Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

Judgments of 2015

759 judgments, newest first — showing 601–759.

PRABHAKARversusJOINT DIRECTOR, SERICULTURE DEPARTMENT &ANR.

2015 INSC 10147 September 2015Dismissed

The petitioner, a former clerk of the Karnataka Sericulture Department, was terminated in 1985 but only raised an industrial dispute in 1999, fourteen years later, alleging illegal termination under the Industrial Disputes Act. The Labour Court awarded reinstatement without back wages, which the management challenged;

LAXMI FIBRES LTD.versusAP. INDUSTRIAL DEV. CORPN. LTD. & ORS.

2015 INSC 5527 August 2015Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered an appeal by Laxmi Fibres Ltd., a company under liquidation, challenging a condition imposed by the High Court that the Official Liquidator must adjudicate the claims of A.P. Industrial Development Corporation and A.P. State Financial Corporation, both secured creditors under Section 29 of

RAM NARAINversusSTATE OF U.P.

2015 INSC 5547 August 2015Appeal(s) allowed

Ram Narain was convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment in 1978. After serving more than ten years, he applied before the Juvenile Justice Board, presenting a school transfer certificate that showed he was 15 years, 11 months old at the time of the 1976 murder. The Board declared him a juvenil

RIJU PRASAD SARMA ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF ASSAM & ORS.

2015 INSC 4877 July 2015Dismissed

The case concerned the management of the Sri Sri Maa Kamakhya Temple in Assam, where the traditional custom allowed only male members of the four Bordeori families to elect the head priest (Doloi), excluding women and Deuris. Petitioners challenged the constitutionality of Section 25A of the Assam State Acquisition of

CHANDRA BABU @ MOSESversusSTATE THROUGH INSPECTOR OF POLICE & ORS.

2015 INSC 4887 July 2015Disposed off

The appellant filed an FIR alleging assault and the police investigation concluded with a final report exonerating the accused. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, after a protest petition, directed "reinvestigation" of the case by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBCID). The Madras High Court set aside that order, hold

M/S. BHS INDUSTRIESversusEXPORT CREDIT GUARANTEE CORP. &ANR.

2015 INSC 4867 July 2015Dismissed

The appellant, a small‑scale exporter, obtained a Shipment Comprehensive Risk Policy from Export Credit Guarantee Corporation (ECGC) and made several shipments to a US buyer. Two of the shipments were sent after the approved credit limit was exhausted and the buyer later refused to accept the documents. The appellant c

KHENYEIversusNEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. & ORS.

2015 INSC 3897 May 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved claimants injured in a collision between a bus and a trailer‑truck. The bus was insured by New India Assurance Co., while the trailer‑truck was uninsured. The High Court had limited the insurer's liability to one‑third of the award, based on a 1/3‑2/3 split of negligence between the drivers. The Supre

M/S. SERVO-MED INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MUMBAI.

2015 INSC 3917 May 2015Appeal(s) allowed

Servo‑Med Industries bought bulk disposable syringes and needles, sterilised them, packed them in branded pouches and sold them. The Central Excise Department issued a show‑cause notice demanding additional excise duty, contending that sterilisation transformed the articles into a new commodity. The Tribunal held that

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KERALAversusM/S. TRAVANCORE SUGAR AND CHEMICALS LTD.

2015 INSC 3907 May 2015Disposed off

The respondent, M/s Travancore Sugar & Chemicals Ltd., claimed a deduction for a vend fee of Rs 22,87,512 paid to the Kerala Government, which the assessing officer disallowed under Section 438 of the Income Tax Act because it was not paid before the expiry of the relevant previous year. The Commissioner of Income Tax

THE UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusM/S.ASAHI INDIASAFETYGLASS LTD.

2015 INSC 9957 May 2015Dismissed

The respondent, M/s Asahi India Safety Glass Ltd., manufactures tempered and laminated safety glass for automobiles and claimed MODVAT credit on float glass raw material under Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Revenue Department issued show‑cause notices alleging that the credit was claimed on defective i

SHANTI LAL MEENAversusSTATE OF NCT OF DELHI, CBI

2015 INSC 9857 April 2015Dismissed

The appellant, a Sub‑Inspector of Police, was caught red‑handed accepting a bribe of Rs 25,000 and was convicted under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, receiving two years’ rigorous imprisonment for each offence with fines. The appeal before the Supreme Court was limite

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, GOAversusM/S. COSME FARMA LABORATORIES LTD.

2015 INSC 2877 April 2015Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether a drug‑manufacturing loan licencee, Cosme Pharma Laboratories Ltd, which contracts job workers to produce its medicaments, should be treated as a "manufacturer" under the Central Excise Act, 1944 and thus liable for excise duty. The Commissioner of Central Excise had issued notices tr

PADMAKUMARI & ORS.versusDASAYYAN &ORS.

2015 INSC 2887 April 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff, Padmakumari & ors., entered into an unregistered agreement to purchase 2.08 acres of land from defendants 1‑11, agreeing to pay the balance consideration of Rs 63,000 within nine months. The plaintiff failed to make this payment within the stipulated period, while defendants 12‑15 subsequently purchased

SECRETARY, MINOR IRRIGATION DEPTT. & R.E.S.versusNARENDRA KUMAR TRI PATH I

2015 INSC 2867 April 2015Disposed off

The petitioner, Narendra Kumar Tripathi, was first appointed as Work Engineer in 1983 and later, on 12 June 1985, was appointed as Assistant Engineer on an ad hoc basis after a selection committee recommendation. The appointment continued until it was regularised on 14 December 1989 under the Uttar Pradesh Regularisati

MANOJBHAI N. SHAH & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2015 INSC 137 January 2015Disposed off

The case concerned employees of five nationalised general insurance companies who had taken voluntary retirement under the 2004 Special Voluntary Retirement Scheme and later sought the benefit of a retrospective pay revision dated 21 December 2005. The employers argued that the scheme was designed to reduce future sala

M/S COCHIN SHIPYARD LTD.versusM/S APEEJAY SHIPPING LTD.

2015 INSC 8376 November 2015Case Partly allowed

The parties entered into a contract for the construction of a cargo ship, which later gave rise to arbitration before a former Supreme Court judge who awarded in 2009. The respondent sought to set aside the award under Sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, alleging the arbitrator’s legal misconduct, and appl

PARVAIZAHMAD PARRYversusSTATE OF JAMMU & KASHMIR & ORS.

2015 INSC 8356 November 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Parvaiz Ahmad Parry, held a B.Sc. with Forestry as a major subject and an M.Sc. in Forestry, and applied for the post of Range Officer (Forest) Grade‑I under the J&K Forest Service Recruitment Rules, 1970, which required "B.Sc. (Forestry) or equivalent" from a university recognised by ICAR. The JKPSC dec

RAKESH MOHINDRAversusANITA BERI AND OTHERS

2015 INSC 8366 November 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiffs filed a suit under the Specific Relief Act seeking a declaration of title over a property. The defendant sought to prove a disclaimer letter by secondary evidence because the original was allegedly misplaced in the custody of the DEO, Ambala, and submitted a photocopy along with a witness from the DEO. T

JUPUDYPARDHASARATHYversusPENTAPATI RAMA KRISHNA AND OTHERS

2015 INSC 8346 November 2015Dismissed

The case concerned a property bequeathed by P. Venkata Subba Rao in 1920 to his third wife Veeraghavamma for her lifetime as maintenance. After the husband's death, Veeraghavamma occupied the house, and the question arose whether her limited life interest under the Will became an absolute right under Section 14(1) of t

GURUDASSING NAWOOSING PANJWANIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRAAND OTHERS

2015 INSC 8336 November 2015Dismissed

Gurudassing Nawoosing Panjwani, a displaced person, was allotted land under the Displaced Persons Act but later faced competing mutation entries arising from a series of revenue proceedings. Multiple revisions and appeals were filed under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966, culminating in a second revision before

RAMESH CHAND (DEAD) THROUGH L.RS.versusASRUDDIN (DEAD) THROUGH LRSANDANOTHER

2015 INSC 7356 October 2015Disposed off

The plaintiff claimed that a sale agreement dated 21‑06‑2004 with the defendant for a 12‑kanal land, mortgaged to a bank, was breached when the defendant failed to execute the sale deed after receiving Rs 4 lakhs as earnest money. The defendant contended that he had already sold the same land to a third party on 07‑05‑

SATYAPAL SINGHversusSTATE OF M.P. AND ORS.

