Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

Judgments of 2005

627 judgments, newest first — showing 1–200.

STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ANR.versusBELA BAGCHI AND ORS.

2005 INSC 39231 August 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The State Bank of India (SBI) initiated disciplinary proceedings against its employee, Snigdha Kanti Bagchi, for misappropriating customers' money. While the proceedings were pending, the employee’s service was extended for three months under Rules 20‑A and 20‑B of the SBI (Supervising Staff) Service Rules, 1975, to al

BRIJ MOHAN LALversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 17131 March 2005

The petition challenged the discontinuation of the Fast Track Courts Scheme after 31 March 2005, arguing that the State’s failure to maintain the scheme would violate the constitutional right to speedy justice under Article 21. The respondents, Union of India and several states, contended that financial constraints and

SREE BALAJI RICE MILL, BELLARYversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2005 INSC 16931 March 2005Dismissed

The appellant, Sree Balaji Rice Mill, challenged a penalty imposed by the Additional Commissioner under Section 18A of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, which was levied suo motu in revision proceedings under Section 22A after the Assessing Authority had failed to impose any penalty. The High Court had held that the assessm

V.M. SALGAOCAR AND BROS.versusBOARD OF TRUSTEES OF PORT OF MORMUGAO AND ANR

2005 INSC 17231 March 2005Dismissed

The appellant, an iron‑ore exporter, claimed a rebate of Rs 62,46,548.10 from the Board of Trustees of Mormugao Port, alleging that the Board had unlawfully levied a surcharge and refused full rebate. The Board raised two defenses under Section 120 of the Major Port Trusts Act, 1963: that the appellant had not served t

BHARTI TELENET LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 17331 March 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Bharti Telenet Ltd., a basic telephone service licensee in Madhya Pradesh, disputed the interconnection points with BSNL and sought a TRAI order on 15 June 2001, which was declared of general applicability. The company asked its industry association (ABTO) to file a collective review, which was dismissed; subsequently

KULDEEP SINGH AND ANR.versusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS .

2005 INSC 17431 March 2005Disposed off

Petitioners, a renal patient in Tamil Nadu and his brother from Punjab, applied for a No‑Objection Certificate (NOC) under the Transplantation of Human Organs Act, 1994, to enable a kidney donation by the brother, who was not a near relative. The Tamil Nadu authorities directed the petitioners to seek the NOC from Punj

CIFCO PROPERTIES PVT. LTD. AND ORS.versusCUSTODIAN AND ORS.

2005 INSC 17031 March 2005Dismissed

The Special Court under the Special Courts (Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions in Securities) Act, 1992, initially directed a High Court Receiver to sell certain properties to recover dues, but later ordered the Custodian appointed under the Act to act as Receiver because the High Court Receiver was unable to c

CANARA BANKversusV.K. AWASTHY

2005 INSC 17531 March 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Canara Bank dismissed employee V.K. Awasthy for multiple acts of misconduct. The employee challenged the dismissal, alleging violation of natural justice and that the punishment was disproportionate. The High Court held the dismissal violated natural justice and was excessive, directing a fresh hearing. On appeal, the

IDRISH BHAI DAUDBHAIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2005 INSC 5631 January 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Idrish Daudbhai (appellant) was convicted under IPC sections 302 and 34 for allegedly sharing a common intention with three co‑accused to murder Siddique Ahmed Patel and to cause hurt to Yusuf Adam Patel. The prosecution's case rested on the testimony of three eye‑witnesses and the FIR, alleging that the appellant stru

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAIversusD.P. SANDU BROS. CHEMBUR (P) LTD.

2005 INSC 5531 January 2005Dismissed

The respondent, D.P. Sandhu Bros. Chembur (P) Ltd., entered into a 50‑year lease in 1959 and prematurely surrendered its tenancy rights in March 1986, receiving Rs 35 lakhs. The Assessing Officer treated the receipt as income from other sources under Sec. 10(3) read with Sec. 56, while the Commissioner of Income Tax (A

RAKESH VIJversusRAMINDER PAL SINGH SETHI

2005 INSC 46030 September 2005

The appellant, Rakesh Vij, challenged an eviction order against his father’s tenancy in a shop‑cum‑flat in Chandigarh, arguing that the landlord could not evict a tenant from a non‑residential building under the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 as amended in 1974. The Court examined the effect of the 1956 A

SIDHARTH ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF BIHAR

2005 INSC 46230 September 2005

The State of Bihar prosecuted three accused—Amit Das, Sidharth and Rohan Prakash—for the murder of a student named Abhishek, alleging a conspiracy in which Amit Das shot the victim with a country‑made pistol supplied by Sidharth. Amit Das made a detailed confession before a Judicial Magistrate (recorded under Section 1

M/S. GOPAL ZARDA UDYOG AND ORS.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NEW DELHI

2005 INSC 46130 September 2005Case Partly allowed

The appellants, manufacturers of chewing tobacco, used an intermediate product called "additive mixture" (kimam) in their production process. The Central Excise Department alleged that the kimam was clandestinely manufactured and cleared under sub‑headings 2404.49/2404.40 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, in cont

COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS AND ORS.versusK.R. VISHWANATH

2005 INSC 38830 August 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, K.R. Vishwanath, applied for a compassionate appointment under the Karnataka Civil Services (Appointment on Compassionate Grounds) Rules after his father, a government servant, died when he was an infant. His first application was filed more than a year after he attained majority and was rejected for be

A.P. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSIONversusKONETI VENKATESWARULU AND ORS.

2005 INSC 38930 August 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission advertised for several posts and required candidates to disclose full employment details in Column 11 and Annexure III of the application. The respondent, Koneti Venkat eswarulu, left Column 11 blank and declared in Annexure III that he was not employed, although he was work

ASHUTOSHversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

2005 INSC 39030 August 2005Disposed off

A decree for a construction work claim was passed against the State of Rajasthan and the partnership firm Sharma & Co. The State recovered the decree amount and sought execution against the firm’s securities, including a house owned by partner Smt. Dhanwanti Devi, who had earlier executed a will bequeathing the house t

ATMA RAMversusSHAKUNTALA RANI

2005 INSC 39130 August 2005Dismissed

The tenant, Atma Ram, repeatedly sent money orders for rent which the landlord refused to accept and later deposited the arrears for February 1992 to January 1995 under the Punjab Relief of Indebtedness Act, 1934. The landlord rejected that deposit and the tenant subsequently deposited rent for February 1995 to July 19

STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR.versusSANGAPPA DYAVAPPA BIRADAR AND ORS.

2005 INSC 16730 March 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The Karnataka State Government acquired land for a canal project and, after negotiations, entered into consent agreements with the landowners, resulting in consent awards that included market value, solatium and additional market value. The landowners received the compensation and thereafter filed applications under Se

M/S. TATA IRON AND STEEL CO. LTD.versusSTATE OF JHARKHAND AND ORS.

2005 INSC 16830 March 2005Dismissed

Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd., a dealer under the Bihar Finance Act, operated a Hot Rolled Mill (HRM) and later set up a Cold Rolled Mill (CRM) as a diversification. The CRM received tax exemption under Bihar's 1995 Industrial Policy notifications 478/479, which was later withdrawn but restored by the Supreme Court. Aft

K. KALIMUTHUversusSTATE BY D.S.P.

2005 INSC 16530 March 2005Disposed off

The appellants, who were public servants, were charged with offences under the IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act and contended that the Special Judge could not take cognizance without the prior sanction required by Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The High Court held that the appellants had f

RAM BHUALversusAMBIKA SINGH

2005 INSC 45529 September 2005Dismissed

In the 2002 Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly election, Ram Bhual was declared elected. Defeated candidate Ambika Singh filed an election petition under Section 100(1)(c) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, alleging that the Returning Officer had wrongly rejected the nomination of independent candidate Sita

STATE OF M.P.versusDAYAL SAHU

2005 INSC 45629 September 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The accused Dayal Sahu was convicted by a trial court for rape under IPC s.376 based on the testimony of the victim (prosecutrix) and corroborating statements of relatives, as well as forensic serology reports. On appeal, the High Court acquitted him, holding that the failure to produce and examine the doctor who medic

STATE OF GOAversusBABU THOMAS

2005 INSC 45729 September 2005Disposed off

The State of Goa prosecuted Babu Thomas, a Joint Manager of Goa Shipyard Ltd., under the Prevention of Corruption Act for accepting illegal gratification from a contractor. Two sanction orders were issued—one by the Company Secretary and another by the Chairman and Managing Director—both without the requisite approval

PENTAKOTA SATYANARAYANA AND ORS.versusPENTAKOTA SEETHARATNAM AND ORS.

2005 INSC 45829 September 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Pentakota Srirammurthy executed a registered will in 1980 bequeathing a portion of his self‑acquired property to his first wife, Seetharatnam, and the remainder to his children by his second wife, Alla Kantamma. After his death, Seetharatnam and Krishna Bhagavan (who claimed to be an adopted son) filed suits seeking ma

M/S. NGEF LTD.versusM/S. CHANDRA DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. AND ANR.

