Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

Judgments of 2023

854 judgments, newest first — showing 601–800.

GAS POINT PETROLEUM INDIA LTD.versusRAJENDRA MAROTHI & ORS.

2023 INSC 11910 February 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The decree holder obtained a judgment against National Ginni Enterprises for non‑performance of an LPG gas agreement and initiated execution proceedings. The judgment debtor's property was auctioned on 18‑Oct‑2011 and sold to respondent No.1, who deposited 25% of the price on 3‑Nov‑2011 and the balance on 4‑Nov‑2011. T

STATE OF HARYANA & ANR.versusSUBHASH CHANDER & ORS.

2023 INSC 12010 February 2023Case Partly allowed

The State of Haryana acquired about 58 acres of land in Kherki, Majra village under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The original award of Rs 60 lakh per acre was enhanced by the reference court to Rs 1.56 crore per acre, and the High Court further increased it to Rs 2.98 crore per acre by taking a base of Rs 2.38 crore

ANNA MATHEWS AND OTHERSversusSUPREME COURT OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2023 INSC 12210 February 2023Dismissed

The petitioners challenged the appointment of an individual as an Additional Judge of the Madras High Court, alleging that the collegium had not properly considered the candidate's suitability and seeking a writ of certiorari and mandamus to quash the recommendation and compel reconsideration. The Court examined whethe

BAR COUNCIL OF INDIAversusBONNIE FOI LAW COLLEGE & ORS.

2023 INSC 11610 February 2023Disposed off

The Supreme Court considered a civil appeal by the Bar Council of India against Bonnie Foi Law College concerning the validity of the Bar Council's power to prescribe pre‑enrolment training and examinations under the Advocates Act, 1961. The Court examined three questions referred by a three‑Judge Bench: (1) whether th

ASHWINI KUMAR UPADHYAYversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2023 INSC 9919 November 2023Directions issued

The Supreme Court entertained a public‑interest writ petition under Article 32 seeking the expeditious disposal of criminal cases pending against sitting and former Members of Parliament and Legislative Assemblies. The petition also raised the constitutional validity of Section 8 of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1

M/S. RAJASTHAN ART EMPORIUMversusKUWAIT AIRWAYS & ANR.

2023 INSC 9969 November 2023Dismissed

M/s Rajasthan Art Emporium (appellant) exported a large consignment of handicraft goods to the United States and booked air carriage with Kuwait Airways (respondent No.1) through Dagga Air Agents (respondent No.2), receiving a guarantee that the shipment would arrive within seven days. The goods were delayed by more th

THANESAR SINGH SODHI (D) THR. LRS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2023 INSC 9979 November 2023Dismissed

The appellants challenged the forfeiture of their properties under the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976 (SAFEMA), arguing that the detention order against them under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (COFEPOSA) had been re

UNION OF INDIA & ORSversusD.G.O.F. EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION AND ANR.

2023 INSC 9959 November 2023Dismissed

The D.G.O.F. Employees Association, representing assistants and personal assistants of the Ordnance Factory Board (OFB) headquarters, sought parity in pay with similarly placed employees of the Central Secretariat Service (CSS) and other central cadres, invoking para 3.1.9 of the Sixth Central Pay Commission (CPC) reco

SAJEEVversusSTATE OF KERALA

2023 INSC 9989 November 2023Dismissed

The case concerned the conviction of two accused, Sajeev (A10) and Roy (A11), for their role in a conspiracy to mix methyl alcohol with spirit and sell it as illicit liquor, which caused seven deaths, eleven cases of blindness and injuries to over forty persons. The trial court and Kerala High Court convicted them unde

M/S. IFCI LIMITEDversusSUTANU SINHA & ORS.

2023 INSC 10239 November 2023Dismissed

The appellant IFCI Ltd. had subscribed to Compulsorily Convertible Debentures (CCDs) issued by ICTL, a special purpose vehicle of IVRCL, for financing a highway concession project. When ICTL defaulted, the CCDs were treated as equity under the project’s concession agreement and the Resolution Professional rejected IFCI

LAJJA RAM & ORS.versusRATI CHAND & ORS. ETC

2023 INSC 10919 November 2023Dismissed

The case concerned a parcel of shamlatdeh (village common) land in Punjab/Haryana that had been granted rent‑free to Narain Dass as a bhondedar in return for secular services to the village temple. Narain Dass later sold the land to Lajja Ram and his sons, who claimed ownership. The village inhabitants and the land pro

DILIP B JIWRAJKAversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS

2023 INSC 10189 November 2023Dismissed

The petitioners challenged the constitutional validity of sections 95 to 100 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, alleging violations of Articles 14 and 21 and the denial of a hearing before a resolution professional is appointed. They argued that the resolution professional’s powers to seek information and the

MADANversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2023 INSC 9909 November 2023Disposed off

The case arose from a 2003 incident in Muzzafarnagar where six persons were killed by indiscriminate firing by the appellants Madan, Sudesh Pal and others, allegedly motivated by political rivalry. The trial court convicted the accused under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC and sentenced Madan and Sudesh Pa

ANKITA THAKUR & ORS.versusTHE H.P. STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION & ORS.

2023 INSC 9929 November 2023Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the recruitment of Junior Office Assistants (IT) in Himachal Pradesh where the State had, after the application deadline, issued a relaxation order allowing candidates with diplomas from private institutions to be considered eligible. The petitioners argued that the relaxation was illegal bec

NABHA POWER LIMITEDversusPUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LIMITED

2023 INSC 8839 October 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute concerned the recovery of deductions from monthly tariff, specifically the cost of washing coal and the gross calorific value (GCV) under a power purchase agreement between Nabha Power Limited and Punjab State Power Corporation Limited (PSPCL). The Supreme Court had earlier, on 5 October 2017, ordered PSPCL

M/S. KEWAL COURT PVT. LTD. AND ANRversusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

2023 INSC 8849 October 2023Matter referred to larger bench

The Supreme Court examined the meaning of “vacant land” under Section 2(q) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, focusing on sub‑clause (i) and the conflict between the earlier Johnson two‑judge decision and the later Billimoria three‑judge decision. The appellants argued that land on which construction

SHEO RAJ SINGH (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS. & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2023 INSC 8859 October 2023Dismissed

The case arose from a land acquisition dispute where the Reference Court enhanced compensation for landowners, prompting the Union of India to file an appeal before the Delhi High Court. The appeal was filed 479 days after the order, exceeding the limitation period, leading the Union to seek condonation of delay under

CHANDRA PRATAP SINGHversusSTATE OF M.P

2023 INSC 8879 October 2023Case Partly allowed

The appellant, accused No.2, was convicted by the High Court of murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC and of causing disappearance of evidence under Section 201 IPC. The conviction under Section 302/34 was based on the appellate court’s alteration of the original charge (Section 302 with Sections 148

NARESH @ NEHRUversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2023 INSC 8899 October 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC for the murder of Ajay based primarily on the testimony of PW‑9, a cousin of the deceased, and a CCTV video. The Supreme Court examined the reliability of the eyewitness, finding his statements riddled with inconsistencies, no prior identi

RAJESH JAINversusAJAY SINGH

2023 INSC 8889 October 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Rajesh Jain alleged that he had advanced loans to Ajay Singh, who later issued a post‑dated cheque for repayment that was dishonoured for insufficient funds. Jain filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881; the trial court acquitted Singh and the High Court upheld the acquittal. The Sup

STATE OF GUJARATversusDILIPSINH KISHORSINH RAO

2023 INSC 8949 October 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Gujarat prosecuted Sub‑Inspector Dilipsinh Kishorsinh Rao under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for possessing assets disproportionate to his known income. Rao filed an application for discharge under Sections 227 and 228 of the CrPC, contending that the investigating officer had ignored his written

KISHAN CHAND JAINversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS

2023 INSC 9159 October 2023Disposed off

The petitioner, Kishan Chand Jain, filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking directions that State Information Commissions (SICs) adopt hybrid or virtual hearings to reduce travel costs for applicants, especially from remote areas. The petition argued that such measures would further the legislative intent of the

M/S HARSH AUTOMOBILES PRIVATE LIMITEDversusINDORE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION

2023 INSC 8939 October 2023Disposed off

Harsh Automobiles Private Limited and a related company, dealers of motor vehicles, displayed name boards on their premises showing their trade name and the types of vehicles sold. The Indore Municipal Corporation issued notices demanding payment of advertisement tax under Section 132 of the Madhya Pradesh Municipal Co

DIVYAversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2023 INSC 9009 October 2023Dismissed

The petitioners, including Ms. Divya, applied for the 2022 Civil Services Examination (CSE) claiming reservation under the Economically Weaker Section (EWS) category but were rejected by the UPSC because they did not possess the required Income & Asset Certificate (I&AC) for FY 2020‑21 before the prescribed cut‑off dat

SANJIT SAHA & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL

2023 INSC 10859 October 2023Matter referred to larger bench

Sanjit Saha and Anil Saha, convicted under IPC 376(2)(g) and sentenced to ten years' rigorous imprisonment, filed a Special Leave Petition (Criminal) together with an application for exemption from surrender. The Chamber Judge rejected the exemption, gave them six weeks to surrender and later two weeks to file surrende

DEV GUPTAversusPEC UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY AND ORS.

