Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

Judgments of 2025

897 judgments, newest first — showing 801–897.

SMT. LAVANYA C & ANR.versusVITTAL GURUDAS PAI SINCE DESEASED BY LRS. & ORS.

2025 INSC 3254 March 2025Case Partly allowed

The appellants, originally defendants in a suit concerning a Joint Development Agreement, gave an undertaking through their counsel in 2007 not to alienate the subject property, which the trial court later incorporated into a court order. In 2011 the plaintiffs filed an application under Order XXXIX Rule 2A alleging br

THE COSMOS CO. OPERATIVE BANK LTD.versusCENTRAL BANK OF INDIA & ORS.

2025 INSC 2434 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The Cosmos Co. Operative Bank Ltd. (appellant) challenged a High Court order that held Central Bank of India (respondent No.1) had the first charge over a flat mortgaged by the original borrowers. Both banks had received security documents: the appellant bank held the share certificate of ownership, while the responden

SOVARAN SINGH PRAJAPATIversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2025 INSC 2254 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

Sovaran Singh Prajapati was convicted of murdering his wife and daughter under Sections 302 and 201 IPC and sentenced to death by the Trial Court, a judgment affirmed by the Allahabad High Court. The appellant challenged the conviction on the ground that the trial was not a fair trial, citing numerous procedural irregu

MISSION ACCESSIBILITYversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2025 INSC 13763 December 2025Disposed off

Mission Accessibility, a disability‑rights organization, filed a writ petition seeking modification of the scribe‑registration timeline for the Civil Services Examination and the introduction of laptops with screen‑reader software and accessible digital question papers for visually‑impaired candidates. The petition arg

ABHISHEK GUPTAversusDINESH KUMAR & ORS.

2025 INSC 14063 December 2025Disposed off

The appellant, Abhishek Gupta, was allotted a fair‑price shop licence after the licence of respondent No.1 was revoked for breach of conditions. The revocation and its affirmation were challenged by respondent No.1 in a writ petition under Art.226, where the appellant was not impleaded. The Single Judge set aside the r

MMTC LIMITEDversusANGLO AMERICAN METALLURGICAL COAL PVT. LIMITED

2025 INSC 12793 November 2025Dismissed

MMTC Limited entered a Long Term Agreement with Anglo American Metallurgical Coal for the supply of coking coal, but a dispute arose over the price and unlifted quantities, leading to an arbitral award in favour of Anglo. MMTC challenged the award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, which was reje

C.P. FRANCISversusC.P. JOSEPH AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 10713 September 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute concerned the succession to the suit‑schedule property of the deceased parents, C.R. Pius and Philomina Pius, who had executed a joint will bequeathing the property to the appellant C.P. Francis. The respondents, other children of the deceased, challenged the will on the grounds of lack of testamentary capa

DELHI POLLUTION CONTROL COMMITTEEversusLODHI PROPERTY CO. LTD. ETC.

2025 INSC 9233 August 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The Delhi Pollution Control Committee (DPCC) appealed against a Delhi High Court decision that held it could not levy restitutionary or compensatory damages under s.33A of the Water Act and s.31A of the Air Act, on the ground that such powers amounted to penalties. The Supreme Court examined the statutory scheme, the p

STATE OF WEST BENGALversusBAISHAKHI BHATTACHARYYA (CHATTERJEE) AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 4373 April 2025Disposed off

The West Bengal School Service Commission (WBSSC) conducted a 2016 recruitment for assistant teachers and non‑teaching staff that was later found to involve massive irregularities, including rank‑jumping, out‑of‑panel appointments, manipulation of OMR scores, destruction of original answer sheets and illegal subcontrac

RAM KISHAN (SINCE DECEASED) THROUGH HIS LRS ETC.versusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

2025 INSC 4413 April 2025Disposed off

The appellants, landowners in Dharuhera village, Haryana, challenged the compensation awarded for their lands acquired under a 2008 notification of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, arguing that it should be enhanced to match the higher compensation granted for adjoining villages (Malpura and Kapriwas) acquired under a l

SANGITA SINHAversusBHAWANA BHARDWAJ AND ORS.