2005 INSC 45929 September 2005Appeal(s) allowed

NGEF Ltd., a joint‑venture sick industrial company, was referred to the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (SICA). BIFR recommended winding up and observed that any sale of the company's assets should be sought from the High Court.

STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.versusRAJ RANI

2005 INSC 38629 August 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, the State of Haryana, appealed decrees that held a surgeon and the State liable for a woman's pregnancy after a sterilization operation performed by a surgeon employed by the State. The Supreme Court examined whether the surgeon could be held liable without proof of negligence, noting that pregnancy af

POPAT AND KOTECHA PROPERTYversusSTATE BANK OF INDIA STAFF ASSOCIATION

2005 INSC 38729 August 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant and the respondent entered into a 1983 agreement for the appellant to develop the respondent's property, with the respondent to execute a lease deed after construction, which was never done. The appellant filed a suit in 1990 seeking declaration of title, specific performance, damages and other reliefs. T

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusNARENDER SINGH

2005 INSC 32329 July 2005Appeal(s) allowed

NARENDER SINGH, a customs vigilance officer, was dismissed for allegedly accepting illegal gratification to clear Afghan nationals through customs. After his appeal was rejected, the Central Administrative Tribunal quashed the dismissal and ordered his reinstatement. The Union of India challenged the Tribunal's order b

M.C.D.versusSTATE OF DELHI AND ANR.

2005 INSC 23929 April 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) appealed against a Delhi High Court order that granted probation under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 to builder Gurcharan Singh, who had been convicted under Sections 332 and 461 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957. The High Court had not called for

COMMISSIONER OF TRADE TAX, LUCKNOWversusM/S. KANHAI RAM THEKEDAR

2005 INSC 24129 April 2005Dismissed

The Commissioner of Trade Tax of Uttar Pradesh assessed M/s Kanhai Ram Thekedaar for the 1977-78 tax year in 1986, which the assessee fully paid. In 1990 the assessing authority issued a separate order imposing interest at 24% per annum on the unpaid tax, without a prior notice. The assessee appealed, and after a serie

HANS RAJ BANGAversusRAM CHANDER AGGARWAL

2005 INSC 24229 April 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The Ministry of Rehabilitation constructed a market shop that formed part of the compensation pool under the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 and was sold by tender to Hans Raj Banga. The predecessor‑in‑interest, Bhagwan Das, a squatter and not a displaced person, failed to bid and did not

SHREE SUBHLAXMI FABRICS PVT. LTD.versusCHAND MAL BARADIA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 16129 March 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Shree Subhlaxmi Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. initiated arbitration against Chand Mal Baradia under a clause in their contract. Baradia filed a suit in the Calcutta Civil Court seeking an injunction to restrain the arbitration, claiming that no arbitration agreement existed and that the contract’s jurisdiction clause limited dispu

HEM RAJ AND ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

2005 INSC 16229 March 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted for the murder of Hemant Kumar under Section 302 IPC based primarily on the testimony of two related eyewitnesses, PW4 and PW5. An independent eyewitness, Kapur Singh, who was present at the scene, was never examined, and the prosecution offered no explanation for this omission. The Court

C.S. KRISHNAMURTHYversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2005 INSC 16329 March 2005Dismissed

C.S. Krishnamurthy, a technical supervisor in Bangalore Telephones, was charged under Section 5(2) read with Section 5(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 for possessing assets disproportionate to his known income between 1964 and 1986. The Deputy General Manager of the department sanctioned the prosecution

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.versusCHARLIE AND ANR.

2005 INSC 16429 March 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant insurer challenged a Kerala High Court order that awarded compensation to the claimant, who suffered a 100% permanent disability in a motor accident. The dispute centered on the appropriate deduction for personal expenditure and the multiplier to be applied in computing the lump‑sum award. The Supreme Cou

PROCTER & GAMBLE HYGIENE & HEALTH CARE LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, BHOPAL.

2005 INSC 59128 November 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Procter & Gamble manufactured detergent powder (AMS) in 25 kg bulk packs at its Bhopal plant and sent the powder to an independent job‑worker, IED, for repacking into 20 g and 30 g sachets. The Revenue issued a show‑cause notice alleging that the assessee had suppressed the true price of the product and, as the sachets

ROMESH LAL JAINversusNAGINDER SINGH RANA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 54028 October 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from a FIR lodged by a Sub‑Inspector (the respondent) against M/s Jain Gas Agency under the Essential Commodities Act, which the appellant claimed was false and alleged that the officer had misappropriated gas cylinders and accepted a bribe. The Special Judge directed the investigating officer to obtain

BISHNA@ BHISWADEB MAHATO AND ORS.versusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2005 INSC 54128 October 2005Disposed off

The case arose from a violent altercation over a disputed plot of land in Bhadsa village, where the accused, armed with various weapons, chased and assaulted the complainants, resulting in the death of Prankrishna Mahato and injuries to several others. The accused claimed private defence of property and person, arguing

TRILOKI NATH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P.

2005 INSC 54228 October 2005Dismissed

The appellants, who owned a plot of land, removed wood that villagers had piled for Holika Dahan and chased a servant away. A confrontation ensued about 300 paces from the plot, during which the accused Jitendra fired a shot killing Nanhe. The trial court convicted the accused under Sections 302 and 149 IPC; the High C

BALDEV SINGHversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 54328 October 2005Dismissed

Baldev Singh, an Indian Army officer enrolled in 1978, was arrested in 1987 and convicted under Sections 302, 34 and 452 of the IPC, leading to his dismissal in 1990. The High Court acquitted him in 1992, after which he claimed reinstatement, arrears of pay for the custody period (March 1987‑September 1993) and pension

FORUM, PREVENTION OF ENVN. AND SOUND POLLUTIONversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 53728 October 2005Dismissed

The Forum, an environmental NGO, challenged the constitutional validity of sub‑rule (3) of Rule 5 of the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000, which permits State Governments to relax night‑time loud‑speaker restrictions for up to fifteen days a year during cultural or religious festivals. The petition

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (IMPORTS), MUMBAIversusM/S. TULLOW INDIA OPERATIONS LTD.

2005 INSC 54428 October 2005Disposed off

The case concerned the customs duty exemption for magnetic tapes (IT software) imported by ONGC and Tullow India Operations Ltd. for seismic surveys under petroleum exploration contracts. The exemption notification required the importer to produce an essentiality certificate from the Directorate General of Hydrocarbons

PUNJAB AND SIND BANK AND ORS.versusMOHINDER PAL SINGH AND ORS.

2005 INSC 53828 October 2005

Amarjit Singh Sahni, a cashier‑clerk of Punjab and Sind Bank, applied for voluntary retirement under the bank's scheme (effective 1‑31 Dec 2000) but withdrew his application on 22 Dec 2000 before the bank had accepted it. The bank later treated him as relieved from service on 28 Jan 2001 and denied his reinstatement, d

MYLAPORE CLUBversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ANR.

2005 INSC 53928 October 2005Dismissed

The Madras City Tenants Protection Act, 1921 gave tenants who built structures on landlords' land protection against eviction and a right to compensation. The Madras City Tenants Protection (Amendment) Act, 1994 (effective 1996) amended the Act to exempt tenancies of land owned by religious institutions and charities a

GURMEET SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

2005 INSC 45328 September 2005Dismissed

Gurmeet Singh was convicted of murdering thirteen members of his own family in a moonlit night, using swords, after a dispute over his newly‑married wife and a co‑accused. The trial court sentenced him to death under Section 302 IPC, a sentence confirmed by the Allahabad High Court despite a split decision among its ju

COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX, U.P.versusM/S SWADESHI POLYTAX LTD., GHAZIABAD

2005 INSC 45428 September 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Swadeshi Polytax Ltd., a dealer of polyester staples fiber, collected sales tax in excess of the prescribed rate and deposited the amount with the Government Treasury. The dealer sought a refund of the excess amount, but the Trade Tax Tribunal ordered a refund contrary to Section 29-A of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, which m

AIR INDIA LTD. AND ORS.versusVISHAL KAPOOR AND ORS.

2005 INSC 45228 September 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute concerned seniority of Air India co‑pilots: whether it should be based on the date a pilot obtained an Air Lines Transport Pilot (ALTP) licence or on the date of entry as a co‑pilot with only a Commercial Pilot Licence (CPL). The ‘Adhikari group’ (ex‑IAF/Navy pilots with ALTP) challenged Clause 7(C) of a 19

STA TE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANR.versusSHIV NARAIN UPADHYAYA

2005 INSC 31828 July 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh appealed a High Court order that held the employee Shivnarain Upadhyaya's date of birth to be 1‑Sept‑1939, based on school records, and ordered him to refund salary paid after his superannuation. The Supreme Court examined the service book, which showed the date of birth as 1‑Sept‑1930, a rec

VINAYAKA DEV IDAGUNJI AND ORS.versusSHIVARAM AND ORS.