2023 INSC 6959 August 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Dev Gupta, challenged the University’s requirement of a minimum 75% aggregate in Class XII for admission under the 2% sports quota, arguing that it defeated the quota’s purpose and violated Article 14. The High Court dismissed the writ petition, prompting a special leave petition before this Court. The S

GOVERNMENT OF KERALA & ANR.versusJOSEPH AND OTHERS

2023 INSC 6939 August 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute concerned a 30-cent parcel of government "puramboke" land in Kudayathoor village, which the claimants alleged they had possessed since 1940 and sought title by adverse possession. The High Court, in a second appeal, held that the claimants were entitled to ownership based on long possession, overturning the

HIND OFFSHORE PVT. LTD.versusIFFCO – TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.

2023 INSC 6979 August 2023Dismissed

Hind Offshore Pvt. Ltd. chartered the vessel M.V. Sea Panther and obtained a marine hull insurance policy from IFFCO‑Tokio covering the period 09.11.2006‑08.11.2007, which required a class warranty. The vessel had suffered engine damage during the preceding policy year, for which the insurer paid an advance, but the re

INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. AND ORSversusM/S. SATHYANARAYANA SERVICE STATION & ANR

2023 INSC 5079 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Indian Oil Corporation (IOC) entered into a 15‑year petrol pump dealer agreement with Sathyanarayana Service Station, which contained a clause allowing either party to terminate the agreement by giving three months' notice. The dealer gave a notarised notice to withdraw, which IOC accepted; the dealer later attempt

M/S. JERMYN CAPITAL LLC DUBAIversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ORS.

2023 INSC 5099 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Jerlyn Capital LLC Dubai, a foreign institutional investor, had shares and funds in an ICICI Bank account. Freeze orders under Section 102 of the Code of Criminal Procedure were imposed in 2006 and 2010 on the basis of an investigation into alleged offences by Dharmesh Doshi, who had no employment or ownership link wit

C.S. GOPALAKRISHNAN ETC.versusTHE STATE OF TAMIL NADU & OTHERS

2023 INSC 5109 May 2023Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined challenges to the Tamil Nadu Industrial Purposes Act, 1997 and the Tamil Nadu Highways Act, 2001, alleging inherent arbitrariness and violation of Article 14 of the Constitution. The appellants, who purchased the lands after acquisition notices were issued, sought to invalidate the statutes a

STATE OF U.P. & ORS.versusSMT. PRIYANKA

2023 INSC 1099 February 2023Dismissed

Dr. Vinod Kumar, a lecturer employed by the State of Uttar Pradesh since July 2001, died on 11 August 2009 while still in service. His wife, Priyanka, filed a writ petition seeking payment of death‑cum‑retirement gratuity, which the State rejected on the ground that the employee had not exercised the mandatory option t

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusNARVADA DEVI & ORS.

2023 INSC 1109 February 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Delhi Development Authority (DDA) appealed a Delhi High Court order that had declared the acquisition of a parcel of land to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, because physical possession had not been tak

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.versusSHAKEEL AHMED & ORS.

2023 INSC 1089 February 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Government of NCT of Delhi appealed a Delhi High Court order that had declared the land acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The High Court ha

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.versusSH. MANISH & ANR

2023 INSC 1089 February 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Government of NCT of Delhi appealed a Delhi High Court order that had declared land acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, relying on the Pune M

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHIversusSUBHASH GUPTA & ORS.

2023 INSC 1089 February 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Government of NCT of Delhi appealed a Delhi High Court order that had declared land acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 because possession of

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.versusSH. NARENDER & ANR.

2023 INSC 1089 February 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Government of NCT of Delhi had taken possession of land on 14 September 2007 under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Delhi High Court, relying on Pune Municipal Corporation v. Harakchand Misrimal Solanki, held that the acquisition proceedings had deemed to lapse under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensati

NORTHERN DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONversusRAM CHANDER SINGH AND ORS.

2023 INSC 1079 February 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Northern Delhi Municipal Corporation (NDMC) acquired land in 1959 under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, with an award passed in 1964 and possession taken on 1 May 1964. The original owners claimed that the acquisition had lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisit

M/S. LISIE MEDICAL INSTITUTIONSversusTHE STATE OF KERALA AND ORS.

2023 INSC 7209 February 2023Reference answered

M/s Lisie Medical Institutions appealed against the State of Kerala challenging the interpretation of Section 3(1)(b) of the Kerala Building Tax Act, 1975. The issue was whether the Explanation to the provision, which states that ‘charitable purpose’ includes relief of the poor and free medical relief, limits the term

STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORSversusKAMAL KISHORE PRASAD

2023 INSC 219 January 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a Branch Manager of SBI, was dismissed on 11 August 1999 following departmental inquiry. He challenged the dismissal in a writ petition, which the High Court Single Bench set aside in 2003, but the order was stayed by a Division Bench and the Letters Patent Appeal was dismissed in 2010. The respondent a

MOHAMMAD WAJID AND ANR.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

2023 INSC 6838 August 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined an FIR registered under Sections 395, 504, 506 and 323 IPC alleging that the appellants assaulted the complainant, seized Rs.2 lakh and forced signatures on a stamp paper during a land dispute. The Court considered whether the FIR disclosed the ingredients of dacoity, criminal intimidation or

SALIB @ SHALU @ SALIMversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

2023 INSC 6878 August 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The victim Husna filed FIR No.175/2022 alleging that several persons threatened her to withdraw an earlier FIR against her father‑in‑law. The appellant, Salib alias Salu, was not named in the original FIR but his name appeared for the first time in the informant’s further statement recorded under Section 161 CrPC. The

M/S. ISNAR AQUA FARMSversusUNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.

2023 INSC 6808 August 2023Disposed off

The appellant, a prawn farming partnership, obtained a five‑month insurance policy from United India Insurance covering 22,67,000 prawns. An outbreak of White Spot Disease caused massive mortality, and the appellant filed a claim which the insurer rejected, alleging improper record‑keeping. The National Consumer Disput

KRISHAN KUMAR AND ANRversusTHE STATE OF HARYANA

2023 INSC 6798 August 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted under Sections 201, 300 and 302 IPC read with Section 34 for the murder of Devinder based largely on circumstantial evidence, including a disputed 'last seen' theory, an alleged extra‑judicial confession, a claimed motive, and the recovery of a chunni as the murder weapon. The Supreme Cour

A. SREENIVASA REDDYversusRAKESH SHARMA AND ANR.

2023 INSC 6828 August 2023Dismissed

The appellant, an Assistant General Manager of State Bank of India, was accused of conspiracy to cheat the bank by sanctioning a large corporate loan and was charged under Sections 120‑B, 420, 468 and 471 of the IPC and under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The bank initially declined, then later granted, sanct

HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ANRversusJAGDEEP SINGH

2023 INSC 5038 May 2023Dismissed

The Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA) and other officials demanded an additional price from Jagdeep Singh for a plot allotted in 1986, alleging that the land cost had risen after the Animal Husbandry Department transferred the land to HUDA at a lower rate. Singh filed a suit in 2003 challenging the demand, and

PRIYANKA MISHRA & ORSversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR.

2023 INSC 7298 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The wife (Respondent No.2) filed a criminal complaint alleging dowry harassment, cruelty and forced abortion against her husband’s parents and in‑laws under IPC sections 498‑A and 34 and the Dowry Prohibition Act. The appellants moved to quash the FIR under CrPC s.482, arguing that the wife had lived abroad for most of

CALCUTTA STATE TRANSPORT CORPORATION & ORS.versusASHIT CHAKRABORTY & ORS.