2025 INSC 4503 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a beneficiary under the original seller's will, challenged a decree granting specific performance of an unregistered agreement to sell, alleging that the agreement had been cancelled by the seller before the suit was filed. The buyer had paid an earnest money deposit and post‑dated cheques, but after rec

JOGESWAR SAHOO & ORS.versusTHE DISTRICT JUDGE, CUTTACK & ORS.

2025 INSC 4493 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, who were Stenographer Grade‑I and Personal Assistant in the District Judiciary, Cuttack, were granted a retrospective promotion and a financial benefit in 2017 based on the Shetty Commission recommendations. After their superannuation in 2020, the State ordered them to repay the amounts, alleging the pr

SANJAY SADASHIV BENDRE & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2025 INSC 4003 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, senior firemen of the Pune Municipal Corporation, challenged the corporation's order that reduced their retirement age from 60 to 58 years based on a reclassification of their post as Class III under the 2014 Recruitment Rules. The High Court had upheld the lower retirement age, interpreting the newer c

DEVINDER KUMAR BANSALversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB

2025 INSC 3203 March 2025Dismissed

The petitioner, Devinder Kumar Bansal, an Audit Inspector, was alleged to have demanded and facilitated a bribe during an audit of development work while the complainant's wife served as Sarpanch, with co‑accused Prithvi Singh collecting the money on his behalf. An FIR was lodged under Section 7 of the Prevention of Co

SURESHversusSTATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2025 INSC 3183 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC for allegedly pouring kerosene on his wife and setting her on fire. The prosecution's case relied heavily on a dying declaration recorded by a Judicial Magistrate, which accused the appellant, while earlier statements by the deceased to a doctor and a police c

SARANGA ANILKUMAR AGGARWALversusBHAVESH DHIRAJLAL SHETH & ORS.

2025 INSC 3143 March 2025Dismissed

The appellant, a real‑estate developer, was penalised by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) with 27 penalties under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act for failing to deliver possession of residential units. While insolvency proceedings were initiated against the appellant under Section 9

C. KAMALAKKANNANversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE C.B.C.I.D., CHENNAI

2025 INSC 3093 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was convicted under Sections 120B, 468 and 471 of the IPC for allegedly preparing a postal cover that transmitted a forged marksheet. The prosecution’s case hinged on the testimony of a handwriting expert who claimed the cover bore the appellant’s handwriting, but the original postal cover was never produ

K.S. MEHTAversusM/S MORGAN SECURITIES AND CREDITS PVT. LTD.

2025 INSC 3153 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, K.S. Mehta and Basant Kumar Goswami, were non‑executive directors of Blue Coast Hotels & Resorts Ltd. and were implicated in criminal complaints under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for dishonoured cheques issued to repay an inter‑corporate deposit. They neither atte

SIDDHARTH DALMIA & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2025 INSC 3513 March 2025Disposed off

The petitioners, invoking Article 32, sought a court order to stop private hospitals from forcing patients to purchase medicines and consumables exclusively from the hospitals' own pharmacies at inflated prices, alleging exploitation and violation of the right to life under Article 21. They highlighted personal experie

WAHIDversusSTATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

2025 INSC 1453 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Wahid and Anshu, were convicted for robbery under IPC sections 392/397 and for possession of arms under the Arms Act, based on an FIR that named no specific perpetrators. The prosecution’s case relied on the complainant’s identification of the accused at a bus depot two days after the incident and the r

UNION OF INDIA & ANR.versusTARSEM SINGH & ORS.