2005 INSC 31928 July 2005Dismissed

The plaintiffs, who claim to be hereditary archaks (priests) of the Vinayaka Dev temple, sued the temple trustees for a declaration of their hereditary right, a share of devotees' offerings, and to set aside a notice terminating their services. The trustees contended that the suit was barred under Section 50 of the Bom

CHAIRMAN, LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION AND ORS.versusRAJIV KUMAR BHASKER

2005 INSC 32028 July 2005Disposed off

The Life Insurance Corporation (LIC) had introduced a Salary Savings Scheme under which employers were required to deduct insurance premiums from employees' salaries and remit them to LIC. When an employer failed to make the deductions, the employee’s policy lapsed and the claimant sought the assured sum after the empl

T.N. RAJASEKARversusN. KASIVISWANATHAN AND ORS.

2005 INSC 32128 July 2005Disposed off

The appellant, a Class II heir of an unmarried, issueless deceased, filed a partition suit seeking his one-fifth share of the estate valued at Rs. 2,98,79,569. The trial judge allotted a house (Item No.6) worth Rs. 1,50,00,000 to the appellant, exceeding his share of Rs. 59,75,914, and ordered the excess Rs. 90,24,086

S.D.O. GRID CORPORATION OF ORISSA LTD. AND ORS.versusTIMUDU ORAM

2005 INSC 32228 July 2005Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined three writ petitions filed under Article 226 seeking compensation for deaths caused by electrocution from live wires owned by the Grid Corporation of Orissa (GRIDCO). The High Court had awarded compensation on the basis that the snapped wires and resulting deaths amounted to negligence on the

A.P.S.R.T.C.versusREGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY AND ORS.

2005 INSC 23428 April 2005Reference answered

The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (the Corporation) framed a scheme under s.99 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 to nationalise the mofussil service in West Godavari district, excluding all private operators on the notified routes and on any routes overlapping them. The scheme contained Exception 2, whi

RAJESH K. GUPTAversusRAM GOPAL AGARWALA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 23728 April 2005Dismissed

Rajesh K. Gupta, a Supreme Court advocate, filed a writ of habeas corpus seeking custody of his daughter Rose Mala, who was residing with her mother Aruna Gupta and the maternal grandparents. He alleged that the mother suffered from paranoid schizophrenia and that the child had been abducted by the grandparents. The De

HARMOHINDER SINGH PRADHANversusRANJEET SINGH TALWANDI AND ORS.

2005 INSC 23528 April 2005Dismissed

The appellant challenged the election of Ranjit Singh Talwandi, alleging that religious leaders had appealed to voters to support him, which was claimed to be a corrupt practice under Section 123(3) of the Representation of People Act, 1951. The Supreme Court examined whether such an appeal, made by religious leaders,

MANOJ KUMAR AND ANR.versusMUNNI DEVI

2005 INSC 23628 April 2005Dismissed

The landlord, Munni Devi, sought eviction of the tenants, Manoj Kumar and others, under Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972, claiming the building was dilapidated and needed demolition for a new business and for her son’s employment. The Prescribed Authority

M.B. RAMACHANDRANversusGOWRAMMA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 23828 April 2005Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined appeals challenging the High Court's declaration that the Karnataka Inams Abolition (Amendment) Act, 1979 was void in its entirety. The Court held that the High Court had overreached; only the amendment of Mysore Act 18 of 1955 (Section 3) could be declared ultra vires, while the amendment to

BIJENDER SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

2005 INSC 16028 March 2005Disposed off

An FIR was lodged for murder and related offences committed on 17‑11‑1999. The accused, aged 17 years and 8 months at the time, applied to be treated as a juvenile under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. The 1986 Juvenile Justice Act, then in force, defined a male juvenile as under 16, s

HARYANA STATE COOP. LAND DEVELOPMENT BANKversusNEELAM

2005 INSC 10928 February 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Neelam was appointed on an ad‑hoc basis as a typist with Haryana State Cooperative Land Development Bank from January 1985 until May 1986, after which she joined the Haryana Urban Development Authority. Following a successful industrial dispute by similarly situated employees, she filed a writ petition in the Punjab &

SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. AND ANR.versusM. SENTHIL KUMAR

2005 INSC 11028 February 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The Tamil Nadu Service Recruitment Board reserved 10% of police constable posts for the children/wards of serving, retired, deceased or medically invalidated police personnel and ministerial staff. M. Senthil Kumar applied for a post but was rejected on the grounds of unsatisfactory performance, and the Central Adminis

SOBHA HYMAVATHI DEVIversusSETTI GANGADHARA SWAMY AND ORS.

2005 INSC 5128 January 2005Dismissed

The Supreme Court upheld the Andhra Pradesh High Court's decision that Sobha Hyma Vathi Devi, elected from a Scheduled Tribe (ST) reserved assembly constituency, was ineligible because she belonged to the forward Patnaik Sistu Karnam caste, not the Bhagatha ST community. The Court affirmed that the marriage of a non‑tr

SRIDEVI AND ORS.versusJAYRAJA SHETTY AND ORS.

2005 INSC 5428 January 2005Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined an appeal by the daughters and a granddaughter of Padmayya Kambali challenging a will dated 28‑03‑1976 that bequeathed certain properties to the testator's two sons. The appellants argued that the will was not duly executed, citing the testator's advanced age, his death within 15 days of exec

M. JANARDHANA RAOversusJOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

2005 INSC 5228 January 2005Disposed off

The appellants, former partners of a dissolved firm, challenged the taxability of proceeds from the sale of the firm's assets, arguing that the transaction did not constitute a slump sale and that no capital‑gain tax could be levied before the 1999 amendment. They filed appeals under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,

M/S. MANGALORE GANESH BEEDI WORKSversusTHE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MYSORE AND ANR.

2005 INSC 5328 January 2005Disposed off

Mangalore Ganesh Beedi Works appealed to the Supreme Court against a Karnataka High Court order that affirmed the Income‑Tax Appellate Tribunal’s findings without providing any discussion or reasons. The appeals were filed under section 260‑A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Supreme Court held that even when a higher c

RAMADHAR SHRIVASversusBHAGWANDAS

2005 INSC 53127 October 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Ramadhar purchased a house from Hiralal, who was held by a trial court to be the absolute owner. In the earlier suit, the court found that Bhagwandas was a tenant paying rent to Hiralal and, after the sale, became a tenant of Ramadhar; the suit against him was dismissed. In a later suit for eviction and arrears, the tr

SATRUCHARLA VIJAYA RAMA RAJUversusNIMMAKA JAYA RAJU AND ORS.

2005 INSC 53227 October 2005Dismissed

The appellant, elected from the Naguru (ST) constituency in 1999, was challenged under Section 80 of the Representation of the People Act on the ground that he did not belong to the "Konda Dora" Scheduled Tribe but was a Kshatriya. The appellant argued that an earlier election petition (E.P. 13 of 1983) which had dismi

P.K. SHAJI @ THAMMANAM SHAJIversusSTATE OF KERALA

2005 INSC 53427 October 2005Dismissed

The appellant, P.K. Shaji, was charged under Sections 120B and 307 IPC and was granted bail by the Sessions Court with specific conditions, including reporting to the investigating officer on designated days and seeking magistrate’s permission before entering the sessions division. The bail order directed that any brea

BABUBHAI ODHAVJI PATEL, ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2005 INSC 53527 October 2005Dismissed

The appellant, owner of a tanker lorry, was stopped by police on routine patrol at 5:30 a.m. and a search revealed over 5 kg of opium concealed in the vehicle. He was convicted under Section 17 of the NDPS Act. On appeal, he challenged the validity of the search under Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act, alleged tamperi

SUDHIR G. ANGUR AND ORS.versusM. SANJEEV AND ORS.

2005 INSC 53327 October 2005Dismissed

The respondents, trustees of an educational trust, filed a suit under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 seeking cancellation of a lease of trust property and removal of certain trustees, alleging forgery and mismanagement. The appellants contended that the Mysore Religious and Charitable Institutions Act,

C.K. JIDHEESHversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 53627 October 2005Dismissed

The petitioner, who runs a colour photographic film developing and printing business, challenged a Ministry of Finance letter that clarified the Service Tax provisions of the Finance Act, 1994 (as amended by Act 14 of 2001). The letter stated that the taxable value of photography services is the gross amount charged, e

M.M. BILANEY AND ANR.versusFALI RUSTOMJI KUMANA

2005 INSC 45027 September 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiffs, owners of a premises, filed an eviction suit under Section 13(1)(g) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947, claiming bona‑fide need, against the original tenant Rustom D. Kumana. The tenant's son, Fali Rustomji Kumana, was impleaded claiming to be a tenant in his own right

STATE OF UPversusBRIJPAL SINGH

2005 INSC 44927 September 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Brijpal Singh was appointed as a seasonal clerk on a temporary basis and his services were terminated on 3 July 1987. He obtained a stay of the termination order from the Allahabad High Court but did not resume work. Six years later, relying on the stay, he filed an application under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Di

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESHversusKANDA GOPALUDU

2005 INSC 45127 September 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Andhra Pradesh charged Kanda Gopaludu with murder under Section 302 IPC. The trial court convicted him based on an extra‑judicial confession he made before three village officials (the sarpanch and two ward members), corroborated by the investigating officer’s testimony, a doctor’s medical report indicatin

UNION OF INDIAversusGAGAN KUMAR

2005 INSC 31427 July 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a casual labourer, filed an application before the Central Administrative Tribunal seeking "temporary" status under the Casual Labourers (Grant of Temporary Status and Regularization) Scheme, 1993, claiming he had completed the requisite 240/206 days of service in 1998. The Tribunal held that Clause 4 o

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, GHAZIABADversusM/S. APEX TRADERS, SAHIBABAD

2005 INSC 31527 July 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Mis Apex Traders, a manufacturer of aerated water, filed a declaration of assessable value under Rule 173‑C claiming deductions for equalized freight and rent on containers (ROC). The Assistant Commissioner allowed the ROC deduction but treated the factory‑gate price as the assessable value for freight, leading to the

KANWAR PAL SINGH GILLversusSTATE (ADMN., U.T. CHANDIGARH) THRO SECRETARY AND ANR.