2023 INSC 5058 May 2023Dismissed

The respondent, a conductor appointed in 1981, exercised his option in 1991 to join the pension scheme created by the Calcutta State Transport Corporation Employees’ Service (Death cum Retirement Benefits) Regulations, 1990, which had retrospective effect from 1 April 1984. Upon voluntary retirement in 2017, he receive

T. VALSAN (D) THR. LRS. & ORS.versusK. KANAGARAJ & ORS.

2023 INSC 5028 May 2023Dismissed

The appellants, who joined the Puducherry Electricity Department as Junior Engineers with engineering degrees, challenged the promotion of diploma‑holding engineers who obtained a degree during service and were immediately promoted under the degree quota. The issue was whether service rendered before acquiring the degr

ASSOCIATION OF OLD SETTLERS OF SIKKIM PRESIDENT SHRI RAM CHANDRA MUNDRA S/O LATE MURLIDHAR MUNDRA & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF FINANCE SECRETARY GENERAL & ANR.

2023 INSC 1068 February 2023Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained miscellaneous applications seeking correction of certain phrases in paragraphs 10(a) and 77 of Justice B.V. Nagarathna's judgment in W.P. (C) No.59/2013, filed by the Association of Old Settlers of Sikkim. The Court observed that substantial amendments to the original writ petition had not

NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.versusTHE CHIEF ELECTORAL OFFICER & ORS.

2023 INSC 1048 February 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The National Insurance Company Ltd. (appellant) entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with the Chief Electoral Officer of Bihar (respondent No.1) to provide group insurance for election workers in 2000. A constable died of sun stroke while on election duty, and his wife (respondent No.2) filed a claim for Rs.10 la

M/S. GAIL (INDIA) LIMITEDversusM/S. INDIAN PETROCHEMICALS CORP. LTD. & ORS.

2023 INSC 1038 February 2023Case Partly allowed

The Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas allocated natural gas to Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd. (IPCL) on the condition that IPCL lay its own pipelines. IPCL entered into a gas‑supply contract with GAIL (India) Ltd., a public sector undertaking, which contained clauses charging IPCL for "loss of transportatio

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIAversusV SHANKAR

2023 INSC 7198 February 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) issued a notice to Deccan Chronicle Holdings Ltd (DCHL) and its Company Secretary, V. Shankar, imposing a Rs 10 lakh penalty for alleged violations in a Rs 270 crore share buy‑back. The SEBI Whole Time Member held the Company Secretary liable for not exercising due dili

PUNJAB & SIND BANKversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

2023 INSC 10797 December 2023Dismissed

Punjab & Sind Bank appealed against a High Court order that upheld the State of Punjab's claim of priority over tax dues under the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005, which it alleged superseded the bank's charge on the borrower’s immovable property. The State asserted a first charge under Section 35 of the 2005 Act for

DEREK A C LOBO & ORS.versusULRIC M A LOBO (DEAD) BY LRS. & ORS.

2023 INSC 10937 December 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants sought probate of a Will dated 10‑Nov‑1992 executed by their mother, Cecelia Gertrude Lobo, which was contested by one brother (defendant No.5) on grounds of alleged suspicious circumstances. The trial court found that the Will was duly executed, satisfying Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act and Sec

HARIPRASAD @ KISHAN SAHUversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2023 INSC 9867 November 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Hariprasad, was convicted under Section 302 IPC for allegedly poisoning Bisahu Singh by mixing a herb in liquor, based largely on the deceased's dying declaration and a forensic report that arrived a year later. The Supreme Court examined whether the more than one‑year delay in filing the FIR was fatal t

MOHAR SINGH (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. & ORS.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH COLLECTOR & ORS.

2023 INSC 10197 November 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, owners of land in Khora village, sought compensation for land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. After the Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded Rs 70 per sq. yard, the Reference Court enhanced it to Rs 106, and other landowners obtained further enhancement to Rs 130 and later Rs 150 per

KAMALversusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI)

2023 INSC 6787 August 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased Hoshiyar Singh was found dead at his home, and the prosecution alleged that his son Prem Singh, who had a property dispute with him, fled the scene and later implicated Kamal Kishore and Manoj as accomplices. The trial court and the Delhi High Court convicted the three accused under Section 302 read with S

DINGANGLUNG GANGMEIversusMUTUM CHURAMANI MEETEI & ORS

2023 INSC 6987 August 2023Directions issued

The Supreme Court, hearing a Special Leave Petition arising from sectarian violence in Manipur that included widespread sexual violence against women, directed the State and Union governments to restore law and order and ensure justice for victims. It ordered the formation of a three‑member committee of former female j

V. SENTHIL BALAJIversusTHE STATE REPRESENTED BY DEPUTY DIRECTOR AND ORS.

2023 INSC 6777 August 2023Dismissed

The appellant, a cabinet minister, was arrested under Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) on 14 June 2023 and produced before a magistrate, after which a judicial remand was ordered. His wife filed a writ of habeas corpus challenging the arrest, while the respondents sought police custody

VINOD KUMAR & ORS.versusDISTRICT MAGISTRATE MAU & ORS.

2023 INSC 6067 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Central Government acquired parcels of land in Mau district for a highway widening project under the National Highways Authority Act, 1956. The Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) determined the total compensation and apportioned shares among the landowners, a determination accepted by the appellants but contes

PRATIBHA MANCHANDA & ANRversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ANR

2023 INSC 6127 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, senior citizens who owned a 15 Kanal 2 Marla plot in Gurugram, alleged that the accused (Respondent No.2) forged a 1996 power of attorney and a 2022 sale deed to illegally transfer the land. An FIR was filed under sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120‑B IPC. The accused sought anticipatory bail; the

RANA AYYUBversusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT THROUGH ITS ASSISTANT DIRECTOR

2023 INSC 1017 February 2023Dismissed

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the petitioner conducted three crowdfunding campaigns on the Ketto platform. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) opened investigations under FEMA and later filed a complaint under the Prevention of Money‑Laundering Act (PMLA), attaching the petitioner’s bank account in Navi Mumbai. The Specia

ROPPEN TRANSPORTATION SERVICES PVT LTDversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2023 INSC 1027 February 2023Disposed off

Roppen Transportation Services Pvt Ltd, an aggregator for two‑wheeler ride‑pooling, applied for a licence under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 but the Pune RTO rejected the application for non‑compliance with the Motor Vehicle Aggregator Guidelines 2020. While the petition was pending, the Maharashtra Government issued a

COX AND KINGS LTD.versusSAP INDIA PVT. LTD. & ANR.

2023 INSC 10516 December 2023

The Supreme Court examined whether the "group of companies" doctrine, which allows an arbitration agreement signed by one member of a corporate group to bind non‑signatory affiliates, is valid under Indian law and how it should be applied. The Court considered the interpretation of the phrase "claiming through or under

M/S. GREATER ASHOKA AND LAND DEVELOPMENT COMPANYversusKANTI PRASAD JAIN (D) THROUGH LRS.

2023 INSC 10556 December 2023Disposed off

The appellant, Greater Ashoka and Land Development Co., had advertised plots in 1963 and received an earnest payment of ₹4,945 from the respondent, Kanti Prasad Jain, for plot No. 103. Due to subsequent statutory changes under the 1963 and 1971 Acts, the development was delayed and the appellant later offered the respo

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERSversusDILIP PAUL

2023 INSC 9756 November 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerns Dilip Paul, a former Area Organizer of the Service Selection Board, who was penalised with a 50% pension withholding after a Central Complaints Committee (CCC) found him guilty of sexual harassment based on a first complaint and a later second complaint filed by a female employee. The appellant (Union

LOMBARDI ENGINEERING LIMITEDversusUTTARAKHAND JAL VIDYUT NIGAM LIMITED

2023 INSC 9766 November 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Lombardi Engineering, a Swiss design consultancy, entered into a contract with Uttarakhand Vidyut Nigam Ltd for a hydro‑electric project, which was later transferred from UPDCC to the respondent. After the respondent terminated the contract, Lombardi invoked the arbitration clause in the General Conditions of Contract,

JYOTIRMAY RAYversusTHE FIELD GENERAL MANAGER, PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK & ORS.

2023 INSC 9796 November 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Jyotirmay Ray, a senior manager of Punjab National Bank, was compulsorily retired and denied employer's contribution to his provident fund, gratuity, leave encashment and pension. He challenged the denial of PF contribution and gratuity before the High Court, which partially granted relief, but the Division Bench of th

STATE OF KARNATAKAversusT. NASEER @ NASIR @ THANDIANTAVIDA NASEER @ UMARHAZI @ HAZI & ORS.