2015 INSC 7376 October 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The father of a deceased woman filed an appeal before the Madhya Pradesh High Court challenging the acquittal of five accused in a dowry‑death case. The High Court dismissed the appeal mechanically, without examining whether the appellant needed leave of the High Court under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Proce

JAGDISH LAL GAMBHIRversusPUNJAB NATIONAL BANK & ORS.

2015 INSC 7316 October 2015Dismissed

Jagdish Lal Gambhir, an Assistant General Manager of Hindustan Commercial Bank, was transferred to Punjab National Bank (PNB) after the banks' amalgamation and placed as a Scale‑III officer. PNB later issued a charge‑sheet alleging irregular loan sanctions and initiated disciplinary proceedings, ultimately dismissing h

STATE THROUGH INTELLIGENCE OFFICER NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAUversusMUSHTAQ AHMAD ETC.

2015 INSC 7196 October 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The State, through an Intelligence Officer of the Narcotics Control Bureau, charged Mushtaq Ahmad and Guizar Ahmad with possession of large amounts of charas (6.2 kg and 4.0 kg respectively) seized on 5 April 2004. The trial court held that the seized charas constituted a "commercial quantity" under the NDPS Act and co

SREE BALAJI MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL AND ANOTHERversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

2015 INSC 5516 August 2015Case Allowed

Sree Balaji Medical College & Hospital sought to increase its MBBS admission capacity from 150 to 250 seats. The College had already been recognised under Section 11 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 and had permission for 100‑150 seats. After an inspection report confirmed that the College satisfied all requirem

M/S. TATA CHEMICALS LTD.versusTHE COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, AHMEDABAD

2015 INSC 5476 August 2015Matter referred to larger bench

Tata Chemicals sold soda ash in gunny bags and claimed that the cost of these durable, returnable bags should be excluded from the assessable value of the soda ash under Section 4(4)(d)(i) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The revenue argued that no valid arrangement obligating buyers to return the bags to the seller ex

M/S. JAYASWAL NECO LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, RAIPUR

2015 INSC 5486 August 2015Appeal(s) allowed

JayashwalNECO Ltd., a manufacturer of pig iron, defaulted on excise duty payments, leading the Revenue to withdraw its fortnightly instalment facility under Rule 173G(1)(e) for two months and require payment per consignment by debit to the account current. During this period the assessee used Cenvat Credit to discharge

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIAversusPANASIA ADVISORS LTD. & ANR.

2015 INSC 4836 July 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) debarred Panasia Advisors Ltd. and its managing director for ten years, alleging that as lead managers they facilitated a fraudulent scheme involving Global Depository Receipts (GDRs) of six Indian companies, creating a false appearance of foreign investment and harming

SIRAJUL & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF U.P. &ANR.

2015 INSC 4816 July 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Sirajul and others, were summoned in a criminal complaint under Section 307 IPC filed by respondent No.2, a co‑accused who had been convicted in a cross‑case relating to the same 1992 incident. The complaint was lodged in 2008, sixteen years after the alleged offence and more than a decade after the cro

MAINUDDIN ABDUL SATTAR SHAIKHversusVIJAY D. SALVI

2015 INSC 4806 July 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant booked a flat with the respondent's company and paid Rs.74,200, for which the respondent later issued a cheque for refund. The cheque was drawn by the respondent in his personal capacity and was dishonoured, leading the appellant to issue a notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and fi

SH JOGENDRASINHJI VIJAYSINGHJIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

2015 INSC 4856 July 2015Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether a letters patent appeal could be filed against an order of a Single Judge that arose from civil court proceedings or other tribunals. It held that orders of civil courts are only reviewable under Article 227 of the Constitution and therefore are not amenable to writ jurisdiction under

ABCversusTHE STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

2015 INSC 4826 July 2015Appeal(s) allowed

An unwed Christian mother filed a petition under Section 7 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, seeking to be appointed guardian of her five‑year‑old son. The Guardian Court dismissed the petition because the mother refused to disclose the name and address of the child’s putative father, holding that Section 11 requir

STATE OF M.P.versusMANISH & ORS.

2015 INSC 4846 July 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh appealed a High Court order that quashed an FIR for offences under IPC sections 307, 294, 34 and Arms Act sections 25, 27 on the ground that the victim and accused had settled the dispute out of court. The issue was whether the High Court could invoke its inherent power under Section 482 of

IQBAL AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF UTIAR PRADESH

2015 INSC 3876 May 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants Iqbal and Khurshed were convicted under Section 396 of the Indian Penal Code for participation in a dacoity that occurred on a new‑moon night, based primarily on the testimony of three eye‑witnesses and their identification of the accused in a test identification parade. The prosecution failed to recover

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESHversusP. VENKATESHWARLU

2015 INSC 3846 May 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a Sub Registrar, was caught in a police‑laid trap after demanding a bribe of Rs.500 for registering a will. The prosecution proved demand and acceptance through eyewitness testimony, a positive phenolphthalein test, and the unchallenged recovery of the tainted money. The High Court acquitted the accused

KIRSHNA TEXPORT & CAPITAL MARKETS LTD.versusILAA. AGRAWAL & ORS

2015 INSC 3866 May 2015Directions issued

The appellant issued a notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act to a company whose cheque was dishonoured, but no separate notice was sent to the company's directors. A complaint was filed against the company and its directors under Sections 138 and 141. The Bombay High Court held that individual noti

ZONAL GENERAL MANAGER, M/S IRCON INTERNATIONAL LTD.versusM/S VINAY HEAVY EQUIPMENTS

2015 INSC 3826 May 2015Dismissed

IRCON International, the main contractor, entered into two sub‑contracts (C1 and C2) with Vinay Heavy Equipments for road work. The subcontractor completed about 67% of the work and claimed an unpaid balance of Rs 61 lakhs, leading to arbitration (First Arbitration) in which the arbitrator awarded the subcontractor rou

STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERSversusCALCUTTA MINERAL SUPPLY CO. PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER

2015 INSC 3816 May 2015Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined two appeals arising from writ petitions challenging State actions under the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953 and its Rules. In the first appeal, the Court held that Calcutta Mineral Supply Co. had lawfully retained factory land within the ceiling limit and that the State's resumption

SHAMIMA FAROOQUIversusSHAHID KHAN

2015 INSC 2836 April 2015Appeal(s) allowed

Shamima Farooqui, a Muslim woman, filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking maintenance after being harassed and deserted by her husband Shahid Khan, who later divorced her. The Family Court ordered Rs 2,500 per month from the date of application and Rs 4,000 per month from the da

JASBIR SINGH @ JAVRI @ JABBAR SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2015 INSC 2846 April 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Jasbir Singh was convicted under Sections 399 and 402 of the IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act for allegedly planning and attempting a dacoity with firearms. The Supreme Court examined the evidence, noting the absence of independent witnesses, the fact that the investigating officer himself conducted the

PROFESSOR RAMESH CHANDRAversusUNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ORS.