2025 INSC 1463 February 2025Dismissed

The National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) filed a miscellaneous application seeking clarification on whether the Supreme Court's 2019 judgment in Union of India v. Tarsem Singh, which mandated payment of solatium and interest to landowners whose land was acquired under the NHAI Act, should operate only prospectiv

RAMU APPA MAHAPATARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2025 INSC 1473 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ramu Appa Mahapatar, was convicted for the murder of his live-in partner Manda based primarily on an extra‑judicial confession he allegedly made to the landlord (PW‑1) and the deceased's brother (PW‑3), which was later endorsed by PW‑4 and PW‑6. The Supreme Court examined whether such a confession, coupl

AIRPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIAversusPRADIP KUMAR BANERJEE

2025 INSC 1493 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, an Assistant Engineer of the Airports Authority of India, was arrested and convicted for demanding illegal gratification, leading to his dismissal from service. After being acquitted on benefit of doubt in a criminal appeal, he sought reinstatement, but the Authority initiated fresh disciplinary proceed

1. THE COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 2. BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversus1. SMT. RATHNAMMA 2. SRI G ARVIND 3. SMT. RADHAMMA

2025 INSC 3453 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) acquired land from the respondents, who voluntarily surrendered it on 31 May 2001 under the Incentive Rules of 1989. All acquisition formalities, including compensation, were completed before the Amended Incentive Rules came into force on 27 November 2002. The respondents filed

TUHIN KUMAR BISWAS @ BUMBAversusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL

2025 INSC 13732 December 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Tuhin Kumar Biswas, was charged under IPC sections 341, 354C and 506 for allegedly restraining a complainant and voyeuristically photographing her when she attempted to enter a disputed property. The complainant claimed intimidation and intrusion of privacy, while the appellant argued that he was enforci

ROUSANARA BEGUMversusS.K. SALAHUDDIN @ SK SALAUDDIN & ANR.

2025 INSC 13752 December 2025Appeal(s) allowed

Rousanara Begum married S.K. Salahuddin in 2005 and divorced him in 2011. At the time of marriage her father gave Rs 7 lakh and 30 bhori of gold, which the appellant sought to recover under Section 3 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986. Lower courts awarded partial amounts, but the Calcutta

JYOTI BUILDERSversusCHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER & ORS.

2025 INSC 13722 December 2025Disposed off

The dispute concerned a 2,005‑sq‑m parcel in Malad, Mumbai, originally declared a slum and reserved as Recreational Ground under the 1991 Development Plan. Jyoti Builders (appellant) claimed that the 2015 order of the CEO‑SRA required the State Government to acquire the land under s.14(1) of the Maharashtra Slum Areas

PHIRERAMversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2025 INSC 10742 September 2025Disposed off

The appellant, the original complainant, filed an FIR for murder and related offences, after which the accused was released on bail by the High Court with specific conditions prohibiting intimidation of witnesses. Subsequent FIRs alleged that the accused threatened a key witness, prompting the appellant to seek cancell

MRS. SHAILJA KRISHNAversusSATORI GLOBAL LIMITED & ORS.

2025 INSC 10652 September 2025Appeal(s) allowed

Mrs. Shailja Krishna, a majority shareholder and former executive director of Satori Global Limited, alleged that the company’s board had fraudulently obtained her signature on a gift deed and share transfer forms, thereby oppressing her and mismanaging the company. The NCLT had earlier granted her relief under Section

OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LTD.versusM/S G & T BECKFIELD DRILLING SERVICES PVT. LTD.

2025 INSC 10662 September 2025Dismissed

The dispute arose from an arbitral award dated 21 November 2004 in favour of G & T Beckfield Drilling Services, directing ONGC (the respondent) to pay a sum of US$6,56,272.34 together with interest at 12% per annum from 12 December 1998, the date the claim was affirmed. ONGC challenged the award under Section 34 of the

RAJANversusTHE STATE OF HARYANA

2025 INSC 10812 September 2025Dismissed

The appellant Rajan was convicted for murder under Sections 302/34 of the IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act based primarily on the ocular testimony of two eyewitnesses, despite the alleged firearm not being recovered. He appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the High Court’s delay of two years and five m

ASF BUILDTECH PRIVATE LIMITEDversusSHAPOORJI PALLONJI AND COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED

2025 INSC 6162 May 2025Dismissed

The respondent, Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Private Limited (SPCPL), filed counter-claims in an arbitration initiated by Black Canyon SEZ Pvt. Ltd. (BCSPL) against BCSPL and two non-signatory entities, ASF Buildtech Private Limited (ABPL) and ASF Insignia SEZ Pvt. Ltd. (AISPL), invoking the group of companies doctri

DR. VIMAL SUKUMARversusD. LAWRENCE & ORS.