2023 INSC 9886 November 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Karnataka prosecuted accused persons for a series of bomb blasts in Bangalore in 2008, seizing numerous electronic devices that were examined by the CFSL, Hyderabad, producing a report dated 29‑11‑2010. The trial court refused to admit the CFSL report without a certificate under Section 65B of the Evidence

SACHIDHANANDAM SINCE DEAD THROUGH HIS LRS.versusE. VANAJA AND ORS.

2023 INSC 9846 November 2023Disposed off

The case concerned a partition suit filed by E. Vanaja, the widow of a pre‑deceased son, seeking a share in the properties of her mother‑in‑law under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The trial court awarded her a one‑eighth share; the first appellate court reduced it to one‑sixteenth of certain schedule properties, and

ADITI ALIAS MITHIversusJITESH SHARMA

2023 INSC 9816 November 2023Disposed off

The minor daughter of Jitesh Sharma challenged the High Court's order that reduced the maintenance awarded by the Family Court from Rs 20,000 to Rs 7,500 per month. The Supreme Court observed that the High Court had not required the parties to file the uniform affidavits of disclosure of assets and liabilities prescrib

MANJUNATH & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2023 INSC 9786 November 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the conviction of six appellants for offences under various sections of the IPC, based primarily on a dying declaration, ocular testimony and circumstantial evidence. The trial court had acquitted all accused, but the Karnataka High Court overturned the acquittals of five appellants, sentencing them

M/S MODI NATURALS LTD.versusTHE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAX UP

2023 INSC 9746 November 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Modi Naturals Ltd., a registered dealer of rice bran oil in Uttar Pradesh, claimed full input tax credit (ITC) on tax paid for raw rice bran used to manufacture taxable oil and a by‑product (de‑oiled rice bran, an exempt good). The Revenue argued that under Section 13(1)(f) of the UP VAT Act the ITC should be limited t

BALVIR SINGHversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2023 INSC 8796 October 2023Dismissed

The appellant Balvir Singh was convicted of murder under s.302 IPC and dowry harassment under s.498A IPC, while his mother‑in‑law Maheshwari Devi was convicted of s.498A IPC read with s.34 IPC. The prosecution proved that the victim died from aluminium phosphide poisoning, a fumigant not explainable by her heart medica

SARVESH MATHURversusTHE REGISTRAR GENERAL HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

2023 INSC 8916 October 2023Directions issued

The petitioner, Sarvesh Mathur, filed a writ petition under Article 32 challenging the denial of video‑conferencing and hybrid hearing facilities by High Courts and tribunals. The Supreme Court examined the widespread variation in adoption of technology, the absence of uniform SOPs, arbitrary age restrictions, lack of

VISHAL CHELANI & ORS.versusDEBASHIS NANDA

2023 INSC 9136 October 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, home buyers in a real‑estate project, obtained a decree from the Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (UPRERA) ordering a refund of their investments with interest. While insolvency proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) were pending, the resolution professional propo

SRI. K.M. KRISHNA REDDYversusSRI. VINOD REDDY & ANR.

2023 INSC 8776 October 2023Case Partly allowed

The appellant, K.M. Krishna Reddy, filed a suit for perpetual injunction claiming ownership of a family property inherited from his father and alleged interference by the respondents. The respondents counter‑claimed that they had acquired title by adverse possession since 1978 and also asserted an agreement for sale by

RANJAN KUMAR CHADHAversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2023 INSC 8786 October 2023Dismissed

The appellant was arrested at a bus stand after police received a tip that he was carrying charas. He consented to be searched by the police, and during the search of his bag, 1.25 kg of charas was recovered. The trial court acquitted him, holding that Section 50 of the NDPS Act, which mandates informing the suspect of

N. RAMKUMARversusTHE STATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2023 INSC 8126 September 2023Case Partly allowed

The appellant, N. Ramkumar, assaulted his former lover Sangeetha by grabbing her hair and slamming her head against a wall, causing fatal head injuries. He was convicted by the Sessions Court and the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to life imprisonment. Th

NHPC LTD.versusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SECRETARY & ORS.

2023 INSC 8106 September 2023Dismissed

NHPC Ltd. provides free bus transport for its employees and their children in Himachal Pradesh. The State assessed passenger tax on this service under the Himachal Pradesh Passengers and Goods Taxation Act, 1955, which the High Court had held did not apply to gratis transport. The State later enacted the Himachal Prade

LOONKARAN GANDHI (D) THR. LR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

2023 INSC 8186 September 2023Case Partly allowed

The appellant, heir of a landowner whose property was taken by the Nagpur Improvement Trust (NIT) for a road scheme in 1970, sought a declaration that the acquisition had lapsed under Section 11‑A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, an alternative plot in lieu of compensation, and damages for the decades‑long delay in a

R. SREENIVASAversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2023 INSC 8036 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a co-accused in a murder case, was acquitted by the trial court on the ground that the prosecution failed to prove that the deceased was last seen in his company. The High Court reversed this acquittal and convicted the appellant under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC, relying on a disputed 'last seen' th

UNION TERRITORY OF LADAKH & ORS.versusJAMMU AND KASHMIR NATIONAL CONFERENCE & ANR.

2023 INSC 8046 September 2023Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered an appeal by the Union Territory of Ladakh and related authorities against a High Court order that directed them to recognise the "Plough" symbol for the Jammu and Kashmir National Conference (J&K NC) in the upcoming Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council (LAHDC) elections. J&K NC argue

RAJNISH KUMAR RAIversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS

2023 INSC 8626 September 2023Dismissed

Petitioner Rajnish Kumar Rai, who had instituted a proceeding before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) Hyderabad, sought its transfer to the CAT Ahmedabad bench. The Principal Bench of CAT Delhi rejected the transfer application, prompting the petitioner to challenge the order before the Gujarat High Court unde

EVA AGRO FEEDS PRIVATE LIMITEDversusPUNJAB NATIONAL BANK AND ANR.

2023 INSC 8096 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Eva Agro Feeds Private Ltd bid the reserve price of Rs.10 crore for a corporate debtor's property in an e‑auction and was issued a certificate of winning on 20 July 2021. The liquidator cancelled the auction the next day under Clause 3(k) of the E‑Auction Process Information Document without giving any reasons, prompti

ROHIT CHAUDHARY & ANR.versusM/S VIPUL LTD.

2023 INSC 8076 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants sought to purchase a commercial office space in the Vipul World Commercial project and paid Rs 51,10,117, but the developer failed to deliver possession within the agreed 24‑month period. The appellants filed a complaint before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) claiming that the

K. HYMAVATHIversusTHE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ANR.

2023 INSC 8116 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant K. Hymavathi loaned Rs 20 lakh to respondent No.2, who executed a promissory note on 25 July 2012 promising repayment by December 2016. The respondent later issued a cheque for Rs 10 lakh on 28 April 2017, which was dishonoured, leading the appellant to file a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable

SMT. ROOPA SONIversusKAMALNARAYAN SONI

2023 INSC 8146 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The marriage between Roopa Soni and Kamalnarayan Soni, solemnised in 2002, broke down after the birth of their child, leading to a separation that has lasted for over fifteen years. Both parties filed serious allegations against each other, including a complaint under Section 498A IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act, and

THE MADRAS ALUMINIUM CO. LTD.versusTHE TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD AND ANR.

2023 INSC 6076 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Madras Aluminium Co. Ltd., a sick industrial unit, applied on 24 December 2001 to reduce its contracted maximum electricity demand from 23,000 KVA to 10,000 KVA. The Tamil Nadu Electricity Board (TNEB) failed to act on the request for over two and a half years, during which the company was forced to pay charges for

INCOME TAX OFFICERversusVIKRAM SUJITKUMAR BHATIA

2023 INSC 3276 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned whether the amendment to Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 introduced by the Finance Act, 2015 applies to searches under Section 132 that were initiated before the amendment’s effective date of 1 June 2015. A search was conducted on 4 September 2013, and material relating to third parties was

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 7versusM/S PAVILLE PROJECTS PVT. LTD.