2005 INSC 31627 July 2005Appeal(s) allowed

In 1988, a senior police officer allegedly slapped the posterior of a female officer at a dinner party, an act reported to senior officials but not acted upon. The victim and her husband later filed a criminal complaint before the Chief Judicial Magistrate alleging offences under Sections 341, 342, 352, 354, 355 and 50

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MEERUT-IversusBISLERI INTERNATIONAL PVT.LTD.

2005 INSC 31727 July 2005Dismissed

Bisleri International Pvt. Ltd., a manufacturer of aerated water, obtained concentrate from a Coca‑Cola subsidiary and collected rent on empty containers (ROC) from dealers while also receiving price‑support incentives in the form of credit notes from the concentrate supplier. The Central Excise Department contended th

SHRI BANARSI DASSversusMRS. TEEKU DUTTA AND ANR.

2005 INSC 23327 April 2005Dismissed

The appellant, Banarsi Dass, objected to the grant of a succession certificate to Mrs. Teeku Dutta, alleging she was not the deceased's daughter. He moved an application under Order 151 CPC for a DNA test to establish paternity, which the trial court allowed. The Delhi High Court set aside that order, holding that the

JAYENDRA SARASWATHY SWAMIGAL, TAMIL NADUversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS.

2005 INSC 52826 October 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Jayendra Saraswathy Swamigal, head of the Kanchi Mutt, was charged with conspiracy to murder the in‑charge manager of Devarajaswamy Devasthanam. He and 24 co‑accused filed a transfer petition under Section 406 of the CrPC, alleging that the Tamil Nadu State machinery was fabricating evidence, intimidating defence couns

STATE OF GUJARATversusMIRZAPUR MOTI KURESHI KASSAB JAMAT AND ORS.

2005 INSC 52526 October 2005Dismissed

The Gujarat Legislature enacted the Bombay Animal Preservation (Gujarat Amendment) Act, 1994, imposing a total ban on the slaughter of bulls and bullocks of any age. Butchers (Kureshis) challenged the amendment as an unreasonable restriction on their right to practice any profession under Article 19(1)(g) of the Consti

UNION OF INDIAversusHARINDER PAL SINGH AND ORS.

2005 INSC 52926 October 2005Dismissed

The Union of India sought to acquire 3,512.33 acres in five villages for the extension of the Amritsar Cantonment. The Collector awarded compensation based on land categories, but claimants obtained enhanced compensation through the belting method in the District Court. The Punjab and Haryana High Court discarded the b

M/S. S.B.P. AND CO.versusM/S. PATEL ENGINEERING LTD. AND ANR.

2005 INSC 52626 October 2005Disposed off

The case concerned the nature of the power exercised by the Chief Justice of a High Court or the Chief Justice of India under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to appoint arbitrators when parties fail to do so. The petitioners argued that this power is judicial, requiring the Chief Justice to

C. ALBERT MORRISversusK. CHANDRASEKARAN AND ORS.

2005 INSC 53026 October 2005Dismissed

C. Albert Morris leased a vacant plot in Pondicherry to operate a petrol bunk. The lease expired in 1996 and the landlord, K. Chandrasekaran, served a notice to vacate, filed an eviction suit (later dismissed for default), and sought cancellation of the No‑Objection Certificate (NOC) and non‑renewal of the licence unde

STATE THROUGH C.B.I.versusAMARMANI TRIPTHI

2005 INSC 44026 September 2005Disposed off

The State of Uttar Pradesh, represented by the CBI, appealed against the Allahabad High Court's orders granting bail to Amarmani Tripathi, a former minister, and his wife Madhumani Tripathi in a murder case involving the killing of Madhumita Shukla. The prosecution alleged a conspiracy in which Amarmani, who had an ill

M/S. SHARP INDUSTRIES LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MUMBAI-III

2005 INSC 44126 September 2005Dismissed

Mis. Sharp Industries Ltd. manufactures aluminium foil laminated on one side with polyester film and on the other with polyethylene and sought classification of the product under Tariff Headings 76.07 and 76.12 (aluminium foil "backed"). The Revenue argued that the product should fall under Tariff Headings 39.20.38 and

STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR.versusALPANA ROY AND ORS.

2005 INSC 44226 September 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioner, a teacher, filed a writ petition seeking regularisation of her services, claiming she had been appointed by the school’s Managing Committee in 1976. The West Bengal Board of Primary Education examined the claim and concluded that the alleged appointment order was fabricated and no resolution of the Mana

M/S. TCI FINANCE LTD.versusCALCUTTA MEDICAL CENTRE LTD. AND ANR.

2005 INSC 44326 September 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Mis. TCI Finance Ltd., obtained a decree for Rs.20,91,319 against Dr. Ashok Kumar Gupta, the proprietor of the respondent company, and sought execution of the decree. The respondent company, Calcutta Medical Centre Ltd., claimed to be a tenant of Dr. Gupta’s mother and filed an intervention application i

HARSHAD CHIMAN LAL MODIversusD.L.F., UNIVERSAL LTD. AND ANR.

2005 INSC 44426 September 2005Dismissed

Harshad Chiman Lal Modi entered into a plot‑buyer agreement with DLF Universal Ltd for a residential plot situated in Gurgaon, while the agreement was executed and payments made in Delhi. He sued the defendants in the Delhi High Court for declaration, specific performance, possession and a permanent injunction. The sui

P.C. AGGARWALAversusPAYMENT OF WAGES INSPECTOR, M.P. AND ORS.

2005 INSC 44526 September 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether directors of Jiyajirao Cotton Mills Ltd., a company that owned factories, could be held personally liable for unpaid wages under the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 as amended by the Madhya Pradesh Industrial Relations Act, 1960. The Court held that the Act does not incorporate the "occupi

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, HYDERABADversusM/S. ALDEC CORPORATION

2005 INSC 44626 September 2005Dismissed

M/s Aldec Corporation purchased aluminium sheets and sent them to two job processors, VPI and SREW, for slitting, re‑rolling and painting, after which Aldec sold the painted aluminium slats (PAS) for venetian blinds. The Central Excise Department, relying on earlier decisions that slitting and painting did not amount t

T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPADversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 43926 September 2005Disposed off

The petition sought directions on whether user agencies diverting forest land for non‑forest purposes must compensate by paying the Net Present Value (NPV) of the lost forest benefits and what guidelines should govern NPV calculation. The Court examined the statutory framework of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, th

U.P. STATE SPINNING CO. LTD.versusR.S. PANDEY AND ANR.

2005 INSC 44726 September 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, U.P. State Spinning Co. Ltd., challenged a Allahabad High Court order that quashed the dismissal of workmen R.S. Pandey and another on the ground that the dismissal was effected before receipt of the show‑cause reply. The High Court had entertained a writ petition under Article 226 despite the existence

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusJOSEPH P. CHERIAN

2005 INSC 44826 September 2005Appeal(s) allowed

In 1995 a departmental examination for the post of Sub‑Inspector in the Border Security Force was held for 24 vacancies, but the results were later cancelled after a Staff Court of Inquiry found widespread malpractice at several centres. A fresh examination was conducted in 1998 for 86 vacancies; the respondent, Joseph

VISHWANATHA ACHARIversusKANAKASABAPATHY

2005 INSC 31226 July 2005Disposed off

The respondents filed a suit for declaration of title, which the trial court dismissed. The first appellate court reversed the decision, granting title to the respondents on the basis of adverse possession, even though the trial court had not framed any issue on that point. The appellant filed a second appeal, contendi

M/S BIRLA CORPORATION LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

2005 INSC 31326 July 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Mis Birla Corporation Ltd. sought MODVAT credit for duty paid on ropeway spares used to transport crushed limestone from mines 4.2 km away to its factory. The Central Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal rejected the claim, holding that the ropeway was not material‑handling equipment within the factory premises.

M/S. SACI ALLIED PRODUCTS LTD., U.P.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MEERUT

2005 INSC 23026 April 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, SACI Allied Products Ltd., sold detergent powder to independent dealers across India at a uniform price and also sold the same goods to Syndet (SCIL) in Uttar Pradesh at a lower price; Syndet then resold the goods to dealers at a higher price. The Revenue treated Syndet as a related person and, under the

HARI CHAND AND ORS.versusFARIDABAD COMPLEX ADMINISTRATION AND ORS.