2025 INSC 6222 May 2025Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined appeals challenging two Madras High Court orders that declared the 7‑3‑2022 Special Synod meeting of the Church of South India (CSI) invalid, set aside the amendments to the CSI Constitution, and ordered re‑election of all office bearers. The Court held that the Special Synod meeting was duly

STATE OF ODISHA & ORS.versusJITA LUHA

2025 INSC 8132 May 2025Disposed off

The State of Odisha appealed against the High Court's order directing that applications for rehabilitation assistance be considered under the 1990 Rules, despite the later 2020 Rules. The petitioners argued that the 2020 Rules, which mandated that pending cases be dealt with under their provisions, should apply even to

KABIR PAHARIAversusNATIONAL MEDICAL COMMISSION AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 6232 May 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Scheduled Caste candidate with benchmark disabilities, secured a high rank in the NEET‑UG 2024 examination and applied for admission to the MBBS UG course at AIIMS, New Delhi under the SC‑PwBD quota. The Vardhman Mahavir Medical College’s disability certification board deemed him ineligible under NMC n

NARESH KUMAR SINHAversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

2025 INSC 8142 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a clerk appointed in 1989 under a government advertisement, served for over 16 years before a show‑cause notice in 2005 alleged that his appointment was forged because it was supposedly issued by the Deputy Director, Human Resources Development Department (DDHRD), an incompetent authority. The Department

STATE (NCT) OF DELHIversusRAJEEV SHARMA

2025 INSC 4562 April 2025Dismissed

The State of Delhi appealed against a Delhi High Court order granting bail to Rajeev Sharma, who was arrested under Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Official Secrets Act, 1923 and Section 120B of the IPC. Sharma filed multiple bail applications, all of which were dismissed, and later invoked Section 167(2) of the CrPC claimi

NEW MANGALORE PORT TRUST & ANR.versusCLIFFORD D SOUZA ETC. ETC.

2025 INSC 4402 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The New Mangalore Port Trust (NMPT) had revised licence fees for land allotted to several licensees and issued demand notices for arrears. The licensees challenged the retrospective application of the revised tariff before the Karnataka High Court, which dismissed their writ petitions, leading NMPT to file writ petitio

UCO BANK & ANR.versusVIJAY KUMAR HANDA

2025 INSC 4422 April 2025Dismissed

Vijay Kumar Handa, a clerk of UCO Bank, was charged with gross misconduct and dismissed from service in 1999. The appellate authority modified the penalty to removal from service with entitlement to terminal benefits, stating that removal would not disqualify future employment. The bank later challenged the award of th

M/S R. K. TRANSPORT COMPANYversusM/S BHARAT ALUMINUM COMPANY LTD. (BALCO)

2025 INSC 4382 April 2025Dismissed

The parties entered into a contract for bauxite mining, and an arbitral award dated 9 April 2022 was issued in favour of the appellant. The respondent filed an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 on 11 July 2022 to set aside the award. The issue before the Supreme Court was whethe

KASHMIRI LAL SHARMAversusHIMACHAL PRADESH STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD. & ANR.

2025 INSC 4722 April 2025Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a permanently locomotor‑disabled electrician employed by Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board since 1985, was scheduled to retire on 30 September 2018 at age 58. An Office Memorandum dated 29 March 2013 had extended the superannuation age to 60 years for physically disabled employees, but only for th

RAJNISH SINGH @ SONIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

2025 INSC 3082 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Rajnish Singh, was charged under Sections 376, 384, 323, 504 and 506 IPC for alleged sexual exploitation and blackmail of the complainant, who claimed he promised marriage and later married another woman. The complainant alleged a 16‑year consensual relationship that began with a forced act in 2006, duri

THE STATE OF GOA & ANR.versusNAMITA TRIPATHI

2025 INSC 3062 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Goa filed a complaint alleging that the respondent's professional laundry service operated as a factory without a valid licence, violating the Factories Act, 1948. A Judicial Magistrate First Class issued summons on the basis of the complaint, but the High Court quashed the process, holding that dry‑cleani

SHABEEN AHMADversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2025 INSC 3072 March 2025Disposed off

The appellant, brother of the deceased, filed FIRs alleging that the deceased wife was subjected to relentless dowry demands and cruelty by her in‑laws, culminating in her death by strangulation within two years of marriage. The trial court denied bail to the accused in‑laws, but the High Court later granted bail to al

SHARMILA VELAMURversusV. SANJAY AND ORS.

