The Supreme Court held that despite l

TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD AND ANRversusN. RAJU REDDIAR AND ANR

1996 INSC 153020 December 1996Dismissed

The Supreme Court dismissed an application for clarification filed by a new advocate after a Special Leave Petition (SLP) and a subsequent review petition had already been dismissed. The petitioner, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, had originally engaged Advocate‑on‑Record Mr. Mariaputham, while the respondent’s counsel l

N. MOHANANversusSTATE OF KERALA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 153220 December 1996Dismissed

The petitioner, an assistant in the Economics and Statistics Department, applied for a transfer to the post of Legal Assistant Grade II under Kerala Secretariat Subordinate Service Special Rules. He was placed at No.13 on a merit list prepared in 1989 but was not appointed despite existing vacancies, leading him to obt

HARDEV SINGHversusHARBHEJ SINGH AND ORS.

1996 INSC 135320 November 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned a violent assault on 23 May 1985 in which six accused, armed with a double‑barrel gun, gandhalis, kirpans and gandasas, attacked two men (Harbhajan Singh and Baldev Singh) and injured a third witness (Suba Singh). The trial court convicted four of the accused and acquitted two; the Punjab and Haryana

WALDIES LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, WEST BENGAL

1996 INSC 135520 November 1996Dismissed

Waldies Ltd. was assessed to income tax for AY 1964‑65 and subsequently to surtax under the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act. The income‑tax assessment was later reopened under Section 147, increasing the tax liability, and the surtax assessment was rectified under Section 13 of the Surtax Act to allow a deduction for th

BHARAT COKING COAL LTD.versusMADANLAL AGRAWAL

1996 INSC 134320 November 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Madan Lal Agrawal sued Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. for eviction of land and buildings he claimed to own adjacent to Victory Colliery. The properties were used as offices and staff quarters for the mine, which had been taken over by the Central Government under the Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1973. The trial court dis

STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.versusGARIB DASS AND ORS.

1996 INSC 134520 November 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh challenged the High Court's declaration that Section 37-A of the U.P. Excise Act, 1910 was void for violating Article 14 because it allowed an exemption for foreign liquor under Section 20(2). While the appeal was pending, the legislature omitted Section 20(2) and substituted a new Section 37

CHINNAMALversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS.

1996 INSC 135720 November 1996Disposed off

Six accused were convicted under IPC sections 147, 148, 307 and 302 for a homicide. The Madras High Court set aside the convictions, acquitting them on the ground that the appellant's statement recorded under Section 164 of the CrPC (initially a dying declaration) materially contradicted the FIR report. The Supreme Cou

M/S. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.versusSMT. JIKUBHAI NATHUJI DABHI AND ORS.

1996 INSC 134620 November 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Mis. National Insurance Co. Ltd., sought to deny liability for an accident that occurred on 25 October 1983 at 11:14 a.m. The motor insurance policy had a renewal premium due on 14 October 1983, which was paid late on 25 October 1983 at 4:00 p.m. The policy expressly stated that coverage was suspended fr

M/S SANT RAM AND COMPANYversusTHE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

1996 INSC 134720 November 1996Dismissed

The appellant, a contractor, entered into a contract with the State of Rajasthan for bridge widening works. A dispute arose and, by mutual agreement, the matter was referred to an arbitrator. While arbitration was pending, the respondent attempted to adjust amounts due to the appellant against another contract. The app

NARAYAN DATTATRAYA RAMTEERTHAKHARversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 134820 November 1996Dismissed

The petitioner, a government servant, was found to have misappropriated Rs. 1,440 deducted from employees and only deposited it after being compelled in 1985. An enquiry officer held him guilty of misconduct, leading the disciplinary authority to remove him from service. The petitioner challenged the removal, alleging

DEPOT MANAGER, ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATIONversusMOHD. YOUSUF MIYA ETC.

1996 INSC 134920 November 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Depot Manager of Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation initiated disciplinary proceedings against driver Mohd Yousuf Miya under Regulation 28(ix) of the Employees Conduct Rules, 1963 after a fatal accident caused by his alleged failure to anticipate the incident. Simultaneously, the driver faced criminal

THE SECRETARY, JAIPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, JAIPURversusDAULAT MAL JAIN

1996 INSC 108520 September 1996Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the validity of land allotted to "sub‑awardees" after the land had been acquired under the Rajasthan Land Acquisition Act. It held that once a notification under S.4 and possession under S.16 were effected, the original owner's title ceased and vested in the State, rendering any subsequent sa

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search