2005 INSC 23126 April 2005Dismissed

The petitioners were former employees of the Faridabad Development Board who retired between 1976 and 1986 and sought pension benefits under a scheme introduced in 1992. They relied on a prior civil suit where similarly situated employees were granted pension, arguing that the decree should bind the administration as r

ANWARUL HAQversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2005 INSC 23226 April 2005Dismissed

The appellant, Anwarul Haq, was convicted under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code for inflicting grievous injury with a knife, based on the testimony of the injured victim and two eyewitnesses, despite the weapon not being recovered. He appealed, arguing that the weapon was not a 'dangerous weapon' and that the lack

LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIAversusR. DHANDAPANI

2005 INSC 59025 November 2005Appeal(s) allowed

R. Dhandapani, an assistant with Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC), was transferred to a new branch but failed to join, subsequently taking privileged and medical leave without furnishing a medical certificate from the LIC‑designated doctor. The employer issued a charge sheet for disobedience, insubordination a

K.R. PURUSHOTHAMANversusSTATE OF KERALA

2005 INSC 52225 October 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the alleged misappropriation of gold used to make a temple ornament (Golaka) by officials of the Cochin Devaswom Board. The prosecution claimed that the assistant commissioner (appellant) conspired with a Devaswom officer (A‑3) to fraudulently divert pure gold, and that the appellant either misapprop

SURENDRANAGAR DISTRICT PANCHAYATversusDAHYABHAI AMARSINH

2005 INSC 52325 October 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The Su... District Panchayat terminated the services of workman D. Amarsinh, who claimed he had been employed for over ten years and that his dismissal violated the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Panchayat argued that the workman had not completed the statutory 240 days of service in the twelve months preceding his

STATE OF U.P.versusGANGA RAM AND ORS.

2005 INSC 52425 October 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh appealed against the Allahabad High Court's acquittal of Ganga Ram and Rajendra Singh for the murder of Tula Ram under IPC Sections 302 and 34. The trial court had convicted all four accused, but the High Court set aside the convictions, relying on the absence of any pedestrian witness and th

STATE OF KARNATAKAversusLAXUMAN

2005 INSC 52125 October 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Karnataka appealed against High Court orders that had allowed a claimant, Laxuman, to file a belated application under Section 18(3)(b) of the Karnataka‑amended Land Acquisition Act seeking a court‑directed reference for enhanced compensation. The claimant had filed the initial application for reference wi

RAJESHWARIversusPURAN INDORIA

2005 INSC 38325 August 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The defendant appealed a decree for specific performance of a sale agreement, which had been upheld by the trial court and a first appeal under Section 96 CPC. The defendant filed a second appeal under Section 100 CPC, which the High Court dismissed summarily on the ground that no substantial question of law was involv

PUNDLIKversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 38525 August 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a member of the managing committee of a Maharashtra co‑operative society, was denied the right to replace the society's previously nominated delegate with his own name for the election of the Maha Sangh, despite a resolution passed within the period allowed by Rule 5(2) of the Maharashtra Specified Co‑op

STATE OF PUNJABversusSHIV RAM AND ORS.

2005 INSC 38225 August 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Punjab and a lady surgeon were sued by Shiv Ram and his wife for damages after the wife became pregnant and gave birth despite having undergone a tubectomy in 1984. The trial court and the High Court awarded Rs.50,000, holding the State liable for the failed sterilisation. On appeal, the Supreme Court exam

STATE OF PUNJABversusSAWARAN SINGH

2005 INSC 30825 July 2005Disposed off

The appellant State of Punjab proved that the accused, Swaran Singh, was apprehended on 17 May 1992 with a plastic bag containing approximately 5 kg of opium; a 10‑gram sample was taken, sealed and sent for forensic analysis, and the chain of custody was testified to by PW‑1 and PW‑4. The accused was examined under Sec

NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.versusHARJEET RICE MILLS

2005 INSC 30925 July 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Harjeet Rice Mills, insured with National Insurance Co., claimed loss of stock after a fire in its godown, asserting the fire was accidental and caused by a short circuit. The insurer contested, alleging the fire was arson, the loss exaggerated, and that the claim was fraudulent, relying on a private investigator’s rep

R. MURALI AND ORS.versusKANYAKA P. DEVASTHANAM AND CHARITIES AND ORS.

2005 INSC 31025 July 2005Dismissed

The appellants, R. Murali and others, sought leave under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure to file a suit for modifying the scheme of administration of the Sri Kanyaka Parameshwari Devasthanam and Charities, alleging mismanagement by the current Board of Trustees. The trustees opposed, contending that the Tamil

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ANR.versusT. SURYACHANDRA RAO

2005 INSC 31125 July 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, T. Suryachandra Rao, submitted a declaration under the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973, surrendered land deemed excess, and the surrender was accepted by the authorities. It later emerged that the surrendered land had already been acquired by the State under the

S.V. MUZUMDAR AND ORS.versusGUJARAT STATE FERTILIZER CO. LTD. AND ANR.

2005 INSC 22925 April 2005Dismissed

The complainant filed a criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and Sections 420 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code against Gujarat State Fertilizer Co. Ltd. and several of its employees and directors. The accused filed applications before the Chief Judicial Magistrate seeking to have

KASTURIversusIYYAMPERUMAL AND ORS.

2005 INSC 22825 April 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Kasturi filed a suit for specific performance of a contract for sale against the vendor (respondents Nos.2 and 3). Respondents Nos.1 and 4‑11, who were not parties to the contract but claimed independent title and possession of the property, applied to be impleaded as defendants. The trial court and the Madras High Cou

M/S. CASTROL INDIA LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CALCUTTA-I

2005 INSC 10825 February 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Castrol India Ltd manufactured a blended lubricating oil called ‘Super TT’ with a flash point below 94°C and classified it under tariff heading 2710.99, claiming exemption under Notification 120/84‑CE which exempts blended or compounded lubricating oils. The Central Excise Department argued that the notification applie

M/S. MARUTI UDYOG LTD.versusRAM LAL AND ORS.

2005 INSC 5025 January 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents were workmen of Maruti Ltd whose employment ended in 1977 due to the closure of the factory. After the Maruti Limited (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1980 transferred the company's assets to the Central Government and then to the appellant company, the workmen claimed re‑employment under

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, GOA AND CHENNAIversusM.R.F. LTD., CHENNAI

2005 INSC 4825 January 2005Disposed off

M.R.F. Ltd. manufactures tyres and uses grey tyre‑cord fabric that is dipped in a latex solution before being incorporated into tyres. The Commissioner of Central Excise issued show‑cause notices alleging that the dipped tyre‑cord fabric was a separate excisable product falling under Central Excise Tariff Heading 59.02

COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX DELHI AND ORS.versusM/S. SHRI KRISHNA ENGG. CO. AND ORS.

2005 INSC 4925 January 2005

The Supreme Court examined whether Rule 8(4)(c) of the Delhi Sales Tax Rules, which withholds issuance of ST‑1 declaration forms to dealers who have defaulted in tax or penalty payments, exceeds the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975. The selling dealers argued that they should not be liable for tax when their purchasing dealer

JALARAMversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2005 INSC 58724 November 2005Case Partly allowed

Four brothers, including the deceased, were moving cattle through a field owned by Sonaram when Jalaram and six other accused, who were hiding in the field, assaulted them with lathis. Jalaram delivered a single blow to the deceased's forehead, causing instant death. The trial court convicted Jalaram under Sections 147

M/S. SANJEEV WOOLEN MILLSversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI

2005 INSC 58824 November 2005Dismissed

Mis. Sanjeev Woolen Mills, a manufacturer and exporter of woolen blankets, valued its closing stock of finished goods at market price (converted from US dollars) rather than at cost or the lower of cost/market. Due to a sharp rupee devaluation in AY 1992‑93, this method produced an inflated gross profit, enabling the f

VISHNU@ UNDRYAversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2005 INSC 58924 November 2005Dismissed

The accused, a taxi driver, was convicted of raping a girl, Pushpa, who was allegedly under 16 years of age. Two dates of birth were on record – 29‑Nov‑1964 from municipal and hospital registers and 29‑Jun‑1963 from a school leaving certificate. A medical officer’s ossification test suggested the girl was 18‑19 years o

MOHD. SIDDIQ ALIversusHIGH COURT OF A.P. THROUGH REGISTRAR AND ORS.

2005 INSC 51924 October 2005Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the appointment of District Munsiff magistrates in Andhra Pradesh where a number of women and SC/ST candidates were selected under Rule 22‑A(2) of the Andhra Pradesh State and Subordinate Service Rules. The petitioners argued that the rule, even after amendment, only created a preference for

ST. THERESA'S TENDER LOVING CARE HOME AND ORS.versusSTATE OF A.P.

2005 INSC 52024 October 2005Dismissed

The Society (St. Theresa's Tender Loving Care Home) sought permission to place a five‑year‑old girl, Sahiti, for inter‑country adoption by two U.S. residents. The child was said to have been relinquished by her mother, but the relinquishment deed was later found to be fabricated and the Society had been prosecuted for

UNION OF INDIAversusKRIMPEX SYNTHETICS LTD.