2023 INSC 3256 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

M/s Paville Projects Pvt. Ltd. sold its building for Rs 33 crore in AY 2007‑08 and claimed a deduction of Rs 31.05 crore as "cost of improvement" to discharge encumbrances arising from a family settlement of shareholders. The Assessing Officer accepted this claim and passed an assessment under section 143(3). The Commi

HARYANA POWER PURCHASE CENTREversusSASAN POWER LTD. & ORS

2023 INSC 3266 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned an Ultra Mega Power Project where the seller (Sasan Power Ltd.) claimed compensation for increased costs of a water‑intake system and customs duty on mining equipment, alleging these were "change in law" events under Article 13 of the Power Purchase Agreement (PPA). The seller argued that the Appella

RAJKUMARversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2023 INSC 7186 February 2023Directions issued

Petitioner Rajkumar sought enforcement of the Supreme Court’s earlier directions in Rashidul Jafar for premature release of life‑imprisoned convicts, alleging that Uttar Pradesh had not considered eligible prisoners despite the existence of the Uttar Pradesh Prisoners (Release on Probation) Act, Rules and a Standing Po

ASHOK KUMAR MEWARIversusUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

2023 INSC 10925 December 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Ashok Kumar Mewari, a Pointsman in the West Central Railway, applied for voluntary retirement on medical grounds on 18 June 2013, conditioning his retirement on the compassionate appointment of his son, Mukesh Mewari, as per Railway Board Circular dated 14 June 2006. The Railway authorities accepted his retirement but

M/S IVECO MAGIRUS BRANDSCHUTZTECHNIK GMBHversusNIRMAL KISHORE BHARTIYA & ANR

2023 INSC 8805 October 2023Dismissed

The German company Iveco Magirus Brandschutztechnik GmbH (appellant) challenged a summons issued by an Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate in Delhi after a private complaint of defamation was filed by Nirmal Kishore Bhartiya (respondent). The complaint alleged that letters written by the appellant’s authorised age

SMT. M. HEMALATHA DEVI & ORS.versusB. UDAYASRI

2023 INSC 8705 October 2023Dismissed

The appellants, a group of builders, entered into a sale agreement to construct a villa for the respondent, a home‑buyer, but failed to deliver possession and subsequently terminated the agreement. The buyer filed a complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 before the District Consumer Forum, while the builders

THE STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERSversusJASWANT SINGH

2023 INSC 7985 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Jaswant Singh was recruited as a constable in the Punjab Police on probation and was sent for training. After a special duty assignment, he failed to report back to the training centre and did not inform anyone of his absence. The Superintendent of the training centre recommended his discharge, and the Senior Superinte

LAL BAHADUR SHASTRI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY & ANR.versusDELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS.

2023 INSC 7975 September 2023Disposed off

The appellants, charitable educational societies, deposited amounts with the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) to obtain the benefit of additional floor area ratio (FAR) as required by DDA notifications dated 10‑10‑2008 and 23‑12‑2008. While the writ petitions were pending, DDA issued a subsequent notification on 17‑07

UNION OF INDIA & OTHERSversusJOGESHWAR SWAIN

2023 INSC 8025 September 2023Dismissed

A constable of the Border Security Force was dismissed after pleading guilty before a Summary Security Force Court (SSFC) to an allegation that he photographed a lady doctor while she bathed. The constable challenged the dismissal, arguing that the plea of guilty was obtained without complying with procedural safeguard

HARILAL ETC.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH (NOW CHHATTISGARH)

2023 INSC 8015 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants Harilal and Parasram were convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for murder under Section 302 IPC based on the testimony of two eye‑witnesses and the seizure of a lathi and clothes allegedly belonging to them. The Supreme Court examined the credibility of the witnesses, noting that the FIR was lodg

MAKKELLA NAGAIAHversusTHE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2023 INSC 8005 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Makkella Nagaiah was convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC for a murder committed on 21‑12‑2005 and sentenced to life imprisonment. He later filed a writ petition under Article 32 claiming that he was a juvenile at the time of the offence, asserting a date of birth of 02‑05‑1989, which would make

PRAKASH BANGversusGLAXO SMITHKLINE PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. & ANR.

2023 INSC 7945 September 2023Dismissed

The appellant, Prakash Bang, claimed that after receiving the hepatitis B vaccine Engerix‑B, he suffered myositis and permanent shoulder disability, seeking compensation from the manufacturer GlaxoSmithKline under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission dismissed his claim

HARI PRAKASH SHUKLA & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2023 INSC 6005 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Bhoomidars, were in possession of land that had been declared a reserved forest under Section 4 of the Forest Act, 1927, leading to an eviction drive by the Forest Department. The Forest Settlement Officer, after hearing the parties, held that the appellants had a rightful claim dating back to before 13

S. NARAHARI AND ORSversusS.R. KUMAR AND ORS.

2023 INSC 6045 July 2023Matter referred to larger bench

The Supreme Court examined whether a liberty granted to approach the High Court for review, after an earlier Special Leave Petition (SLP) was dismissed, automatically places the matter in the escalation matrix and permits filing a fresh SLP. The Court held that Order XLVII Rule 7 of the CPC bars an SLP against an order

PRADEEPversusTHE STATE OF HARYANA

2023 INSC 5995 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, accused No.2, was convicted along with another accused for murder and related offences based solely on the testimony of his 12‑year‑old son, PW‑1, who claimed to have witnessed the crime. The trial court administered an oath to the child after a perfunctory preliminary examination consisting of only thre

PRITINDER SINGH @ LOVELYversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB

2023 INSC 6145 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Pritinder Singh (alias Lovely) and Manjit Kaur, were convicted for murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC based on circumstantial evidence, an alleged extra‑judicial confession, and the "last seen" theory. The Supreme Court examined the reliability of the extra‑judicial confession, the

SINGRAULI SUPER THERMAL POWER STATIONversusASHWANI KUMAR DUBEY & ORS

2023 INSC 6185 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The National Green Tribunal (NGT) constituted an expert committee to investigate alleged environmental violations at Singrauli thermal power plants and uploaded its report and recommendations on 15 January 2022. The NGT then passed its final order on 18 January 2022 without giving the power stations an opportunity to o

ARUN DEV UPADHYAYAversusINTEGRATED SALES SERVICE LTD. & ANR.

2023 INSC 6105 July 2023Dismissed

The dispute arose from a representation agreement between D.M.C. Management Consultants Ltd. and Integrated Sales Service Ltd., which contained an arbitration clause. After the arbitrator awarded US $6.9 million against DMC, the award was sought to be enforced against non‑signatory parties, including Arun Dev Upadhyaya

TRUST ESTATE KHIMJI KESHAWJI & ANRversusTHE KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS.

2023 INSC 6095 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a trust owning a six‑storey building, was served a notice under Sections 238 and 271 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980, alleging that it was using domestic water for non‑domestic purposes without permission. The notice was addressed only to the owner and did not specify the alleged violation

STATE OF U.PversusSONU KUSHWAHA

2023 INSC 6035 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh appealed against a High Court order that reduced the conviction of Sonu Kushwaha from aggravated penetrative sexual assault under Section 6 of the POCSO Act to penetrative sexual assault under Section 4, thereby lowering his sentence. The facts involved Kushwaha inserting his penis into the m

MADHYAMAM BROADCASTING LIMITEDversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2023 INSC 3245 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Madhyamam Broadcasting Ltd (MBL) had its permission to uplink and downlink the news channel ‘Media One’ revoked by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) after the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) denied a security clearance, citing national security concerns and alleged links to JEI‑H. MBL challenged the rev

MAN SINGHversusSHAMIM AHMED (DEAD) THR. LRS

2023 INSC 3235 April 2023Dismissed

Man Singh, a tenant of a shop in Saharanpur, paid a rent of Rs.250 per month. When the landlord refused to accept the rent, the tenant deposited the rent in the court under Section 30 of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972. The landlord later served a notice demanding

DR NARENDRA GUPTAversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2023 INSC 3225 April 2023Directions issued

Dr. Narendra Gupta filed a public interest litigation alleging that women, especially from marginalized communities, were subjected to unnecessary hysterectomies under government health schemes in several states, violating their right to health under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court examined affidavits

ROHAN DHUNGAT ETC.versusTHE STATE OF GOA & ORS. ETC.

2023 INSC 165 January 2023Dismissed

The petitioners, life‑imprisoned convicts in Goa, were released on parole under the Goa Prisons Rules, 2006 and subsequently applied for premature release on the ground that they had completed 14 years of actual imprisonment. The High Court held that the period spent on parole must be excluded from the calculation of t

M/S. SHEKHAR RESORTS LIMITED (UNIT OF ORIENT TAJ)versusUNION OF INDIA

2023 INSC 155 January 2023Appeal(s) allowed

M/S Shekhar Resorts Ltd., a corporate debtor, was under a moratorium under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) from September 2018 until July 2020. While the moratorium was in force, the company applied for the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 and was issued Form No.3 requiring a payment of R

BASAVARAJversusPADMAVATHI & ANR.