2025 INSC 2992 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The mother (appellant) and father (respondent No.4) of Aadith Ramadorai, a 22‑year‑old US citizen with ataxic cerebral palsy and severe cognitive limitations, disputed his custody after the father took him to India without the mother’s knowledge. The mother filed a habeas corpus petition in the Madras High Court, which

IN RE: RECRUITMENT OF VISUALLY IMPAIRED IN JUDICIAL SERVICES versus

2025 INSC 3002 March 2025Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether visually impaired candidates are suitable for judicial service and whether recent amendments to the Madhya Pradesh Judicial Service Rules (Rule 6A and the proviso to Rule 7) violated constitutional equality and the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016. The Court held that vis

GULSHAN KUMARversusINSTITUTE OF BANKING PERSONNEL SELECTION & ORS.

2025 INSC 1422 February 2025Disposed off

The petitioner, a 25% permanently disabled candidate with focal hand dystonia, sought a scribe, compensatory time and other accommodations for various recruitment examinations, arguing that the Office Memorandum dated 10.08.2022 limited such facilities to only Persons with Benchmark Disabilities (PwBD). The Court exami

GODREJ PROJECTS DEVELOPMENT LIMITEDversusANIL KARLEKAR & ORS.

2025 INSC 1432 February 2025Case Partly allowed

The respondents booked an apartment with Godrej Projects and paid a 20% earnest money deposit as per the Apartment Buyer Agreement. After the developer offered possession in June 2017, the respondents cancelled the purchase citing a market recession and demanded a full refund of Rs.51,12,310 with interest. The NCDRC or

THE STATE OF JHARKHANDversusSUNNY KUMAR @ SUNNY KUMAR SAO

2025 INSC 1532 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Jharkhand appealed against a High Court order that granted bail to Sunny Kumar, who was charged under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act. After being released on bail, the accused was arrested again on 12 July 2023 for a similar NDPS offence, and the trial in the origin

SEROSOFT SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.versusDEXTER CAPITAL ADVISORS PVT. LTD.

2025 INSC 262 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

Serosoft Solutions and Dexter Capital Advisors were in arbitration over unpaid fees. During the arbitration, the respondent sought additional time to cross‑examine the appellant's witness RW‑1, which the arbitral tribunal rejected, holding that sufficient opportunity had already been given. The respondent appealed to t

MAHANADI COAL FIELDS LTD. & ANR.versusMATHIAS ORAM & ORS.

2025 INSC 222 January 2025Dismissed

Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd. (MCL) sought extensions and directions from the Supreme Court to finalize compensation and rehabilitation benefits for land oustees of four villages (Tumulia, Jhupuranga, Ratansara, Kirpsira) acquired for coal mining. The Court had earlier, in its 03.11.2022 judgment, fixed the Gopalpur model f

MOHAMMED ENTERPRISES (TANZANIA) LTD.versusFAROOQ ALI KHAN & ORS.

2025 INSC 252 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined appeals against a Karnataka High Court order that had stayed the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) for Associate Decor Ltd, where Mohammed Enterprises (Tanzania) Ltd's resolution plan had been approved by the Committee of Creditors (CoC) on 11 February 2020. The petitioners argue

OMI @ OMKAR RATHORE & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR.

2025 INSC 272 January 2025Dismissed

The petitioners Omi (Omkar) Rathore and another were named in the FIR for a murder case but the investigating officer filed a closure report exonerating them and they were not included in the charge‑sheet. During trial, the first informant reiterated his FIR testimony implicating the petitioners, leading the trial cour

GEETHA V.M. & ORS.versusRETHNASENAN K. & ORS.