2005 INSC 37524 August 2005Dismissed

The case concerned Krimpex Synth Ltd.'s claim for a Central Investment Subsidy under the Central Outright Grant or Subsidy Scheme, 1971. The High Court, after a remand, held Krimpex entitled to 25% of Rs 50,72,258 but rejected the company's later affidavit seeking the maximum subsidy because the material had not been p

XEROX MODICORP LIMITED.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2005 INSC 37624 August 2005Dismissed

Xerox Modicorp Ltd entered into Full Service Maintenance Agreements (FSMA) and Spares and Service Maintenance Agreements (SSMA) with customers after selling Xerox machines. The dispute concerned whether the supply of spare parts, toners and developers under these agreements amounted to a sale liable to Karnataka sales

IMPRESSION PRINTSversusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, DELHI-I

2005 INSC 37724 August 2005Dismissed

Impression Prints, a manufacturer of printed bed sheets, bed covers and pillow cases, claimed a nil duty exemption under Notification No. 65/87‑CE which applies to "made up textile articles" manufactured without the aid of power. The Revenue argued that the colour‑mixing and screen‑printing processes used power, and th

ATEEF NASIR MULLAversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2005 INSC 37824 August 2005Dismissed

The appellant, AteeF Nasir Mulla, was arrested in connection with a bomb blast on a local train and repeatedly remanded while the Special Court extended the statutory 90‑day investigation period under Section 49(2)(b) of the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002. The prosecution’s application for extension detailed a deep‑

VIKRAM CEMENTversusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, INDORE

2005 INSC 37924 August 2005Matter referred to larger bench

Vikram Cement, a cement manufacturer, claimed CENVAT credit for duty paid on inputs (explosives, lubricating oil, welding electrodes) and capital goods (limestone crusher, mining equipment) used in its captive limestone mines adjacent to its factory. The department issued show‑cause notices rejecting the credit, arguin

CHAIRMAN, M.P. ELECTRICITY BOARD AND ORS.versusSHIV NARAYAN AND ANR.

2005 INSC 38024 August 2005Matter referred to larger bench

The Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board classified a lawyer's office as a commercial establishment and demanded commercial tariff for electricity consumption. The landlord, who owned the premises, challenged the demand in the High Court, which held that a lawyer's office is not a commercial establishment and the commercia

MANDIR SHREE SITARAMJI @ SHREE SITARAM BHANDARversusLAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR AND ORS.

2005 INSC 38124 August 2005Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined a challenge to a 1975 notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, which sought to acquire about 300 bighas of land, including the appellants' 68 acres, for "planned development of Delhi." The appellants argued that the acquisition was actually for a cooperative society and that

FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusBHANU LODH AND ORS.

2005 INSC 10424 February 2005Case Allowed

The Food Corporation of India (FCI) issued advertisements for direct recruitment to Joint Manager and Deputy Manager posts. The Central Government, invoking Section 6(2) of the Food Corporation Act, 1964, issued directives prohibiting creation of new posts, filling vacancies by fresh recruitment and revising service co

MANGU KHAN AND ORS.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2005 INSC 10524 February 2005Dismissed

The appellants Mangu Khan, Sirdar Khan and Subedar Khan attacked an informant, his father and brother over a dispute concerning a bund, using lathis, farsi and tanchia. The father and brother were killed on the spot while the informant sustained injuries. The trial court convicted all five accused under Sections 148, 3

M/S. PAHWA CHEMICALS PVT. LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, DELHI

2005 INSC 10124 February 2005Dismissed

Mis. Pahwa Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. manufactured textile printing adhesives and claimed exemption under Notification No. 1/1993 (as amended) and Notification No. 16/1997. The Commissioner of Central Excise issued show‑cause notices alleging that the company used a foreign logo, suppressing facts and evading duty, and impose

M/S. HINDUSTAN ZINC LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, JAIPUR

2005 INSC 10224 February 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether silver chloride, an intermediate product generated during Hindustan Zinc Ltd.'s zinc manufacturing process, is liable to excise duty. The Court reiterated that excise duty applies only when an item is both manufactured and commercially marketable. While the manufacturing test was sati

M/S. HINDUSTAN ZINC LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, JAIPUR

2005 INSC 10324 February 2005Disposed off

Hindustan Zinc Ltd produced silver chloride, which the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944 declared as excisable goods. The assessee claimed exemption under Notification No. 217/86-CE dated 2 April 1986. The central issue was whether the exemption could be availed when the department failed to prove the marketability of

STATE OF J & K AND ORS.versusSANJEEV KUMAR AND ORS.

2005 INSC 10624 February 2005Disposed off

The State of Jammu & Kashmir advertised for two lecturer posts in its Medical Education Department. Four departmental employees had earlier been given ad‑hoc promotions, pending approval by the State Public Service Commission (PSC), which was granted shortly after the advertisement. The PSC prepared a select list and a

STATE OF PUNJABversusBALWANT RAI

2005 INSC 10724 February 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Punjab charged Balwant Rai under Section 15 of the NDPS Act for possessing 15 bags of poppy husk. Police, acting on secret information, found the accused sitting on the bags and searched the bags, discovering poppy husk, while a personal search of the accused yielded only Rs.200. The trial court convicted

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusMUNNA CHOUBEY AND ANR.

2005 INSC 4724 January 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh convicted Munna Choubey and others of rape under Section 376(1) IPC and sentenced them to seven years rigorous imprisonment, with an additional five years for offences under Section 450, to run concurrently. On appeal, the Madhya Pradesh High Court reduced the sentence to the period already

CHAIRMAN, OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LTD. AND ANR.versusSHYAMAL CHANDRA BHOWMIK

2005 INSC 58323 November 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a casual worker of ONGC, claimed that he had worked more than 240 days in a year and sought regularisation of his service through a writ petition. The Guwahati High Court allowed the petition, holding that the employer bore the burden of proving the contrary. ONGC appealed, arguing that the factual disp

M/S. KARTA RAM RAMESHWAR DASSversusRAM BILAS AND ORS.

2005 INSC 58423 November 2005Case Partly allowed

The case involved a shop jointly owned by two brothers, one of whom had let out the front portion to a tenant with the other co‑owner's consent. After the death of the co‑owner, his heirs sold their share and the surviving co‑owner filed a suit for partition. The trial court ordered a longitudinal partition with a wall

COMPETENT AUTHORITYversusBARANGORE JUTE FACTORY AND ORS.

2005 INSC 58523 November 2005Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined a Central Government notification under Section 3A of the National Highways Act, 1956 that sought to acquire land for a highway. The petitioners argued that the notification failed to give a brief description of the land and lacked a plan, rendering it invalid. The Court held that the notific

PRATAP SINGH AND ANR.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2005 INSC 58623 November 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The incident involved the assault and death of Vidya Ram on 20 December 1981, allegedly by the appellants wielding a lathi and bharcha. The sole eye‑witness, a minor named Mangal Singh, claimed he saw the assault from a mound, but his testimony contained material contradictions, including differing accounts of how he r

M/S. ANAND NISHIKAWA CO. LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MEERUT

2005 INSC 43523 September 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Anand Nishikawa Co. Ltd., a manufacturer of rubber profiles, classified its products under sub‑heading 4008.29 of the Central Excise Tariff, attracting nil duty. The Revenue re‑classified them under sub‑heading 4016.19, alleging that the company had not disclosed post‑forming processes (notching, drilling, slitting) wh

JOSEPH SEVERANCE AND ORS.versusBENNY MATHEW AND ORS.

2005 INSC 43623 September 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants entered into a licence agreement with the respondents to construct a cinema theatre, which was renewed for five years in 1991 with a condition to surrender possession after expiry. The licencee died in 1994, after which the respondents remained in possession. The appellants filed a suit for mandatory and

ANIGLASE YOHANNANversusRAMLATHA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 43723 September 2005Dismissed

AnigLase Yohannan filed a suit for specific performance of an agreement for sale executed on 15‑Feb‑1978, alleging that he had paid an advance and was ready to pay the balance, while the defendant failed to execute the sale deed within the stipulated six months. The defendant contended that the agreement was a security

M/S. OBETTEE PVT. LTD.versusMOHD. SHAFIQ KHAN

2005 INSC 43823 September 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The workman, Mohd Shafiq Khan, participated in a strike on 2 May 1980 and was suspended along with two co‑workers, Chunnu and Vakil. While the latter two accepted the charges, tendered unqualified apologies and were subsequently released without further action, Khan contested the charges and did not apologise. The Indu

SRI M. PURANDARA AND ORS.versusMAHADESHA S. AND ORS.