2015 INSC 996 February 2015Appeal(s) allowed

Professor Ramesh Chandra, a chemistry professor at the University of Delhi, was punished and dismissed on allegations of concealing his removal as Vice‑Chancellor of Bundelkhand University and of misrepresenting his role as Director of the Ambedkar Centre for Biomedical Research (ACBR). The University framed charge‑she

M/S. PEPSICO INDIA HOLDING PVT. LTD.versusKRISHNA KANT PANDEY

2015 INSC 96 January 2015Appeal(s) allowed

Krishna Kant Pandey, employed by Pepsico India Holding Pvt. Ltd., was terminated after serving in various supervisory roles, most recently as Fleet Executive. He claimed that he was a "workman" under Section 2(z) of the Uttar Pradesh Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and that his termination violated Section 6 of the Act.

PHOOL PATTI AND ANR.versusRAM SINGH (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. & ANR.

2015 INSC 46 January 2015Case Partly allowed

The dispute concerned 52 kanals of land owned by Bhagwana, of which 20 kanals were self‑acquired and 32 kanals were ancestral. Bhagwana, by a consent decree dated 24 November 1980, transferred the entire property to his nephew Ram Singh, acknowledging a family settlement for the ancestral portion. The daughters of Bhag

INDER SINGH & ORS.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2015 INSC 76 January 2015Disposed off

Four villagers were killed and an informant seriously injured in a violent clash in Dhodi village, Rajasthan, leading to the charge of murder and grievous hurt against 29 co‑villagers. The trial court convicted 24 of them under Sections 302, 307 and 149 of the IPC, while five were acquitted; subsequent appeals raised q

UNION OF INDIA & ANR.versusS.N. MAITY & ANR.

2015 INSC 56 January 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a scientist, was appointed on deputation to the post of Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks for a tenure of five years or until further orders. After serving one year, he was repatriated to his parent department without any stated reason. The Central Administrative Tribunal upheld the

UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY & ORS,versusANJU JAIN & ANR.

2015 INSC 106 January 2015Dismissed

The respondents were initially appointed as Junior Machine Operators in 1987 and later had their posts abolished in 1995. They were adjusted to vacant Computer posts with the condition that they would continue to draw the salary of Junior Machine Operators. Following the rationalisation of Electronic Data Processing (E

NARGIS JAL HARADHVALAversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

2015 INSC 66 January 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Nargis Jal Haradhvala, obtained a Section 20 exemption under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 for a parcel of land in Mumbai, with an initial condition to surrender 30% of the permissible floor space to government‑nominated allottees. A 1990 government corrigendum modified this to 20% of

ALL KERALA ONLINE LOTTERY DEALERS ASSOCIATIONversusSTATE OF KERALA & ORS.

2015 INSC 8315 November 2015Dismissed

The State of Kerala issued notifications prohibiting the sale of computerized and online lottery tickets while permitting paper lotteries, which the All Kerala Online Lottery Dealers Association and others challenged as discriminatory under Section 5 of the Lotteries (Regulation) Act, 1998. The petitioners argued that

HERO CYCLES (P) LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), LUDHIANA

2015 INSC 8325 November 2015Appeal(s) allowed

Hero Cycles Ltd. claimed a deduction under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act for interest paid on bank loans in AY 1988‑89. The Assessing Officer disallowed the claim, holding that the borrowed money was used to give an interest‑free advance to its subsidiary, Hero Fibres Ltd., and a low‑interest loan to its dir

NEON LABORATORIES LTD.versusMEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES LTD. & ORS.

2015 INSC 7285 October 2015Dismissed

Neon Laboratories Ltd (appellant) sought to enforce its trademark ROFOL, for which it had applied in 1992 and obtained registration in 2001, but only began using the mark in 2004. Medical Technologies Ltd and its associate (respondents) had been using the similar mark PROFOL since 1998, having acquired goodwill in the

BALESHWAR DAYAL JAISWALversusBANK OF INDIA & ORS.

2015 INSC 5455 August 2015Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether the Appellate Tribunal under the SARFAESI Act could condone a delay in filing an appeal under Section 18(1). It held that Section 18(2) incorporates the provisions of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, including the proviso to Section 20(3) which

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusUTIAM STEEL LTD.

2015 INSC 9935 May 2015Appeal(s) allowed

Uttam Steel Ltd exported galvanized steel sheets in May‑June 1999 and was required to claim a rebate of excise duty under Section 118 (then Section 11B) of the Central Excise Act within six months of shipment. The company filed its rebate applications on 28 December 1999, beyond the six‑month limit but within one year.

M/S. COAL HANDLERS PVT. LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE RANGE KOLKATA - 1

2015 INSC 3795 May 2015Disposed off

The appellants, M/s. Coal Handlers Pvt. Ltd., performed agency services for Ambuja cement companies, supervising coal loading and liaising with railways, but did not handle the clearing, warehousing, or forwarding of the coal. The Revenue claimed that these services fell within the definition of a "clearing and forward

KULWINDER SINGH &ANR.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2015 INSC 9945 May 2015Dismissed

In 1988 police stopped a truck near Raidhriana village and seized 110 bags of poppy husk. The appellants Kulwinder Singh and Amrik Singh, who were on the truck, fled the scene and were later arrested. They were convicted under Section 15 of the NDPS Act, sentenced to ten years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine, and app

M/S. SECURE METERS LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, NEW DELHI

2015 INSC 3785 May 2015Appeal(s) allowed

M/s Secure Meters Ltd., a manufacturer of electricity meters, imported liquid crystal display (LCD) modules from Hong Kong and sought customs clearance under Chapter Heading 9013.80, claiming nil basic duty. The Customs authorities classified the LCDs under Chapter Heading 9028.90 as parts of electricity meters, imposi

L. LAXMIKANTAversusSTATE BY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, LOKAYUKTA

2015 INSC 975 February 2015Dismissed

The appellant, a hostel warden, was accused of demanding Rs.2000 as illegal gratification from a student seeking re‑admission to the hostel. The student complained to the Lokayukta, leading to a sting operation where the money, marked with a chemical that turned pink, was recovered from the warden's pocket. The trial c

KRISHNAMOORTHYversusSIVAKUMAR & ORS.

2015 INSC 9605 February 2015Dismissed

The appeal concerned the election of Krishnamoorthy as President of Thekampatti Panchayat, where he had filed a nomination affidavit disclosing only one pending criminal case while suppressing eight other embezzlement cases. The High Court had declared his election void on the ground of corrupt practice, holding that t

DIWAN SINGHversusLIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2015 INSC 35 January 2015Dismissed

The appellant, Diwan Singh, a cashier with Life Insurance Corporation of India, accepted Rs.533 from a policy holder on 13 August 1990 but failed to deposit the amount, later forging a ledger entry to conceal the shortfall. He was charged with temporary embezzlement and forgery, found guilty in a departmental enquiry,

OM PRAKASH (DEAD) TH. HIS LRS.versusSHANTI DEVI & ORS.