2023 INSC 195 January 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Basavaraj, entered into an agreement to sell dated 13 March 2007 with respondent Padmavathi for Rs 12.74 lakhs, paying Rs 3 lakhs as earnest money. The seller failed to execute the sale deed, prompting the appellant to sue for specific performance on 14 February 2008. The trial court decreed specific per

SIDHA NEELKANTH PAPER INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. & ANRversusPRUDENT ARC LTD. & OTHERS

2023 INSC 145 January 2023Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined appeals arising from SARFAESI Act proceedings where a borrower (Sidha Neelkanth Paper Industries) defaulted on a loan, the secured assets were auctioned, and the auction proceeds exceeded 50% of the claimed debt. The borrower challenged both the steps taken under Section 13(4) and the auction

K. SREEDHARversusM/S RAUS CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD & ORS.

2023 INSC 175 January 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The borrower (M/s Raus Constructions) defaulted on a loan from Indian Bank, leading the bank to invoke the SARFAESI Act, issue possession notices and conduct an e‑auction of the secured properties. The auction purchaser bought one of the properties and the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT) confirmed the sale. The borrower

KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITEDversusGIRNAR CORRUGATORS PVT. LTD. & ORS.

2023 INSC 125 January 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., a secured creditor, sought possession of mortgaged assets of One Mission Vivacare under the SARFAESI Act after the borrower defaulted. The District Magistrate ordered possession, but the Naib Tehsildar refused, invoking a recovery award under the MSMED Act. The High Court Division Bench held t

TATA SONS PVT LTD (FORMERLY TATA SONS LTD)versusSIVA INDUSTRIES AND HOLDINGS LTD & ORS

2023 INSC 135 January 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Tata Sons Pvt. Ltd. initiated arbitration against Siva Industries and its promoter under an inter‑se agreement, invoking the London Court of International Arbitration. The sole arbitrator was appointed by the Supreme Court under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The arbitration proceeded beyo

SANJAY PANDURANG KALATEversusVISTRA ITCL (INDIA) LIMITED AND OTHERS

2023 INSC 10634 December 2023Disposed off

The appellant, a former director of Evirant Developers Private Ltd, challenged an interlocutory order of the NCLT dismissing his application alleging unauthorized filing of a reply in a Section 7 proceeding. The NCLT heard the matter on 17 May 2023 but did not pronounce a substantive order until it was uploaded on 30 M

RAM LALversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

2023 INSC 10474 December 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Ram Lal, a constable of the Rajasthan Armed Constabulary, was dismissed in 2004 after a departmental enquiry found him guilty of altering his date of birth on his 8th standard marksheet to appear of majority age at recruitment. He was later convicted under IPC Section 420 by a trial court, but the appellate court acqui

MUNNA PANDEYversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2023 INSC 7934 September 2023Disposed off

The appellant Munna Pandey was convicted and sentenced to death for the rape and murder of a ten‑year‑old girl, based largely on circumstantial evidence and the testimony of witnesses whose statements to police were not properly confronted. The Supreme Court examined whether the High Court erred in confirming the convi

AMEENA BEGUMversusTHE STATE OF TELANGANA & ORS.

2023 INSC 7884 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant challenged a detention order dated 24 March 2023 issued by the Hyderabad Police Commissioner under the Telangana Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1986, which sought to detain her husband on the ground that his alleged offences threatened public order. The Court examined whether the offences, many o

L.R. PATILversusGULBARGA UNIVERSITY, GULBARGA

2023 INSC 7964 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

L.R. Patil, a civil servant, was appointed Office Superintendent and later relieved to take up the post of Assistant Registrar under Rule 252(b) of the Karnataka Civil Service Rules. His appointment as Assistant Registrar was challenged and eventually quashed, after which he was retained in his original post. The appel

FULMATI DHRAMDEV YADAV & ANR.versusNEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. & ANR.

2023 INSC 7904 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased Ramakant Yadav, a driver, died while tying logs on a trailer, and his mother and wife claimed compensation under the Employees Compensation Act, 1923. The Commissioner awarded a lump‑sum compensation of ₹3,94,120 and a penalty of ₹1,97,060 against the insurer, but the High Court set aside this order, holdi

PRAMOD KUMAR MISHRAversusTHE STATE OF U.P.

2023 INSC 7914 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Pramod Kumar Mishra, was convicted under Section 307 IPC for an assault that caused injuries to the complainant and was sentenced to five years of rigorous imprisonment by the Trial Court, a sentence upheld by the High Court. The Supreme Court was asked to consider whether the sentence was just and prope

COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT ANJUMAN INTEZAMIA MASAJID, VARANASIversusRAKHI SINGH AND OTHERS

2023 INSC 7024 August 2023Disposed off

The petitioners, the Committee of Management Anjuman Intezamia Masajid, sought a declaration that they could perform Hindu rituals at the Gyanvapi Mosque and moved to dismiss the suit under the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991. The trial court, exercising discretion under Order 26 Rule 10A of the Code o

SANTHOSH MAIZE & INDUSTRIES LIMITEDversusTHE STATE OF TAMIL NADU & ANR.

2023 INSC 5904 July 2023Dismissed

Santosh Maize & Industries Ltd, a dealer in maize starch, challenged the classification of its product under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, arguing that it should enjoy exemption under Exemption Entry No.8 (products of millets) as per a 1970 exemption notification. The State contended that maize starch fal

DHEERAJ SINGHversusGREATER NOIDA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS

2023 INSC 5944 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants' land was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and a District Judge fixed compensation at Rs.267 per square yard with solatium. The respondent (Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority) appealed the award, and the appellants filed cross objections under Order 41 Rule 22 of the CPC seeking

INDIRA DEVIversusVEENA GUPTA & ORS.

2023 INSC 5934 July 2023Dismissed

The case concerned a conditional sale deed executed in 1977 by Kishori Lal Sahu and his son in favour of Indira Devi, which contained a right of repurchase if the vendors returned the consideration by July 1984. Kishori Lal later executed a gift deed in 1983 transferring his property to his daughter‑in‑law Veena Gupta

GURUDEEP SINGHversusREGONDA SRINIVAS & ORS.

2023 INSC 6174 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from a High Court order directing NTPC Ltd. to complete recruitment of land oustees as Junior Mazdoors within two months of the judgment dated 17‑12‑2021. NTPC issued a fresh recruitment notification (No.1 of 2022) and cancelled the 2017 notification, leading the land oustees to file a contempt petition

RESERVE BANK OF INDIA & ORS.versusA.K. NAIR & ORS.

2023 INSC 6134 July 2023Disposed off

A.K. Nair, a Reserve Bank of India employee with 50% post‑polio disability, failed to obtain the required 95 marks in the 2003 All India Merit Test for promotion to Assistant Manager by three marks. He sought condonation of the shortfall and reservation in promotion under the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995. The Bo

OM PRAKASH AHUJAversusRELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ETC.

2023 INSC 5984 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Om Prakash Ahuja, purchased a family health insurance policy in 2007 and renewed it for 2008‑2009. His wife was treated for ovarian cancer, and he claimed reimbursement, which the insurer rejected on the ground that the wife’s pre‑existing rheumatic heart disease had not been disclosed. The District Foru

SHANTABAI ANANDA JAGTAP & ANR.versusJAYRAM GANPATI JAGTAP & ANR.

2023 INSC 5924 July 2023Dismissed

The legal heirs of Machindra Ananda Jagtap, who died in a road accident while driving a jeep owned by Jayram Ganpati Jagtap, filed a claim for compensation under the Employees Compensation Act, 1923 in 2004, more than nine years after the accident. The Commissioner rejected the claim on grounds of delay and on merits,

RAMESH KUMARversusSTATE OF NCT OF DELHI

2023 INSC 5964 July 2023Disposed off

The appellant, a property owner, was accused in a cheating case for allegedly receiving Rs.17 lakh from complainants who had paid for a floor that was never delivered. Fearing arrest, he applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC; the trial court dismissed the application, but the Delhi High Court gran

SARNAM SINGHversusSHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ORS

2023 INSC 5974 July 2023

The appellant, a gunman employed by Bharat Hotels Ltd., suffered an amputation of his right leg above the knee in a road accident, resulting in 85% permanent disability and termination of his employment. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded him compensation of Rs. 34,29,800, assessing his loss of earning capacity

COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS AND ANOTHERversusM/S RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD.