2005 INSC 36723 August 2005Disposed off

The appellants challenged a Karnataka High Court order that had expanded the scope of a writ petition concerning the selection of assistant teachers and had issued directions affecting persons who were not parties to the proceedings. The High Court had upheld the Administrative Tribunal's view on rural weightage and th

BIHAR STATE HOUSING BOARDversusARUN DAKSHY

2005 INSC 36823 August 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent deposited Rs 15,000 as earnest money for a MIG house under the Bihar State Housing Board Regulation, 1983, but was not allotted a house in the lottery. He demanded a refund, which the Board paid in 1995, and subsequently filed a complaint before the District Consumer Forum. The Forum and the State Consum

SANGEETA SINGHversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 36923 August 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were selected as dealers of petroleum products by Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Their eligibility was challenged on the ground that a close relative – their father‑in‑law – already held a dealership, a relationship not listed among the prohibited categories in the eligibility advertisement. The Allahabad H

DURGA PRASANNA TRIPATHYversusARUNDHATL TRIPATHY

2005 INSC 37023 August 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Durga Prasanna Tripathy married Arundhati Tripathy on 5 March 1991. The wife left the matrimonial home in October 1991 and the parties lived apart for about 14 years. The husband filed a petition for divorce under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, alleging cruelty and desertion. The Family Court granted the decr

G.REGHUNATHANversusK.V. VARGHESE

2005 INSC 37123 August 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The tenant, G. Reghunathan, leased a room for a jewellery shop under the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 and subsequently altered the premises without the landlord's consent while also defaulting on rent. The landlord sought eviction on two grounds: non‑payment of rent under Section 11(2) and materi

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA AND ORS.versusINDIAN TOBACCO ASSOCIATION

2005 INSC 37223 August 2005Dismissed

The Government of India introduced the Duty Entitlement Pass Book (DEPB) scheme on 7 April 1997, exempting payment of additional duty under Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act for exporters registered at specified ports and inland container depots, but Guntur was omitted. A subsequent notification dated 27 November 199

CREF FINANCE LTD.versusSHREE SHANTHI HOMES PVT. LTD. AND ANR.

2005 INSC 37323 August 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act alleging that four cheques issued by the managing director of the respondent company were dishonoured. The magistrate recorded a rubber‑seal order stating that cognizance was taken and later issued process against the respondents. The r

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusDAULAT RAM

2005 INSC 37423 August 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The police, acting on a tip, stopped Daulat Ram who was carrying a bag on his head and offered him a choice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act to be searched before a magistrate, a gazetted officer, or the SHO; he chose the SHO. The bag was opened and contraband opium was found, leading to his conviction under Sections 8

GOVT. OF A.P. AND ANR.versusJ.B. EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY AND ANR. ETC.

2005 INSC 9923 February 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Private educational societies sought to establish engineering colleges in Andhra Pradesh. They obtained approval from the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) but were denied permission under Section 20 of the Andhra Pradesh Education Act, 1982 because the State deemed the local area already saturated. The

SIDHESHWAR SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 9623 February 2005

Sidheshwar Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd., a cooperative sugar manufacturer, claimed a rebate under Notification No. 132/82 for excess sugar production in May‑September 1982, calculating average production over three years (including two years of nil output) as 11,009.67 quintals. The revenue authorities ignored the two

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISEversusM/S. RATAN MELTING AND WIRE INDUSTRIES, CALCUTTA

2005 INSC 9723 February 2005Matter referred to larger bench

The Supreme Court considered the dispute between the Commissioner of Central Excise and Mis. Ratan Mel Ting & Wire Industries concerning the effect of Central Board of Excise and Customs circulars that interpreted a statutory provision differently from a Constitution Bench judgment in Collector of Central Excise, Vadod

SHENYANG MASTSUSHIT S. BATTERY CO. LTD.versusM/S. EXIDE INDUSTRIES LTD. AND ORS.

2005 INSC 9823 February 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Chinese manufacturer of lead‑acid batteries, challenged the imposition of anti‑dumping duty by the Designated Authority (DA) after the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal set aside the DA’s finding that the company operated on market‑economy principles. The domestic industry had initi

BANK OF PATIALAversusPHOOLPATI

2005 INSC 10023 February 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Hari Ram, an employee of State Bank of Patiala, submitted a resignation on 7 January 2002 to be effective from 1 March 2002. He attempted to withdraw the resignation on 4 February 2002, citing illness, but the bank asked for medical proof and warned that failure to provide it would result in his relief on 1 March. No p

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusMAJOR BAHADUR SINGH

2005 INSC 58122 November 2005Disposed off

Major Bahadur Singh, a serving officer, was considered for promotion to Lieutenant Colonel by Selection Boards in 1995‑96 but was not empanelled. He filed statutory complaints to set aside his Annual Confidential Report (ACR) entries for 1988‑89 and 1989‑90, alleging adverse remarks that were not communicated and down‑

STATE OF ORIS SA AND ORS.versusMD. ILLIYAS

2005 INSC 58222 November 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The Sarpanch of Neulapur Gram Panchayat, MD Illiyas, was alleged to have collected illegal gratification and misled poor beneficiaries under the Indira Avas Yojana. A Sub‑Collector conducted an inquiry, concluded that the Sarpanch had wilfully abused his powers, and the Collector suspended him under Section 115(1) of t

BHAURAO DAGDU PARALKARversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 36522 August 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners challenged the grant of Freedom Fighters' Pension Scheme benefits to a large number of persons in Beed district who were either not born during the freedom struggle or were toddlers at independence, alleging fraud and false claims. The Bombay High Court had constituted an enquiry committee, which report

RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATLON AND ORS.versusZAKIR HUSSAIN

2005 INSC 36622 August 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, Zakir Hussain, was appointed as a daily‑wage conductor on a two‑year probation and was terminated for unsatisfactory performance without any enquiry. He appealed to the departmental authority, which dismissed his grievance, and then filed a suit in a civil court seeking a declaration that the terminatio

GUNTAIAH AND ORS.versusHAMBAMMA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 30622 July 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether land granted to Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe beneficiaries under Rule 43‑J of the Mysore Land Revenue (Amendment) Rules, 1960 could be subject to a 15‑year restriction on alienation, even though the rule itself does not expressly provide such a condition. The Court held that Ru

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusKAMLA DEVI

2005 INSC 30722 July 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Union of India challenged a Central Administrative Tribunal order that granted pension benefits to a deceased canteen employee who retired before the cut‑off date of 1 October 1991. The employee’s husband had retired on medical grounds on 12 July 1990 and died on 28 March 1991. Earlier Supreme Court judgm

TRIVENI GLASS LTD., ALLAHABADversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 8922 February 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Triveni Glass Ltd., a manufacturer of sheet glass, challenged the inclusion of the cost of wooden crates used for packing its glass sheets in the assessable value under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The Assistant Collector had included the packing cost, whereas the Collector (Appeals) had excluded it, leading

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, ALLAHABADversusM/S. HINDUSTAN SAFETY GLASS WORKS LTD .

2005 INSC 9022 February 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The Commissioner of Central Excise appealed against CEGAT orders that excluded the cost of wooden crates used to pack glass sheets from the assessable value. The respondents, Hindustan Safety Glass Works Ltd., argued that the glass could be sold without such packing and that wooden crates were not covered by the Explan

M/S. W.P.I.L. LTD., GHAZIABADversusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MEERUT, U.P.

2005 INSC 9122 February 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Mis. W.P.1.L. Ltd., a manufacturer of power driven pumps, challenged demand notices for excise duty on parts of pumps used in its own factory between 1 March and 21 April 1994. The appellant argued that such parts had been exempt from duty since 1978 and that the omission of this exemption in the consolidated Notificat

M/S. S & S. ENTERPRISEversusDESIGNATED AUTHORITY AND ORS.

2005 INSC 9222 February 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant imported lead‑acid batteries from Bangladesh and the Designated Authority found that the quantity of these imports was less than 3% of total imports of like batteries, which under Rule 14(d) should have led to immediate termination of the anti‑dumping investigation. The Authority instead relied on the val

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALPAIGURIversusOM PRAKASH MITTAL

2005 INSC 9322 February 2005Disposed off

The Commissioner of Income Tax appealed against an order of the Income Tax Settlement Commission that had treated a loan claimed by O.P. Mittal as an advance and refused to declare the settlement void. The revenue argued that the settlement was obtained by fraud and misrepresentation and that the Commission could be mo

D.C.L. POLYSTER LTD., NAGPURversusCOLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS

2005 INSC 9422 February 2005Dismissed

D.C.L. Polyester Ltd., a manufacturer of polyester chips, claimed that chips spilled during bagging were "sweeping wastes" and should be classified under heading 39.15 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, attracting nil duty. The Revenue argued that the chips were primary forms of plastic under heading 39.07 and dem

KANCHUSTHABAM SATYANARAYANA AND ORS.versusNAMUDURI ATCHUTARAMAYYA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 9522 February 2005Dismissed

The appellant, a lessor, leased land to the respondent, a tenant, and later filed an eviction petition under the Andhra Pradesh Tenancy Act, 1956, which was initially allowed, giving him possession. The tenant appealed and the Sub‑Collector set aside the eviction, ordered restitution and remanded the matter for fresh d

RAJINDER SINGH CHAUHAN AND ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 57921 November 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, employees of the Haryana State Federation of Consumers Co‑operative Wholesales Stores Ltd (CONFED), were retrenched under Section 25‑F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. They challenged the retrenchment, contending that Section 25‑N, which applies to industrial establishments, should govern their cas

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, INDOREversusM/S. S. KUMARS LTD. AND ORS.