2015 INSC 15 January 2015Dismissed

The appellant claimed ownership of a disputed immovable property on the basis of a registered Gift Deed dated 15‑05‑1970, asserting that Section 90 of the Evidence Act, 1872 would give a presumption of proper execution because the deed was over thirty years old. The trial court, and subsequently the High Court, rejecte

UNION OF INDIA & ANR.versusPURUSHOTTAM

2015 INSC 25 January 2015Disposed off

The case concerned Havildar Purushottam, who was tried by a Summary Court Martial (SCM) for extortion and other misconduct, pleaded guilty, and was sentenced to reduction in rank. The SCM proceedings were later set aside by a Deputy Judge‑Advocate General acting as a reviewing authority under Section 162 of the Army Ac

OPG SECURITIES PRIVATE LTD.versusS.E.B.I. & ANR.

2015 INSC 8884 December 2015Appeal(s) allowed

OPG Securities Private Ltd, a stock broker, challenged SEBI's demand for registration fees calculated on the basis of its total turnover for periods after 1 October 2006. The demand was based on the earlier Schedule III of the SEBI (Stock‑brokers and Sub‑brokers) Regulations, which used the previous year's turnover on

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.versusHILLI MULTIPURPOSE COLD STORAGE PVT. LTD.

2015 INSC 8904 December 2015Reference answered

The appeal concerned the interpretation of Section 13(2)(a) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 regarding the time allotted to the opposite party to file its version after a complaint is admitted. The petitioner argued that the 30‑day period could be extended beyond the statutory ceiling of 15 days, relying on the lat

VSE STOCK SERVICES LTD.versusS.E.B.I. &ANR.

2015 INSC 8274 November 2015Dismissed

The Vadodara Stock Exchange created a subsidiary limited by guarantee that could not obtain NSE membership, so it formed another stock‑limited subsidiary (the appellant) which secured NSE membership but was denied SEBI recognition because only one subsidiary could be registered as a broker. To operate on NSE, the earli

BALDEV SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2015 INSC 8304 November 2015Case Partly allowed

Baldev Singh, a tractor driver, was stopped at night in 1990 and 33 gunny bags containing poppy husk were recovered from the trolley attached to his tractor. The prosecution relied solely on the testimony of ASI Ram Singh, a police witness who had signed the recovery memos, and on documentary evidence; the investigatin

UNITECH LTD. &ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2015 INSC 8264 November 2015Appeal(s) allowed

Vidarbha Engineering, a lessee of three plots of land, entered into a collaboration agreement with Unitech to develop a commercial complex, whereby Unitech would construct the building, retain 78% of the built‑up area and transfer 22% to Vidarbha. The parties filed a statement under Section 269UC stating a consideratio

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusDAUD KHAN

2015 INSC 8284 November 2015Dismissed

On 19 June 2004, Daud Khan allegedly shot Nand Singh at a restaurant in Nimbahera, Rajasthan, leading to Singh's death. The trial court convicted Khan under Section 302 IPC and Sections 3 and 25 of the Arms Act, but the High Court reduced the murder conviction to Section 304(1) IPC while upholding the Arms Act convicti

SANDU (D) BY LRS.versusGU LAB (D) BY LRS. AND OTHERS

2015 INSC 6394 September 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned land originally owned by a tribal person that had been sold to a non‑tribal transferee. The Assistant Collector initially dropped restoration proceedings under Section 4 of the Maharashtra Restoration of Lands to Scheduled Tribes Act, 1974, because the tribal transferor was unwilling to repurchase th

LT. GOVERNOR OF DELHI & ORS.versusMATWAL CHAND (D) THR. LRS.

2015 INSC 6384 September 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The subject land was originally evacuee property that was acquired by the Central Government under Section 12 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 and placed in the compensation pool. It was subsequently auctioned to the respondents, who obtained provisional possession and later a sale c

RAVI NORA KUMAR SHRIVASTAVAversusSTATE OF M.P. & ORS.

2015 INSC 6424 September 2015Dismissed

Ravi N. Shrivastava, originally a daily wage worker, was regularized as a Lower Division Clerk and later made in charge of Office Steno. He was formally absorbed as a Steno‑typist on 12‑04‑2002, had passed the required shorthand‑typing exam in 2000, and was promoted to Stenographer on 22‑01‑2003. The promotion was canc

NIZAM & ANR.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2015 INSC 6404 September 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants Nizam and Shafique were convicted for the murder of Manoj under Sections 302 and 201 IPC based primarily on the "last seen theory" that Manoj was last seen alive with them. The Supreme Court examined the circumstantial evidence and held that the prosecution failed to establish a complete, unbroken chain

STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERSversusR.K.B.K. LTD. & ANR.

2015 INSC 6434 September 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The State of West Bengal appealed against an order of the Director of Consumer Goods that imposed a penalty on R.K.B.K. Ltd., a licensed kerosene oil agent, for alleged excess distribution. The dispute centered on whether the Director or the District Magistrate had authority under Paragraph 9 of the West Bengal Kerosen

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, MUMBAI-IversusM/S SEIKO BRUSHWARE INDIA

2015 INSC 6414 September 2015Disposed off

The importer M/s Seiko Brushware India brought pig‑hair bristles into India and sold them in 1998‑2000. The Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975, Section 7 lists pig‑hair bristles as tax‑free goods, meaning no sales tax is payable on their sale. The Commissioner of Customs denied the benefit of Exemption Notification No. 34/98‑Cu

SMITA SUBHASH SAWANTversusJAGDEESHWARI JAGDISHAMIN & ORS.

2015 INSC 6444 September 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appeal concerned the filing of an election petition challenging the election of Smitasubhash Sawant as a municipal corporator. The petition was filed on 28 February 2012, and the question was whether the ten‑day limitation under Section 33(1) of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, began on the date the list

M/S. SWASTIKA ENTERPRISES &ANR.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS & ORS.

2015 INSC 5414 August 2015Appeal(s) allowed

M/s. Swastika Enterprises imported an old vessel and, despite claiming exemption, was assessed additional customs duty of Rs. 1,52,20,000 through an endorsement on the Bill of Entry. The appellants challenged the demand by filing a writ petition, and while the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme was introduced during the pendenc

M/S. JAPAN AIRLINES CO. LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI

2015 INSC 5434 August 2015Disposed off

Japan Airlines (JAL) paid landing and parking fees to the Airports Authority of India (AAI) and deducted tax at source (TDS) at 2% under Section 194-C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Income Tax Department argued that the fees were "rent" under Section 194-1 and should attract TDS at 20%. The Supreme Court examined whe

M/S. JASWAL NECO LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, VISAKHAPATNAM

2015 INSC 5424 August 2015Appeal(s) allowed

M/s. Jaswal Neco Ltd., a pig‑iron manufacturer, imported low‑ash metallurgical coke between June and August 1998 under export‑obligation exemptions. It failed to fulfill the export condition and was assessed a demand of Rs 7.21 crore comprising basic customs duty, special customs duty, special additional duty, and anti

VIJAY SHANKARversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2015 INSC 10094 August 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Vijay Shankar was convicted under Sections 302 and 449 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of Satish Kumar, based primarily on circumstantial evidence such as alleged motive, a 'last seen' testimony, an extra‑judicial confession, and the recovery of blood‑stained clothes and a knife. The prosecution’s

VIVEK RAI & ANR.versusHIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND THROUGH REGISTRAR GENERAL & ORS.