2023 INSC 5914 July 2023Dismissed

The Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs issued a show‑cause notice demanding differential excise duty from M/s Reliance Industries Ltd., alleging that the assessee had undervalued its finished goods by not separately accounting for duty benefits obtained from customers holding advance licences. The demand was ra

NAGARATHINAMversusSTATE THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2023 INSC 4954 May 2023Disposed off

Nagarathinam, who was in a troubled relationship, attempted a joint suicide with her twin sons by ingesting pesticide, but survived while the children died. She was convicted under Sections 302 and 309 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to life imprisonment; the High Court later upheld the murder conviction and acq

MUKESHBHAI VALLABHBHAI ABHANGIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2023 INSC 4964 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Mukeshbhai Vallabhbhai Abhangi was charged under the Gujarat Control of Terrorism and Organised Crime Act, 2015 and the Indian Penal Code for alleged extortion, land grabbing and other offences as part of an organised crime syndicate. The High Court dismissed his bail application, but on appeal the Supreme Court examin

DINESH KUMARversusTHE STATE OF HARYANA

2023 INSC 4934 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Dinesh Kumar was convicted for murder, kidnapping and related offences based largely on circumstantial evidence, namely a "last seen" testimony and discoveries made after his police custody. The Supreme Court examined whether the "last seen" evidence, given a long interval before the estimated time of dea

ATULBHAI VITHALBHAI BHANDERIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2023 INSC 4964 May 2023Disposed off

The appellant, Atulbhai Vithalbhai Bhanderi, was charged under the Gujarat Control of Terrorism and Organised Crime Act, 2015 and several IPC provisions for intimidating a victim, extorting money and facilitating land‑grabbing as part of an organised crime syndicate. He applied for bail during the pendency of trial, bu

KANIMOZHI KARUNANIDHIversusA. SANTHANA KUMAR & ORS

2023 INSC 4994 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined an election petition filed under Section 100(1)(d)(iv) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, which alleged that the returned candidate, Kanimozhi Karunanidhi, had suppressed her spouse's PAN and income‑tax details in Form 26. The Court held that the petition contained only vague, bal

GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU & OTHERSversusR. THAMARAISELVAM ETC. ETC.

2023 INSC 4904 May 2023Dismissed

The Tamil Nadu Government issued two Government Orders (G.O. No. 423 dated 28‑07‑2011 and G.O. No. 451 dated 11‑08‑2011) to set up 36 Anti‑Land‑Grabbing Special Cells and to transfer land‑grabbing cases to specially constituted courts. The orders did not define “land grabbing” or lay down any criteria for selecting cas

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusNARENDRA KUMAR JAIN & ORS.

2023 INSC 5014 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Delhi Development Authority (DDA) appealed against a Delhi High Court order that declared the acquisition of a parcel of land to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The land had been possessed in 2004 and

YAMAL MANOJBHAIversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS

2023 INSC 4984 May 2023Matter referred to larger bench

The petitioner, an NRI, was arrested at Delhi airport for allegedly smuggling watches through the green channel. He sought a direction for home‑cooked food and, more importantly, the right to settle the customs duty liability under Section 127B of the Customs Act, arguing that Section 123, which bars settlement for cer

KAILASH VIJAYVARGIYAversusRAJLAKSHMI CHAUDHURI AND OTHERS

2023 INSC 4944 May 2023Disposed off

The victim‑complainant alleged that she was raped by three accused on 29 November 2018 and filed an application under Section 156(3) of the CrPC seeking a direction to the police to register an FIR. The Chief Judicial Magistrate dismissed the application, citing a two‑year delay and inconsistencies in the complainant's

DAMODHAR NARAYAN SAWALE (D) THROUGH LRSversusSHRI TEJRAO BAJIRAO MHASKE & ORS

2023 INSC 4914 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant sought possession of a 3‑acre agricultural field based on a registered sale deed dated 21‑04‑1979. The defendants argued that the deed was a sham, executed as collateral for a money‑lending transaction, and that the sale violated the Maharashtra Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Ac

HEINZ INDIA LIMITEDversusTHE STATE OF KERALA

2023 INSC 4884 May 2023Dismissed

Heinz India Ltd. challenged the classification of its product, Nycil Prickly Heat Powder, under state sales tax statutes. The Kerala High Court and the Madras High Court had held the product to be a "medicated talcum powder" and thus a cosmetic, subject to a lower tax rate, rejecting the revenue's view that it was a me

M/S VISTRA ITCL (INDIA) LTD & ORS.versusMR. DINKAR VENKATASUBRAMANIAN & ANR.

2023 INSC 5004 May 2023Disposed off

The corporate debtor Amtek Auto Ltd pledged 66.77% of its shares in JMT Auto Ltd as security to M/s Vistra ITCL (appellant No.1) for short‑term loans extended to its group companies. Vistra filed a claim as a secured creditor, which was rejected by the resolution professional and later by the adjudicating authority. Th

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 8 MUMBAIversusGLOWSHINE BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD

2023 INSC 4924 May 2023

The appellant, Commissioner of Income Tax, challenged the High Court’s order upholding the ITAT’s finding that a sale of development rights by Glowshine Builders was a transaction in stock-in-trade. The Assessing Officer had originally treated the receipt of Rs 15,94,06,500 as short‑term capital gains, but the ITAT rev

M/S TRIMURTHI FRAGRANCES (P) LTD. THR. ITS DIRECTOR SHRI PRADEEP KUMAR AGRAWALversusGOVT. OF N.C.T. OF DELHI THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (FINANCE) AND ORS.

2023 INSC 4874 May 2023Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether pan masala and gutkha, products containing betel nut and sometimes tobacco, could be taxed under various state sales‑tax statutes despite being listed as exempt under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The Court analysed the classification of these products under the Central Excise Tari

OFFICIAL LIQUIDATORversusUJJAIN NAGAR PALIKA NIGAM & ORS

2023 INSC 4894 May 2023Dismissed

The Official Liquidator (OL) of IISCO Ujjain Pipe and Foundry Co. Ltd., wound up under the Companies Act, sold the company's assets on an "as is where is whatever there is" basis. Ujjain Nagar Palika Nigam (respondent No.1) claimed arrears of property tax and water tax for the period from the winding‑up order (10 July

SMRITI DEBBARMA (DEAD) THROUGH LEGAL REPRESENTATIVEversusPRABHA RANJAN DEBBARMA AND OTHERS

2023 INSC 84 January 2023Dismissed

The appellant, Smriti Debbarma (representing the late Maharani Chandratara Devi), filed a suit seeking declaration of title and possession of the Schedule ‘A’ property (Khosh Mahal). The trial court decreed in her favour, but the Gauhati High Court set aside that decree, holding that she failed to prove legal ownership

IFB AGRO INDUSTRIES LIMITEDversusSICGIL INDIA LIMITED AND OTHERS

2023 INSC 94 January 2023Dismissed

IFB Agro Industries, a listed company, alleged that SICGIL India Ltd. and related persons acquired more than 5% of its shares from the open market without making the disclosures required under SEBI's Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeover (SAST) Regulations and Insider Trading (PIT) Regulations. The appellant f

SABARMATI GAS LIMITEDversusSHAH ALLOYS LIMITED

2023 INSC 104 January 2023Dismissed

Sabarmati Gas Ltd. entered into a gas‑sale agreement with Shah Alloys Ltd., which later defaulted on payments. The respondent was declared a 'sick company' by the BIFR, invoking a moratorium under SICA that barred legal recovery until the Code came into force on 1‑Dec‑2016. After issuing a demand notice under Section 8

DEEPAK ANANDA PATILversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS

2023 INSC 114 January 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Maharashtra cooperative society, engaged in sugar production, sought to delete about 2,000 members under Section 11 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, alleging they did not meet the bye‑law eligibility criteria. The Regional Joint Director (Sugar) issued an omnibus show‑cause notice and, without i

PARSHURAMversusSTATE OF M.P.

2023 INSC 9733 November 2023Disposed off

The case arose from a violent clash in a Madhya Pradesh village where the accused, including Parshuram and Jalim Singh, formed an unlawful assembly after a buffalo damaged a shed built by the accused. The assembly allegedly assaulted members of the complainant party, resulting in the death of Madan. The trial court and

MARKASH JAJARAversusTHE STATE OF ASSAM & ANR.