2005 INSC 58021 November 2005Disposed off

The Commissioner of Central Excise challenged the valuation method used by Mis. S. Kumars Ltd. for processed grey fabric. The respondent sometimes processed fabric on its own account and sometimes on a job‑work basis for "merchant manufacturers". For 1‑Sept‑1985 to 28‑Feb‑1989 it valued the processed goods at the whole

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusRAJA MOHAMMED AMIR MOHAMMAD KHAN

2005 INSC 51321 October 2005Dismissed

The respondent, an Indian citizen and sole heir of the late Raja of Mahmudabad, sought the return of properties that had been vested in the Custodian of Enemy Property after his father, a Pakistani citizen, migrated to Pakistan. The High Court held that the vesting was only for possession, management and control and or

CENTRAL ORGANISATION OF TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY EMPLOYEESversusTAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD

2005 INSC 51421 October 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned whether the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board could alter pension benefits of its employees without formally amending the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Liberalised Pension Regulations, 1960. The Board had relied on a settlement clause to bypass the 15‑day notice under Section 9A of the Industrial Disputes

CONTROLLER OF DEFENCE ACCOUNTS (PENSION) AND ORS.versusS. BALACHANDRAN NAIR

2005 INSC 51521 October 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a former Indian Army soldier, developed anxiety neurosis and was declared medically unfit. He applied for a disability pension, which was denied on the ground that his illness was not attributable to military service. The Kerala High Court initially granted the pension, but the Division Bench reversed t

DAYANDEOGANPAT JADHAVversusMADHAV VITHAL BHASKAR AND ORS.

2005 INSC 51621 October 2005Dismissed

The appellant, a tenant of agricultural lands Gut Nos. 2325 and 2326, became a deemed purchaser under the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 on the tillers' day of 1 April 1957. He repeatedly expressed unwillingness to purchase the land, and the Mamlatdar and Agricultural Lands Tribunal recorded his statem

MASS HOLDINGS PVT. LTD.versusMUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI AND ANR.

2005 INSC 51721 October 2005Dismissed

Mass Holdings Pvt Ltd erected a hoarding in the Mahalaxmi area and was served a notice by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai to remove it, citing the Maharashtra Heritage Regulations, 1995. The appellant argued that the Mahalaxmi Precinct was merely a "location" in the schedule and not a heritage precinct, and

S. BRAHMANAND AND ORS.versusK.R. MUTHUGOPAL (D) AND ORS.

2005 INSC 51821 October 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiffs entered into a 1989 agreement to purchase two shops and a godown, which stipulated a fixed date for performance contingent on the vacating of an injunction. In 1992 the defendants wrote requesting a postponement of performance without fixing a new date, which the plaintiffs accepted by forbearance. The p

MAHILA VIKAS MANDAL COLABA AND ORS.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

2005 INSC 30321 July 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Maharashtra leased land to Mahila Vikas Mandal for a women's hostel, stipulating that any part used for remunerative purposes required prior approval and payment of 50% of the net profit. The Collector later alleged commercial use and demanded 50% of the net income (Rs 19,03,103) as recovery under Section 

SURESH CHANDRAversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2005 INSC 30421 July 2005Dismissed

During a marriage ceremony that turned violent, three members of the bridegroom party (Baratis) shot and killed two men and injured others. They were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined whether the offence could be reduced

M.L. BINJOLKARversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2005 INSC 30521 July 2005Disposed off

The Madhya Pradesh government compulsorily retired 559 employees in 1997; several challenged the orders before the State Administrative Tribunal, which set aside the retirements and ordered reinstatement with full back wages. The State obtained a High Court order dismissing its writ petitions and permitting fresh actio

DHARAMPAL SATYAPALversusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NEW DELHI

2005 INSC 22021 April 2005Dismissed

The appellant, a partnership engaged in manufacturing chewing tobacco, produced a compound called "kimam" in unregistered and unlicensed factories and claimed it was an intermediate, non‑marketable product not liable to excise duty. The Revenue Department contended that kimam was a distinct, identifiable, marketable pr

SAIBANNAversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2005 INSC 22221 April 2005Dismissed

Saibanna, already serving a life sentence for murdering his first wife, was released on parole and subsequently murdered his second wife Nagamma and their 16‑year‑old daughter Vijayalakshmi with a hunting knife while they slept. He was convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to death by the Sessions Court, which

U.P. MADHYAMIK SHIKSHA PARISHAD AND ORS.versusRAJ KUMAR AGNIHOTRI

2005 INSC 22321 April 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a government employee, sought to have his date of birth corrected from 30‑07‑1941 to 16‑10‑1945, alleging an error in his 1960 High School Certificate. He filed an application for correction in 1981, but the suit was only instituted in 1995, more than three decades after the certificate’s issuance and s

BOMBAY ELECTRIC SUPPLY AND TRANSPORT UNDERTAKINGversusLAFFANS (I) PVT. LTD. AND ANR.

2005 INSC 22121 April 2005Disposed off

Bombay Electricity Supply and Transport Undertaking (the licensee) supplied electricity to Laffans (India) Pvt. Ltd. (the consumer). Several meters installed at the consumer's premises either burnt out or were found running slow, leading the licensee to replace them without referring the dispute to the Electrical Inspe

MUKHTIAR AHMED ANSARIversusSTATE (N.C.T. OF DELHI)

2005 INSC 22421 April 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Mukhtiar Ahmed Ansari was convicted under TADA (Sec. 5) and the Arms Act (Sec. 25(IB)) for allegedly possessing firearms and ammunition in a notified area after being arrested near Delhi's Bahai Temple in 1993. He had earlier been acquitted of the related kidnapping charge. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined whether

RAJENPRA SAILversusMADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT BAR ASSOCIATION AND ORS.

2005 INSC 22521 April 2005Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined contempt proceedings against Rajendra Sail, who had called a High Court judgment "rubbish" and alleged bias and bribery by the judges, and against the editor, printer, publisher and chief sub‑editor of the newspaper that published his statements. The Court held that such scurrilous remarks we

KOKILAMBAL AND ORS.versusN. RAMAN

2005 INSC 22621 April 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Kokilambal, a Hindu widow with no issue, executed two settlement deeds in 1963‑64 granting her nephew Varadan a life usufruct and an absolute interest after her death. Varadan died in 1979 before Kokilambal, who then revoked the deeds and executed a fresh settlement in favour of Babu and Shanthi. Varadan's brother, N.

NORTH EASTERN COALFIELDS COAL INDIA LTD.versusMUBARAK ALI AND ORS.

2005 INSC 22721 April 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, North Eastern Coalfields Coal India Ltd, succeeded the private Assam Railway and Trading Company (ARTC) whose coal mining assets were vested in the Central Government under the Coal Mines (Nationalization) Act, 1973. The Additional Deputy Commissioner declared the land held by the appellant as "Sarkari"

ADRI DHARAN DASversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2005 INSC 8721 February 2005Disposed off

The appellant, A.D. Das, was charged under Sections 406, 467, 468, 471 and 420 IPC and applied to the Calcutta High Court for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC, claiming a conspiracy against him. The High Court rejected the application, and the appellant appealed to the Supreme Court. The Court held that

INDIA LITERACY BOARD AND ORS.versusVEENA CHATURVEDI AND ORS.

2005 INSC 8821 February 2005Disposed off

The India Literacy Board, a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, appointed the respondents as teachers on a fixed‑term contractual basis for periods ranging from eight to thirteen years. After the contracts expired, the Board advertised fresh recruitment, but the respondents filed a writ petition un

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, PUNEversusABHI CHEMICAL & PHARMACEUTICALS PVT. LTD.

2005 INSC 8621 February 2005Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined a dispute between the Central Excise Department and Abhi Chemical & Pharmaceuticals over the correct classification of the product Recovit, a premix containing vitamins, minerals, anti‑oxidants, solvents and stabilisers used exclusively as animal feed. The Revenue argued that Recovit should b

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusGULAM MOHD. BHAT

2005 INSC 51120 October 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Gulam Mohd. Bhat, a constable in the Central Reserve Police Force, overstayed his sanctioned leave by 315 days. The competent authority initiated departmental proceedings and, invoking Section 11(1) of the Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949 and Rule 27 of the 1955 Rules, ordered his removal from service. Bhat chall

S.M.S. PHARMACEUTICALS LTDversusNEETA BHALLA AND ANR.

2005 INSC 43220 September 2005Reference answered

The Supreme Court examined a reference concerning prosecutions under Sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, focusing on the necessity of specific averments in a complaint to hold company officers liable for a dishonoured cheque. It held that a complaint must expressly state that the accused was i

HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD.versusDARIUS SHAPUR CHENAI AND ORS.

2005 INSC 43320 September 2005Dismissed

Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., a former tenant, sought to acquire land it occupied after an eviction suit was decreed against it. The State issued a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and after the landowner filed objections under Section 5‑A, the Collector submitted a report and the

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