2015 INSC 964 February 2015Dismissed

The petitioners, convicted under IPC 498‑A and the Dowry Prohibition Act, had their appeal dismissed and filed a revision petition under CrPC ss. 397 and 401 before the Jharkhand High Court. The High Court refused to register the revision because the petitioners had not surrendered to custody as mandated by Rule 159 of

M/S. CONSTRUCTION & DESIGN SERVICESversusDELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

2015 INSC 924 February 2015Disposed off

The Delhi Development Authority (DOA) awarded a construction contract to M/s Construction & Design Services for a sewerage pumping station, with Clause 2 stipulating liquidated damages of up to 10% of the estimated cost for delay. The contractor failed to complete the work, the contract was terminated, and the Superint

DR. VINOD BHANDARIversusSTATE OF M.P.

2015 INSC 954 February 2015

Dr. Vinod Bhandari, Managing Director of a medical institute, was alleged to have conspired with Vyapam officials and middlemen to secure illegal admissions for undeserving candidates into MBBS courses, involving large sums of money and fraud. He was arrested in January 2014 and his bail applications were rejected by t

KANAKLATAversusSTATE OF (NCT) OF DELHI & ORS.

2015 INSC 904 February 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Kanaklata, challenged a discharge order of the Additional Sessions Judge, Rohini, which dismissed the accused under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The High Court set aside that order and directed a fresh consideration, expressly stating that the trial court should not be influenced by it

S. T. SADIQversusSTATE OF KERALA& ORS.

2015 INSC 914 February 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appeal concerned the constitutional validity of Section 6 of the Kerala Cashew Factories Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1995, which declared that ten cashew factories acquired earlier would stand transferred to the State notwithstanding any court judgment. The petitioners argued that the provision directly nullified

S.E.B.I.versusALLIANCE FINSTOCK LTD. & ORS. ETC. ETC.

2015 INSC 8233 November 2015Dismissed

The case concerned stock brokers who had converted their individual or partnership membership into a corporate entity before 1 April 1997 and sought the fee‑continuity benefit under paragraph 4 of Schedule III of the SEBI (Stock Brokers and Sub‑Brokers) Regulations, 1992. SEBI denied the benefit, arguing that the provi

SECURITIES & EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIAversusM/S. PREBON YAMANE (I) LTD.

2015 INSC 8223 November 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) appealed against the Securities Appellate Tribunal’s order directing SEBI to refund fees paid by M/s Prebon Yamane (India) Ltd (the Respondent). The dispute centered on whether the Respondent qualified for the "fee continuity" exemption under Clause 4 of Schedule III of

LLOYD ELECTRIC AND ENGINEERING LIMITEDversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERS

2015 INSC 6323 September 2015Appeal(s) allowed

Lloyd Electric & Engineering Ltd. claimed a 1% concessional Central Sales Tax (CST) rate under Himachal Pradesh's 2004 Industrial Policy, which was originally applicable up to 31‑03‑2009. The Council of Ministers decided to extend this concession to 31‑03‑2013 or until CST is phased out, and the Department of Industrie

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, COIMBATOREversusMIS. G.R. GOVINDARAJULU & SONS

2015 INSC 10133 September 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a public charitable trust, filed its 1994-95 return showing a gross income of Rs 99,41,221 and claimed a nil taxable income by deducting the amount actually spent on its objects (Rs 47,27,533) and an additional sum of Rs 32 lakh that it set apart for future charitable purposes. The Assessing Officer all

PARHLAD AND ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

2015 INSC 5403 August 2015Dismissed

The appellant, Parhlad, and his uncle were convicted for kidnapping and raping a girl who was about 14 years old. The trial court, and subsequently the High Court, relied on the victim's testimony, her father's statements, and a school leaving certificate to establish that she was below sixteen, rejecting the ossificat

MOHAN SINGH & ORS.versusTHE CHAIRMAN RAILWAY BOARD & ORS.

2015 INSC 5393 August 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were canteen workers at the Moradabad Division of the Northern Railway who claimed that their canteen should be treated as a statutory canteen under the Factories Act, 1948 and that their services should be regularised. The respondents argued that the canteen was a non‑statutory, non‑recognised facility

LAXMI DEVIversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

2015 INSC 4783 July 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, land owners, challenged the State of Bihar’s acquisition of their land under the urgency provision of Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, alleging that no award had been made despite a High Court direction in 1988 to do so within four months. The State argued that Section 17 allowed possession

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusKESHAR SINGH

2015 INSC 4763 July 2015Dismissed

The State alleged that Keshar Singh raped a minor girl of unsound mind near a pond, relying on the testimony of the victim’s sister, uncle, father, a doctor and the investigating officer. The Sessions Court and the High Court acquitted the accused, finding the prosecution evidence unreliable, and the State appealed. Th

BASISTH NARAYAN YADAVversusKAILASH RAI AND ORS.

2015 INSC 4753 July 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the death of Raj Banshi Devi, who died from burn injuries in her matrimonial house within two years of marriage. The prosecution alleged dowry demands, physical and mental cruelty, and that the deceased was assaulted, tied with iron wire and set alight, invoking Section 3048 of the IPC. Altho

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusANOOP SINGH

2015 INSC 4773 July 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh prosecuted Anoop Singh for kidnapping, assault and rape of a girl, alleging she was under 16 years old at the time of the offence. The trial court convicted Singh based on the girl’s birth certificate and middle‑school examination certificate, despite a two‑day discrepancy between them, and

M/S. ROHINI TRADERSversusM/S. J.K. LAKSHMI CEMENT LTD.

2015 INSC 9593 February 2015Dismissed

M/s Rohini Traders sued J.K. Lakshmi Cement Ltd. for unpaid dues and served a notice under Order XII Rule 8 of the CPC seeking production of specific documents. The defendant produced some of the documents in court and its representative was cross‑examined, but the plaintiff failed to have those documents marked and en

JITENDRA KHIMSHANKAR TRIVEDI & ORS.versusKASAM DAUD KUMBHAR & ORS.

2015 INSC 893 February 2015Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court considered an appeal by the husband and relatives of Smt. Jayvantiben Jitendra Trivedi, a 22‑year‑old housewife who died in a motor accident caused by the negligent driving of the respondent. The claimants sought enhancement of compensation beyond the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal award of Rs.2,24,0

SUBHAS DATTAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2015 INSC 863 February 2015Disposed off

The petitioner filed a public‑interest writ under Article 32 seeking directions for adequate security and investigation of thefts of historic artefacts from several Indian museums, including the Viswabharati University museum, Asiatic Society, Nandan Art Gallery and Victoria Memorial. The Union of India and various mus

VENNANGOT ANURADHA SAMIRversusVENNANGOT MOHANDAS SAMIR

2015 INSC 8842 December 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The husband filed a petition for divorce on the ground of cruelty and sought transfer of the case from Bombay to Hyderabad. The parties entered into a settlement agreement where the husband promised to pay Rs.12.5 lakh as full and final alimony at the time of a mutual consent divorce decree. The wife later disclosed th

PURUSHOTHAMversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS

2015 INSC 8822 December 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the allotment of Civic Amenity Site No. 2 by the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) to Bharat Petroleum for a petrol pump. The Karnataka High Court had set aside the allotment, holding that the site was earmarked for a bank and that the BDA could not dispose of it under Section 38A of the

UNION OF INDIAversusV. SRIHARAN @ MURUGAN & ORS.