2025 INSC 332 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned employees of Kerala's Directorate of Health Services (DHS) who, under a government policy to abolish a dual control system, exercised an option to be absorbed into the Directorate of Medical Education (DME). The dispute was whether this option amounted to a transfer on request, invoking the proviso t

TARUN SHARMAversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2025 INSC 11391 September 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the conviction of Tarun Sharma under Section 302 IPC for the murder of Munish Kumar, based primarily on a dying declaration recorded by a police Sub‑Inspector. The Supreme Court examined whether the dying declaration was reliable, given that the victim had been unconscious for most of the period, the

SUSHIL KUMAR TIWARIversusHARE RAM SAH & ORS.

2025 INSC 10611 September 2025Disposed off

The case involved a minor girl who became pregnant after being allegedly raped separately by two accused, Hare Ram Sah and Manish Tiwari, in 2016. The trial court convicted them under IPC s.376(2) and POCSO §§4,6, imposing rigorous life imprisonment, but the High Court acquitted them, holding that the prosecution faile

KIRANversusRAJKUMAR JIVRAJ JAIN & ANR.

2025 INSC 10671 September 2025Disposed off

The case arose from an FIR filed by Kiran, a member of the Scheduled Caste ‘Mang’, alleging that Rajkumar Jain and others assaulted him, his mother and aunt with an iron rod, used caste‑based slurs and threatened to burn their house after he voted against a candidate. The accused sought anticipatory bail under Section

M/S TRIVENI ENGINEERING AND INDUSTRIES LTD.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2025 INSC 10601 September 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, M/s Triveni Engineering and Industries Ltd., a sugar manufacturer, was ordered by the National Green Tribunal (NGT) to pay Rs.18 crore as environmental compensation for alleged illegal discharge of untreated effluents and related violations. The appellant challenged the orders on the ground that it was n

RAMESH CHAND (D) THR. LRS.versusSURESH CHAND AND ANR.

2025 INSC 10591 September 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff claimed title to a Delhi property on the basis of an agreement to sell, a general power of attorney, a receipt of consideration, an affidavit and a registered will executed by his father, Kundan Lal. The trial court and High Court had upheld his claim, but the Supreme Court examined whether these document

THE STATE OF TELANGANA & ORS. ETC.versusKALLURI NAGA NARASIMHA ABHIRAM & ORS. ETC.

2025 INSC 10581 September 2025Disposed off

The State of Telangana and its agencies challenged the High Court's expansion of the definition of ‘local candidate’ under the Telangana Medical & Dental Colleges Admission Rules, 2017, arguing that the definition is prescribed by the Presidential Order issued under Article 371D and the 1983 Act and cannot be altered b

ANJUMAN ISHAAT-E-TALEEM TRUSTversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 10631 September 2025Directions issued

The Supreme Court examined whether the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) must be mandatory for teachers in minority educational institutions and for in‑service teachers appointed before the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act (RTE Act) came into force. The Court considered the interplay between Article

R. RANJITH SINGH & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.

2025 INSC 6121 May 2025Disposed off

The appellants, recruited as Sub‑Inspectors of Police through direct recruitment, challenged a Government Order dated 21‑11‑2017 that granted seniority to 20% in‑service candidates over those recruited from the open market. The order retrospectively amended Rule 25 of the Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Service Rules, 19

M/S. COAL INDIA LIMITEDversusCOMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (PORT), CUSTOMS HOUSE, KOLKATA

2025 INSC 6091 May 2025Dismissed

Coal India Ltd., through its subsidiary Central Coalfields Ltd., imported spare parts for P&H shovels and was required to pay an additional 8% of the FOB value to the Indian agent Voltas Ltd. as engineering and technical service fees. The customs authorities held that these fees were part of the assessable value under

M/S NARESH KUMAR GUPTAversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ANOTHER

2025 INSC 7191 May 2025Disposed off

The Punjab government amended section 29 of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 in 2013, extending the time limit for tax assessment from three to six years and inserting a new sub‑section (10A). Several assessees challenged the amendment, arguing that it was prospective, violated Articles 14 and 19, contravened natur