2023 INSC 10153 November 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Markash Jajara, struck his son‑in‑law, an alcoholic who habitually abused his daughter, with a bamboo stick inside his house, resulting in the victim's death. The trial court convicted him under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment, a decision affirmed by the High Court. On appeal, the

NITISHA AND OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2023 INSC 9853 November 2023Disposed off

The petitioners, women officers of the Indian Army who had been granted Permanent Commission following the Supreme Court's Nitisha judgment, challenged their non‑empanelment for promotion to Colonel by selection. They argued that the Army’s cut‑off dates for Confidential Reports (CRs) excluded a substantial portion of

PANKAJ BANSALversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2023 INSC 8663 October 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Pankaj Bansal and Basant Bansal, were arrested by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) under Section 19(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) after being summoned in connection with two Enforcement Case Information Reports (ECIRs). They had earlier obtained anticipatory bail for the firs

STATE BANK OF INDIAversusP. ZADENGA

2023 INSC 8683 October 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, P. Zadenga, a bank officer, was dismissed after departmental proceedings were instituted for alleged misappropriation of deposit challan amounts, while criminal cases based on the same transactions were pending. The bank relied on Clause 4 of the 2002 Memorandum of Settlement (MoS) to argue that discipl

ADITYA KHAITAN & ORS.versusIL AND FS FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED

2023 INSC 8673 October 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, nine defendants in a commercial suit filed by IL and FS Financial Services Ltd, failed to file written statements within the 30‑day period (ending 8 March 2020) and the 120‑day outer limit (ending 6 June 2020). They sought an extension on 20 January 2021, invoking the Supreme Court's suo motu orders tha

STATE OF KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA POLICEversusS. SUBBEGOWDA

2023 INSC 6693 August 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Karnataka Lokayukta Police appealed against the Karnataka High Court’s order that discharged S. Subbegowda, an executive engineer, from charges under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The respondent had faced a charge of amassing disproportionate wealth and the prosecution had examined 17 witnesses a

THEIR WORKMEN THROUGH THE JOINT SECRETARY (WELFARE), FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA EXECUTIVE STAFF UNION.versusEMPLOYER IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF THE FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA & ANR.

2023 INSC 5883 July 2023Disposed off

The Central Government Industrial Tribunal awarded reinstatement, regularisation and 75% back wages to 21 casual workers of the Food Corporation of India (FCI) whose retrenchment was held void. The management of FCI filed a writ petition challenging the award, obtained a conditional stay, but nevertheless reinstated an

M/S. SANVIRA INDUSTRIESversusRAIN CII CARBON (VIZAG) LTD. & ORS.

2023 INSC 5863 July 2023Dismissed

The case concerned the allocation of raw pet‑coke (RPC) among calciner units after the Supreme Court fixed an outer import limit of 1.4 million tonnes per annum based on capacities as of 9 Oct 2018. Sanvira Industries claimed its production capacity had risen to 3.30 lakh MT per annum before that date and sought a larg

UGGARSAINversusTHE STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

2023 INSC 5873 July 2023Case Partly allowed

Eight persons were convicted for the death of Subhash and injuries to others, originally under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment plus additional terms. The High Court reduced the murder conviction to culpable homicide not amounting to murder (Section 304 Part II) and, relyi

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ANRversusVARLA RAMAIAH ETC.

2023 INSC 4853 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Andhra Pradesh government issued two Government Orders appointing a Cabinet Sub‑Committee and later a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe alleged corruption by the previous administration and subsequently sought to refer the matter to the CBI, prompting writ petitions challenging the GOs. The High Court staye

PEETHAMBARANversusSTATE OF KERALA & ANR.

2023 INSC 4813 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Peethambaran, was charged under Section 420 IPC for allegedly cheating persons by promising jobs in exchange for money. The FIR led to two police final reports: the first concluded the case was false due to lack of evidence, while the second recorded a further investigation ordered by the District Police

BALWANT SINGHversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2023 INSC 4823 May 2023Disposed off

Balwant Singh was convicted and sentenced to death for his role in the 1995 bomb blast that killed Punjab Chief Minister Beant Singh. A mercy petition on his behalf was filed by the Shiromani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee in 2012, but the petitioner himself never lodged any petition. The petitioner claimed an inordina

UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHERversusDELOITTE HASKINS AND SELLS LLP & ANR

2023 INSC 4843 May 2023Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether proceedings under Section 140(5) of the Companies Act, 2013 can continue after an auditor resigns, and whether the provision is constitutionally valid. The Court held that the NCLT's enquiry under Section 140(5) must run to its logical end irrespective of the auditor's resignation, an

M. K. RAJAGOPALANversusDR. PERIASAMY PALANI GOUNDER & ANR

2023 INSC 4863 May 2023Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a batch of appeals challenging the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal's (NCLAT) order that set aside the approval of a resolution plan for Appu Hotels Ltd. The Court held that the resolution applicant, M.K. Rajagopalan, was ineligible to submit a plan because he was the managing trustee

PREMCHANDversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2023 INSC 2073 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Premchand was convicted by the trial court of murder (s.302 IPC) and attempted murder (s.307 IPC) based on oral testimony of prosecution witnesses, while his written statement under s.313(5) CrPC was not considered. The High Court affirmed the conviction. On appeal, the Supreme Court observed that the tri

THE STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.versusSATPAL & ORS.

2023 INSC 2013 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute concerned land owned by a Gram Panchayat in Haryana that had been earmarked for a school and its playground. Respondents had illegally occupied about 5 kanal 4 marla of this land and constructed houses. While eviction orders under Section 7(2) of the Punjab Village Common Land (Regulation) Act were upheld b

NIKHIL CHANDRA MONDALversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2023 INSC 1983 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was accused of murdering his wife, with the prosecution relying primarily on an extra‑judicial confession he allegedly made to three witnesses and on recovered blood‑stained clothes and a knife. The trial court found the witnesses' testimonies contradictory, disbelieved the confession, and rejected the ph

CAPTAIN PRAMOD KUMAR BAJAJversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

2023 INSC 2043 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Captain Pramod Kumar Bajaj, a senior Income Tax officer, was selected for appointment as a Member of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) but his appointment never materialised due to the respondents withholding his vigilance clearance and placing his name on a suspect list. Despite multiple favourable orders from

KARAN @ FATIYAversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2023 INSC 1973 March 2023Case Partly allowed

The appellant Karan was convicted under IPC and the POCSO Act for heinous offences and sentenced to death, which the High Court affirmed. While the appeals were pending, the appellant claimed he was a juvenile at the time of the offence, prompting a trial‑court inquiry that established his date of birth as 25‑07‑2002,

UNION OF INDIAversusSANJIV CHATURVEDI

2023 INSC 2103 March 2023Matter referred to larger bench

The Union of India appealed against a High Court of Uttarakhand order that set aside the Chairman of the Central Administrative Tribunal’s (CAT) transfer of an original application (OA) from the Nainital Circuit Bench to the Principal Bench in New Delhi. The Union argued that the High Court lacked territorial jurisdict

THE STATE OF WEST BENGALversusDEBABRATA TIWARI & ORS. ETC. ETC.

2023 INSC 2023 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, heirs of municipal employees who died in service, sought compassionate appointments under a scheme intended to provide immediate financial relief to dependents. Their applications were filed in 2005‑2006, but the authorities took years to act, and the petitioners approached the High Court only in 2015.

DEBIDUTTA MOHANTYversusRANJAN KUMAR PATTNAIK & ORS.

2023 INSC 2033 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute arose from an auction for a lease of minor mineral rights under the Orissa Minor Minerals Concession Rules, 2016, which required bidders to submit a solvency certificate issued by a revenue officer. The Sub‑Collector had expressly directed that the certificate be issued in the name of Gurukrupa Charitable T

THE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRSversusDR. MAHINDRA BHASKAR LIMAYE & ORS.

2023 INSC 2093 March 2023Disposed off

The Supreme Court heard a challenge by the Ministry of Consumer Affairs against the High Court’s order striking down Rule 3(2)(b), Rule 4(2)(c) and Rule 6(9) of the Consumer Protection (Qualification for appointment, method of recruitment, procedure of appointment, term of office, resignation and removal of President a

GURJIT SINGH (D) THROUGH LRSversusUNION TERRITORY, CHANDIGARH & ORS.

2023 INSC 1993 March 2023Dismissed

The appellant, owner of Shop No. 27 in the Chandigarh Agricultural Produce Market, sought allocation of an auction platform adjacent to his shop, arguing that his licence and the "One Site One Shop" policy gave him a right to that specific site. The respondent, a senior licence holder since 1970, was allotted the platf

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