2015 INSC 8862 December 2015Reference answered

The case arose from the assassination of former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, for which several accused were convicted and sentenced to death, later commuted to life imprisonment by the Supreme Court. The State of Tamil Nadu proposed to remit the life sentences of the convicts, prompting the Union of India to file a wri

SUJOYMITRAversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2015 INSC 8852 December 2015Disposed off

The appellant, Sujoy Mitra, was charged with rape of an Irish citizen (PW5) and the trial court recorded PW5's testimony via video conference. The appellant challenged the procedure under Section 482 of the CrPC, arguing it was unfair and seeking access to the video recording. The High Court had prescribed a set of saf

M/S. ADANI AGRI FRESH LTD.versusMAHABOOB SHARIF & ORS.

2015 INSC 8832 December 2015Disposed off

M/s Adani Agri Fresh Ltd. (appellant) supplied fruit to M/s RMS Fruits & Co. (respondent) and obtained three unconditional bank guarantees from State Bank of Mysore to secure payment. When the respondent failed to pay, the appellant invoked the guarantees, prompting the respondent to obtain a permanent injunction restr

M/S. DR. REDDY'S LABORATORIESversusCOMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

2015 INSC 10122 September 2015Disposed off

Dr. Reddy's Laboratories imported diagnostic equipment (BTS models) and classified them as "auto analysers" under the Customs Tariff. Customs seized the goods, alleging they were merely "photometers" and demanded duty, confiscation, and penalties under Sections 111(m), 112(a) and 114A of the Customs Act. The Commission

KSH. LAKSHAHEB SINGH AND OTHERS.versusSTATE OF MANIPURAND OTHERS

2015 INSC 6292 September 2015Disposed off

The appellants, Section Officers Grade‑I in Manipur's Public Health Engineering Department, sought promotion to Assistant Engineer under the 60% promotion quota, contending that the recruitment rules apply to vacancies, not to the total cadre strength. The State had previously imposed a ban on direct recruitment, later

U.V. MAHADKARversusSUBHASH ANAND CHAVAN AND OTHERS

2015 INSC 6282 September 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, U.V. Mahadkar, was selected as Head of the Department of Agronomy by a committee constituted under Statute 41 of the Maharashtra Agricultural Universities Statutes, 1990. Respondent Subhash Anand Chavan challenged the selection, and the Bombay High Court set it aside, directing a fresh selection, holding

K. NANJAPPA (DEAD) BY LRS.versusR.A. HAMEED ALIAS AMEERSAB (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ANOTHER

2015 INSC 6252 September 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appeal arose from a suit for specific performance of a sale agreement dated 2 September 1967 concerning immovable property. The agreement was written on a quarter‑sheet of paper and was produced in a criminal proceeding, leading the High Court to decree specific performance in favour of the plaintiffs. The Supreme

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, TIRUCHIRAPALLIversusM/S. DALMIA CEMENT(BHARAT) LTD.

2015 INSC 6272 September 2015Dismissed

The appellant, Commissioner of Central Excise, sought to enforce a refund order dated 06‑06‑1989 in favour of M/s Dalmiacement (Bharat) Ltd. The refund had not been paid, leading to contempt proceedings and a High Court order directing the Assistant Commissioner to examine the claim under the amended Section 11B, which

M/S. MANGALORE REF. & PETROCHEMICALS LTD .versusCOMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, MANGALORE

2015 INSC 6262 September 2015Disposed off

Mangalore Refineries & Petrochemicals Ltd imported crude oil in 144 voyages between 1996 and 1998. The Revenue, via a show‑cause notice, demanded customs duty on the basis of the quantity shown in the bills of lading, arguing that the duty was now ad valorem and therefore should be calculated on the invoice price. The

SMT. SHAKUNTALA BAI & ORS.versusMR. MAHAVEER PRASAD

2015 INSC 4692 July 2015Dismissed

The deceased Kanhaiya Lal executed three wills, the last dated 15 November 1978, bequeathing his property to his adopted son Mahaveer Prasad. The non‑adopted family members challenged the 1978 will as a forgery and claimed the earlier registered will of 23 December 1974 was the last valid testament. The trial court hel

N.K. RAJENDRA MOHANversusTHIRVAMADI RUBBER CO. LTD. & ORS.

2015 INSC 4712 July 2015Dismissed

In 1918 the plaintiffs leased 963.75 acres of land to Mr. Campbell Hunt for 36 years, allowing the lessee to cultivate any crop and clear forests. The lease later passed to Thiruvamadi Rubber Co., which continued possession after the lease expired, paying rent until 1978 and establishing a rubber plantation. The plaint

ZUARI CEMENT LTD.versusREGIONAL DIRECTOR E.S.L.C. HYDERABAD & ORS.

2015 INSC 4702 July 2015Dismissed

Zuari Cement Ltd. had previously obtained exemption from the Employees State Insurance (ESI) scheme under Section 87 of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 for 1986‑1993, but its application for renewal for 1993‑2001 was rejected, leading to demand notices for contributions. The High Court directed the company to a

UNION OF INDIAversusM/S BRIGHT POWER PROJECTS (I) P. LTD.

2015 INSC 4682 July 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India entered into a construction contract with M/s Bright Power Projects (I) Ltd that expressly barred any interest on amounts payable to the contractor. A dispute was referred to an arbitral tribunal, which awarded interest pendente lite from the date of reference to the date of award despite the contrac

M/S ESSAR OIL LTD.versusHINDUSTAN SHIPYARD LTD. & ORS.

2015 INSC 4672 July 2015Appeal(s) allowed

Essar Oil Ltd., a subcontractor of Hindustan Shipyard Ltd. (the respondent), performed work under a contract between Hindustan Shipyard and ONGC. Although ONGC sometimes paid Essar directly, the payment was made on behalf of Hindustan Shipyard and no contract existed between ONGC and Essar. A dispute over non‑payment w

SURENDRA KUMAR & ORS.versusGREATER NOIDA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS.

2015 INSC 4742 July 2015Case Partly allowed

The appellants were initially engaged on a contractual basis as Assistant Managers (Civil) by the Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority and continued to work for over ten years without a sanctioned post. An advertisement for the post was issued on 20‑Nov‑2002, but a regularisation policy for contractual employ

S.R. SUKUMARversusS. SUNAAD RAGHURAM

2015 INSC 4732 July 2015Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether a magistrate had taken cognizance of an offence under Section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) when a complaint was recorded and whether a complaint could be amended before cognizance was taken. It held that cognizance requires the magistrate to apply his judicial mind to the

DAYA RAM & ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

2015 INSC 4722 July 2015Dismissed

The appellants were convicted for the double murder of two brothers, Ashok and Rohtash, under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The sole eyewitness, the victims' brother (PW 3), hid during the attack out of fear and later reported the incident, identifying the appellants and describing the weap

DEFENCE ESTATE OFFICERversusSYED ABDUL SALEEM AND OTHERS

2015 INSC 812 February 2015Dismissed

The Defence Estate Officer appealed against a High Court order that increased compensation for land acquired under the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952 and awarded 30% solatium and 9% interest due to a 19‑year delay in appointing a statutory arbitrator. The respondents had originally been

BALU S/O ONKAR PUND & OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2015 INSC 852 February 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, led by Apparao Pund, entered a cattle shed owned by Madhavrao Range to forcibly take possession of the land, resulting in a scuffle during which they set the shed on fire with kerosene. Savitribai, the wife of Madhavrao, was injured in the blaze and later died from her burns. The trial court and High Co

AJAY RAMDAS RAMTEKE AND ANR.versusMAHANAGAR SUDHAR SAMITL,AKOLA& ORS.