SHANMUGAM @ LAKSHMINARAYANANversusHIGH COURT OF MADRAS

2025 INSC 6191 May 2025Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined a criminal contempt case where three appellants were accused of forging and using bogus interim orders of the Madras High Court to obstruct the execution of a decree. The High Court had convicted them of contempt and sentenced each to six months’ imprisonment, based on investigations by the C

SANTOSH DEVIversusSUNDER

2025 INSC 6271 May 2025Dismissed

The petitioner, Santosh Devi, filed a suit in 2012 seeking cancellation of a sale deed and related mutation, alleging that the deed was obtained through fraud. The trial court dismissed the suit on the ground of limitation, a decision affirmed by the first appellate court and the High Court. The petitioner contended th

K.R. SURESHversusR. POORNIMA & ORS.

2025 INSC 6171 May 2025Dismissed

The appellant, K.R. Suresh, paid Rs.20,00,000 as advance under an agreement of sale that required the balance to be paid within four months, failing which the advance would be forfeited. He did not pay the balance on time, and the respondents forfeited the advance and later sold the property to third parties. The appel

AMAN BHATIAversusSTATE (GNCT OF DELHI)

2025 INSC 6181 May 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a licensed stamp vendor, was caught in a sting operation after demanding Rs 12 for a Rs 10 stamp paper and was convicted under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The key issue was whether a licensed stamp vendor qualifies as a “public servant” under Section 2(c)(i)

I.K. MERCHANTS PVT. LTD. & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

2025 INSC 4181 April 2025Disposed off

The appellants, I.K. Merchants Pvt. Ltd. and others, sold their shares in a state-owned company in 1973 for Rs.11.50 per share and later sought a higher valuation, which was finally fixed at Rs.640 per share by a court-appointed valuer. The State of Rajasthan, as respondent, delayed payment for over five decades, leadi

MAUKAM SINGH & OTHERSversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2025 INSC 4351 April 2025Dismissed

The appellants entered the deceased's house armed with an axe and a cutting weapon to dispute a place of worship on contested land, leading to a scuffle that resulted in the grandfather's death and injuries to three grandchildren. The trial court convicted the appellants under Sections 302, 323 and 324 read with Sectio

VINAY AGGARWALversusTHE STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

2025 INSC 4331 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Vinay Aggarwal, was charged under several IPC offences for allegedly impersonating an IB officer and extorting money. The complainant filed a petition under Section 482 of the CrPC seeking transfer of the investigation from the Haryana police to the CBI, which the Punjab and Haryana High Court allowed, d

SMT. UMA DEVI AND ORS.versusSRI. ANAND KUMAR AND ORS.

2025 INSC 4341 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiffs, grandchildren of Shivanna, filed a suit for partition of ancestral immovable property in 2023, alleging denial of their share. The defendants moved an application under Order 7 Rule 11 of the CPC, contending that the property had been orally partitioned in 1968 and that registered sale deeds executed in

M/S FERRO CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION (INDIA) PVT. LTD.versusTHE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

2025 INSC 4291 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

M/s Ferro Concrete Construction (India) Pvt. Ltd. entered into a works contract with the State of Rajasthan that contained Clause 22 prohibiting the contractor from claiming any interest on payments, arrears or balances. Disputes led to arbitration under the Arbitration Act, 1940, where the arbitrator awarded the contr

THE MANAGEMENT OF WORTH TRUSTversusTHE SECRETARY, WORTH TRUST WORKERS UNION

2025 INSC 4321 April 2025Dismissed

The Worth Trust, a charitable organization that also runs commercial factories, was challenged by its workers' union for payment of bonus and ex-gratia for the year 1996-97. The union argued that the workers, employed in the Trust's factories, fall within the definition of "workmen" under the Factories Act and are ther

JOMON K.K.versusSHAJIMON P. & ORS. ETC.

2025 INSC 4251 April 2025Dismissed

The Kerala Public Service Commission advertised 12 Boat Lascar vacancies requiring a current Lascar's licence, but the appellant, holding a higher Syrang's licence, applied and was placed first in the ranked list and advised for appointment. While the appointment was pending, two applications were filed before the Kera

URMILA DIXITversusSUNIL SHARAN DIXIT AND ORS.