2015 INSC 842 February 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a dispute arising from the 2012 elections to the Akola Municipal Corporation where a post‑poll group (aghadi) called Mahanagar Sudhar Samiti was formed by elected councillors. The group applied for registration under the second proviso of Section 31A(2) of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporatio

POONA EMPLOYEES UNIONversusFORCE MOTORS LIMITED & ANOTHER

2015 INSC 8761 December 2015Dismissed

The Poona Employees Union (PEU) applied to the Industrial Court for recognition in place of the existing recognized union, Bharatiya Kamgar Sena (BKS), claiming it had over 30% membership and a larger membership base during the relevant six‑month period. The Industrial Court, relying on the Investigating Officer's repo

INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD.versusNILOFER SIDDIQUI & ORS.

2015 INSC 8751 December 2015Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined a dispute where Indian Oil Corporation Ltd (IOCL) terminated the LPG distributorship granted to ex‑servicemen respondents under a letter of allotment that referred to a "standard agreement" which was never supplied or executed. The Court held that, because the standard agreement was not concl

MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIAversusMEDICITI INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES (MIMS) & ORS.

2015 INSC 8791 December 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The Mediciti Institute of Medical Sciences (MIMS) applied to the Medical Council of India (MCI) for renewal of permission to increase its MBBS intake from 100 to 150 seats for the 2015‑16 academic year. MCI inspections in December 2014 and May 2015 identified serious deficiencies in faculty, resident numbers, infrastru

MADAN RAZAKversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS

2015 INSC 8801 December 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The father of a 13‑14‑year‑old girl, Saraswati Kumari, filed a complaint after her body was recovered following a disappearance from a mela. Police recorded statements of several witnesses about a month after the incident, identifying the accused who allegedly kidnapped, raped and murdered the girl. The Additional Chie

RAJNI SANGHIversusWESTERN INDIAN STATE MOTORS LTD. & ORS.

2015 INSC 8741 December 2015Disposed off

The case involved four brothers who owned a family business and entered into an arbitration agreement in 1984 to partition the business. An arbitrator issued an award in 1987, but subsequent litigation in the Bombay, Rajasthan and Delhi High Courts resulted in family settlement schemes in 1994 and an amended settlement

LALARAM & OTHERSversusJAIPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY &ANR.

2015 INSC 8771 December 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants' land was compulsorily acquired in 1981 for an Indian Army field firing range under the Rajasthan Land Acquisition Act, 1953, and although compensation was awarded, it was never fully paid. The State Government issued a series of policy circulars, culminating in the circular dated 13 December 2001, promi

PUKHREM SHARATCHANDRA SINGHversusMAIREMBAM PRITHVIRAJ@ PRITHIBIRAJ SINGH

2015 INSC 7261 October 2015Disposed off

The appellant, Pukhrem Sharatchandra Singh, filed an election petition challenging the 2012 election of the respondent, Mairembam Prithviraj, on grounds of a forged affidavit and procedural irregularities. The respondent delayed filing his written statement for two years and repeatedly sought adjournments, filing numer

STATE BANK OF HYDERABADversusRABO BANK

2015 INSC 7241 October 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff, RABO Bank, sued State Bank of Hyderabad (SBH) in a summary suit under Order 37 of the CPC, claiming payment on several Bills of Exchange that SBH had allegedly accepted via telex/fax messages. SBH denied liability, asserting that the co‑acceptances were unauthorized, that the Bills lacked proper signatur

SUDHIRversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

2015 INSC 7251 October 2015Dismissed

The case involved two officials of the Rural Water Supply Department of Zilla Parishad, Jalgaon, accused of misappropriating public funds allocated for rural drinking‑water schemes. FIRs were filed after an enquiry by the Revenue Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner, alleging large sums were siphoned through fictitious

BHADRESH BIPINBHAI SHETHversusSTATE OF GUJARAT &ANOTHER

2015 INSC 6231 September 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Bhadresh Bipinbhai Sheth, was originally charged in 2001 under Section 506(2) IPC for harassment. After a nine‑year delay, the prosecutrix sought addition of a rape charge under Section 376 IPC, which was finally framed in 2014. The appellant obtained anticipatory bail from the Additional Sessions Judge

U.P. STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORP. &ANR.versusGOPAL SHUKLA & ANR.

2015 INSC 10111 September 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, U.P. State Road Transport Corporation, dismissed conductor Gopal Shukla for allowing 25 passengers to travel without tickets, an act that constituted personal gain and breach of trust. The Labour Court, invoking Section 6(2-A) of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, substituted the dismissal with reinstatem

DR. TAPAS KUMAR MAN DAL AND OTHERS & ETC.versusSTATE OF WEST BENGALAND OTHERS

2015 INSC 6241 September 2015Dismissed

The appellants, in‑service doctors who had completed postgraduate diplomas between 2012 and 2014, applied for government‑sponsored seats in the 2015 West Bengal Post‑Graduate Medical Admission Test and were initially placed on the select list. Subsequently, the Government issued a notification excluding candidates who

ABDUL WAHEEDversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2015 INSC 10101 September 2015Dismissed

Abdul Waheed, aggrieved by a civil suit and contempt petition, went armed with a pistol and firearms to the chabutra of Abbas Khan, where he and co‑accused fired shots and assaulted the complainants with lathis, resulting in the deaths of Abbas Khan and Israr Khan and injuries to several others. The prosecution relied

GURDAS SINGH AND OTHERS ETC.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

2015 INSC 6221 September 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, teachers originally appointed in the school cadre, had been transferred to two Sanskrit institutes that were treated as colleges and had been teaching there for more than 25 years. They claimed parity of pay with college lecturers, arguing that they performed the same duties and possessed the requisite

STATE OF M.P.versusASHOK & OTHERS ETC.

2015 INSC 4511 July 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The victim Tikaram was attacked, had petrol poured on him and was set ablaze. While burning, he was surrounded by the accused, who prevented his escape, threw a burning tyre and a sword at him, and later he died of his injuries. The trial court convicted all accused under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian

PETROLEUM & NATURAL GAS REGULATORY BOARDversusINDRAPRASTHA GAS LIMITED & ORS.

2015 INSC 4591 July 2015Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether the Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board (PNGRB) could, under the PNGRB Act, 2008, fix the maximum retail price of gas and determine network tariff and compression charges for a city or local natural gas distribution network owned by Indraprastha Gas Ltd. The Court held that Sec

BRANCH C.1.0., TIRUNELVELI RANGE, TAMILNADUversusMARIYAANTONVIJAY

2015 INSC 4631 July 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The police intercepted the vessel M.V. Seaman Guard Ohio within Indian territorial waters and seized a large quantity of unlicensed firearms and ammunition, leading to a charge sheet under the Arms Act, 1959 and other statutes. The accused challenged the charge sheet through revision (s.397) and a petition under the in

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, DELHI-IVversusM/S. SANDAN VIKAS (I) LTD.