2025 INSC 201 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a senior citizen, had executed a Gift Deed in 2019 transferring her property to her son on the condition that he would provide her maintenance, a condition also reflected in a contemporaneous promissory note. She later alleged that the son failed to fulfill this obligation and that relations had broken d

KIM WANSOOversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2025 INSC 81 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a foreign national serving as Project Manager for Hyundai Engineering & Construction India LLP, was named in FIR No.64/2020 alleging conspiracy and cheating in a Rs 9‑crore payment default involving multiple subcontractors. The appellant sought quashing of the FIR on the ground that the allegations were

DALJIT SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ANR.

2025 INSC 211 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Daljit Singh, was declared a proclaimed offender under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. for failing to appear after summons in a cheque‑related criminal case filed in 2010. He was later acquitted of the underlying offence under the Negotiable Instruments Act, and an FIR under Section 174A IPC was filed for his

B.N. JOHNversusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2025 INSC 41 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, B.N. John, owned a hostel for underprivileged children and alleged that officials raided it illegally on 3 June 2015, falsely accusing him of assaulting them. An FIR was lodged under IPC s.353, and a charge‑sheet later added s.186, leading the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) to take cognizance and issue

THE STATE, CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusA. SATISH KUMAR & ORS.

2025 INSC 111 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) filed appeals against a High Court order that quashed FIRs and subsequent proceedings against two Central Government employees accused of offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The respondents argued that, following the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh, the CBI req

BERNARD FRANCIS JOSEPH VAZ AND OTHERSversusGOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 31 January 2025Disposed off

The appellants purchased residential plots in Bengaluru between 1995 and 1997, which were later acquired by the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB) under a preliminary notification dated 29 January 2003. Although possession was taken in 2005, no compensation award was made until a Special Land Acquisit

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHIversusGAGAN NARANG & ORS. ETC.

2025 INSC 21 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) sought approval from the Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission (DERC) to conduct a tariff‑based competitive bidding for a 28 MW waste‑to‑energy (WTE) project at Narela Bawana, invoking Section 63 of the Electricity Act, 2003. The Waste to Energy Research & Technology Council c

M/S NARESH POTTERIESversusM/S AARTI INDUSTRIES AND ANOTHER

2025 INSC 11 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

M/s Naresh Potteries (appellant) filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against M/s Aarti Industries (respondent No.1) for the dishonour of a cheque issued in the appellant's favour. The complaint was filed by the manager, Neeraj Kumar, who held a power of attorney from the sole proprieto

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4 & ANR.versusM/S JUPITER CAPITAL PVT. LTD.

2025 INSC 381 January 2025Dismissed

M/s Jupiter Capital Pvt. Ltd. held a 99.88% share in Asianet News Network Pvt. Ltd. which reduced its share capital from 15,35,05,750 to 10,000 shares, proportionately reducing Jupiter's holding to 9,988 shares and receiving Rs. 3,17,83,474 as consideration. The Revenue argued that this reduction did not constitute a "

SANJAY DUTT & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF HARYANA & ANR.

2025 INSC 341 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The Range Forest Officer alleged that the directors and office bearers of a company illegally uprooted trees using a JCB, violating Section 4 of the Punjab Land Preservation Act, 1900, and sought prosecution under Section 19. The Special Environment Court took cognizance of the complaint and issued process against the

SRI MAHESHversusSANGRAM & ORS

2025 INSC 141 January 2025Case Partly allowed

The appellant, an adopted son, claimed entitlement to half of his adoptive mother's joint family property and challenged two alienations— a sale deed (2007) and a gift deed (2008) executed by the adoptive mother after his adoption. The dispute hinged on whether the adoption of a widow’s son relates back to the husband'

GOPAL KRISHAN & ORS.versusDAULAT RAM & ORS.

2025 INSC 181 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Gopal Krishan claimed title to a one‑quarter share of land in Gurdaspur based on a Will executed by the deceased Sanjhi Ram on 7 November 2005, which was subsequently transferred and sold. The respondents challenged the Will, alleging it was forged and that the attesting witness had not testified that the

Search Indian case law

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

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