2015 INSC 4421 July 2015Disposed off

The appeal concerned the classification of car air‑conditioning kits and automotive gas compressors under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 for the period 1 August 1991 to 28 February 1993. The revenue argued that the kits, whether sold with or without compressors, should be taxed under serial No.3 (or serial No.5) o

STATE OF KERALA & ORS.versusA. P. MAMMIKUTIY

2015 INSC 4601 July 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The Kerala Tahsildar levied a luxury tax on a three‑storey building comprising 13 residential apartments by aggregating the plinth area of all apartments, invoking Section SA of the Kerala Building Tax Act, 1975. The Kerala High Court, on a single‑judge decision, held that tax should be levied only on apartments whose

RAHUL YADAV &ANR.versusM/S. INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD.AND OTHERS

2015 INSC 4621 July 2015Dismissed

The petitioners, Rahul Yadav and others, purchased land and entered into a 30‑year lease with Indian Oil Corporation (IOC) to operate a petrol pump after being awarded a dealership. The dealership was later cancelled by the Court in Mukund Swarup Mishra's case, and IOC sought possession of the premises under the Public

STATE OF M.P.versusMADAN LAL

2015 INSC 4581 July 2015Case Partly allowed

Madan Lal was convicted by a Sessions Court for raping a seven‑year‑old girl under IPC Section 376(2)(f) read with Section 511 and sentenced to five years’ rigorous imprisonment. The High Court, relying on a compromise between the accused and the victim’s parents, set aside the rape conviction, reduced the charge to Se

V KRISHNAKUMARversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.

2015 INSC 4561 July 2015Disposed off

The appellant's premature baby, Sharanya, was not screened for Retinopathy of Prematurity (ROP) despite being a high‑risk infant, leading to permanent blindness. The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) found the State of Tamil Nadu, its government hospital and two doctors negligent and awarded Rs 5 

DEPOSIT INSURANCE & CREDIT GUARANTEE CORPORATIONversusRAGUPATHI RAGAVAN & ORS.

2015 INSC 4481 July 2015Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a dispute arising from the liquidation of Theni Co-operative Urban Bank Ltd., where depositors sought payment of amounts exceeding the Rs 1 lakh insurance limit guaranteed by the Deposit Insurance and Credit Guarantee Corporation (DICGC). The High Court had directed the Official Liquidator an

QUANTUM SECURITIES PVT. LTD. & OTHERSversusNEW DELHI TELEVISION LTD.

2015 INSC 4641 July 2015Disposed off

The plaintiff, New Delhi Television Ltd, filed a civil suit against Quantum Securities Pvt Ltd and others seeking a permanent injunction restraining defamatory communications and damages. During the suit, the plaintiff filed a Notice of Motion under Order XXXIX of the CPC and obtained an ex‑parte interim injunction on

INDIAN PERFORMING RIGHTS SOCIETY LTD.versusSANJAY DALIA&ANR.

2015 INSC 4521 July 2015Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether sections 62 of the Copyright Act, 1957 and 134 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 allow a plaintiff to sue in a district court where it resides or carries on business even when the cause of action has also arisen at its principal place of business. The Court held that these provisions creat

AHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION &ANR. ETC.versusRAJUBHAI SOMABHAI BHARWAD AND ANR. ETC.

2015 INSC 4611 July 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned a workman who was dismissed by the Nava Naroda Gram Panchayat and later entered into a compromise with the Sarpanch for reinstatement and back wages. The Labour Court upheld the compromise, but the Gram Panchayat and Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation challenged its validity, arguing that the Sarpanch l

STATE OF U.P.versusSATVEER & ORS.

2015 INSC 4501 July 2015Dismissed

The State of Uttar Pradesh appealed the High Court’s acquittal of Satveer and others for the murder of an eight‑year‑old boy. The prosecution’s case rested on the testimony of a single eyewitness, PW2, who claimed to have seen the accused take the child into a baithak and later find his dead body there. The Supreme Cou

STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.versusMAHENDRANATH SHARMA

2015 INSC 4651 July 2015Dismissed

The petitioners (State of Rajasthan and officials) appealed against a High Court order that granted revised pensions to a group of retired lecturers, librarians and PTIs who had retired before 1 January 2006. The respondents argued that, under the circular dated 12 September 2008, a pre‑1.9.2006 pensioner’s consolidate

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY & ANR.versusPANNALAL CHOUDHURY &ANR.

2015 INSC 4491 July 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The National Institute of Technology (NIT) dismissed its Registrar, Pannalal Choudhury, on grounds of financial and administrative irregularities after a departmental inquiry. The respondent challenged the dismissal, arguing that only the Board of Governors (BOG) had authority to dismiss under the Assam Services (Disci

STATE OF J & KversusWASIMAHMED MALIK@ HAMID AND ANOTHER

2015 INSC 4551 July 2015Case Partly allowed

The State of Jammu & Kashmir appealed the acquittal of two accused in a bomb‑blast case that killed eight people and injured eighteen. The trial court had dismissed the confessional statement of Ghulam Nabi Guide because it was recorded in Hindi, not in the accused's native language, and consequently acquitted both Ghu

OIL & NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LIMITEDversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX &ANR.

2015 INSC 4461 July 2015Dismissed

The Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd (ONGC) challenged the assessment of surtax on its agreements with foreign companies, contending that the exemption notification GSR 307(E) dated 31‑03‑1983 under Section 24AA of the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964, covered both categories of foreign companies – those with dire

SAVITRI PANDEY AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.AND OTHERS

2015 INSC 9921 May 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Savitri Pandey and Raju Pandey were named in an FIR filed in 2014 by their sister‑in‑law alleging fraudulent sale deeds executed in 1994 concerning joint family land. The High Court dismissed their writ petition under Article 226 seeking quashing of the FIR. The Supreme Court examined whether such a writ

RAJASTHAN HOUSING BOARDversusNEW PINK CITY NIRMAN SAHKARI SAMITI LTD. & ANR.

2015 INSC 3751 May 2015Disposed off

The Rajasthan Housing Board and the original Khatedars appealed against a Division Bench order that granted the New Pink City Nirman Sahkari Samiti Ltd. (the Society) a right to compensation and 25% of the developed land after the State acquired the land under the Rajasthan Land Acquisition Act, 1953. The Court held th

JAGDISH CHAND SHARMAversusNARAIN SINGH SAINI (DEAD) THROUGH HIS LRS. & ORS.

2015 INSC 3761 May 2015Dismissed

The appellant sought a Letter of Administration on the basis of a Will dated 22‑10‑1973, allegedly executed by the deceased Nathu Singh in favour of the appellant. The trial court held the Will validly executed and granted the administration, but the High Court set aside that order, finding the Will not proved under Se

BHUPAL SINGH AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2015 INSC 2791 April 2015Case Partly allowed

The State of Haryana acquired large tracts of undeveloped agricultural land in 1977 for residential development, and the landowners sought compensation. The Land Acquisition Officer initially fixed the fair market value at Rs.16.52 per square yard, which was later enhanced to Rs.22 by the reference court. The High Cour

EXCEL DEALCOMM PRIVATE LIMITEDversusASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY (INDIA) LIMITED & ORS.

2015 INSC 2811 April 2015Dismissed

Excel Dealcomm Pvt Ltd entered a private treaty agreement with Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Ltd (ARCIL) for the sale of immovable and movable assets under the SARFAESI Act. Excel filed a suit for specific performance in the Calcutta High Court, seeking issuance of a sale certificate that would effect transfer o

BALASAHEB ARJUN TORBOLE & ORS.versusTHE ADMINISTRATOR & DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER

2015 INSC 2801 April 2015Dismissed

The appellants, residents of slums on privately owned plots in Kurla, challenged the approval of a slum rehabilitation scheme that treated their private plots together with adjoining municipal plots as a single slum area. They argued that the authorities wrongly clubbed the lands, that consent of the required 70% of el

JEYAR CONSULTANT & INVESTMENT PVT. LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MADRAS

2015 INSC 2781 April 2015Dismissed

JEYAR Consultant & Investment Pvt. Ltd., which exported marine products and also earned domestic income from dividends, interest, brokerage and share transactions, claimed a deduction under Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act for profits from its export business. The Assessing Officer denied the deduction because the e

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