HEMALATHA GARGYAversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
2002 INSC 50028 November 2002Disposed off
The Supreme Court examined whether the three‑month payment period prescribed in Section 67(1) of the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme, 1997 could be extended. The Court held that the word "shall" makes the deadline mandatory and that Section 67(2) expressly deems a declaration invalid if payment is not made within…
D.C. AGGARWAL (DEAD) BY LRS.versusSTATE BANK OF INDIA AND ANR.
2006 INSC 25827 April 2006Dismissed
The appellant, a former Deputy General Manager of State Bank of India, sought promotion to General Manager (TEGS VII) and an extension of service beyond the age of superannuation. Both claims were rejected by the Bank after a structured interview and a three‑member committee assessment, respectively. The appellant alle…
PAWAN KUMARversusSTATE OF HARYANA
2003 INSC 32923 July 2003Appeal(s) allowed
Pawan Kumar and Balwinder Singh (Binder) were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of a taxi driver whose body was found in a hotel room. The prosecution relied solely on circumstantial evidence that the accused hired the taxi, stayed in the hotel with the driver, and…
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusGURNAM SINGH
2004 INSC 20523 March 2004Leave Granted & Disposed off
The Supreme Court examined whether the General Court‑Martial of Major Gurnam Singh was convened in violation of Rule 37(1) and 37(3) of the Army Rules, 1954. The respondent argued that the officer who convened the court‑martial had not personally satisfied himself that the charges were offences under the Army Act and t…
CENTRAL ORGANISATION OF TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY EMPLOYEESversusTAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD
2005 INSC 51421 October 2005Appeal(s) allowed
The case concerned whether the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board could alter pension benefits of its employees without formally amending the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Liberalised Pension Regulations, 1960. The Board had relied on a settlement clause to bypass the 15‑day notice under Section 9A of the Industrial Disputes …
DAYANDEOGANPAT JADHAVversusMADHAV VITHAL BHASKAR AND ORS.
2005 INSC 51621 October 2005Dismissed
The appellant, a tenant of agricultural lands Gut Nos. 2325 and 2326, became a deemed purchaser under the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 on the tillers' day of 1 April 1957. He repeatedly expressed unwillingness to purchase the land, and the Mamlatdar and Agricultural Lands Tribunal recorded his statem…
S. BRAHMANAND AND ORS.versusK.R. MUTHUGOPAL (D) AND ORS.
2005 INSC 51821 October 2005Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiffs entered into a 1989 agreement to purchase two shops and a godown, which stipulated a fixed date for performance contingent on the vacating of an injunction. In 1992 the defendants wrote requesting a postponement of performance without fixing a new date, which the plaintiffs accepted by forbearance. The p…
MANORANJAN DASversusSTATE OF JHARKHAND
2004 INSC 30221 April 2004Appeal(s) allowed
Manoranjan Das, a businessman, introduced Loknath Acharya to a bank for opening a current account. Acharya later presented forged demand drafts and withdrew money, leading the bank to discover the fraud and file a police complaint against Acharya, Das and a bank employee under Sections 420 and 109 of the Indian Penal C…
T.T. HANEEFAversusSTATE OF KERALA
2004 INSC 30321 April 2004Dismissed
The appellant, T.T. Haneefa, was arrested on a public road after police, acting on prior information, suspected him of carrying narcotic drugs. He was informed of his right under Section 50 of the NDPS Act to be searched in the presence of a magistrate or gazetted officer and he declined that option. A search was then …
S. JEEVANANTHAMversusTHE STATE THROUGH INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TN
2004 INSC 30421 April 2004Dismissed
The appellants, Muniyandi and Jeevanantham, were convicted under Sections 8(c) and 20(b)(2) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 for possession of hashish. The investigating officer, a police inspector, received information about drug sales, conducted a search, recovered the narcotic, prepared th…
BASHEER@N.P. BASHEETversusSTATE OF KERALA
2004 INSC 29520 April 2004Dismissed
The appellant was caught selling brown sugar on 23 February 2000; a police search of his shirt pocket yielded six small packets containing 1.2 g of the narcotic. He was convicted under section 21 of the NDPS Act and sentenced to ten years’ imprisonment and a fine. On appeal, he argued that the small quantity should be …
M/S. BRITISH MOTOR CAR CO.versusMADAN LAL SAGGI (D) AND ANR.
2004 INSC 66019 November 2004Dismissed
The petitioner, British Motor Car Co., leased land and a building in Jalandhar in 1967 under a lease that prohibited any additions or alterations. The tenant later erected two permanent sheds in the courtyard without the landlord's consent, obstructing ventilation and reducing the usable area. The landlord filed an evi…
STATE OF PUNJABversusBALKAR SINGH AND ANR.
2004 INSC 17716 March 2004Dismissed
The State of Punjab prosecuted Balkar Singh and Munish Chand under Section 15 of the NDPS Act for alleged conscious possession of 100 bags of poppy husk recovered from a field. The police had found the accused sitting on the bags and seized the material, but no further investigation was made to establish how the bags a…
BALA SEETHARAMAIAHversusPERIKE S. RAO AND ORS.
2004 INSC 17816 March 2004Disposed off
The Sessions Court tried six accused for the murder of Vemulapalli Buddah Prasad, framing charges under Sections 148, 302 and 324 IPC. The High Court set aside the convictions under Section 302, substituting them with convictions under Section 304 Part I for one accused and Section 326 for the others, holding that no c…
HARI RAOversusN. GOVINDACHARI AND ORS.
2005 INSC 42015 September 2005Dismissed
The landlord leased a room in Madras for a shoe/leather goods business, but the tenant also sold readymade garments, fixed sign‑boards, drilled holes for racks and obtained a separate three‑phase electric connection. The landlord sought eviction under Sections 10(2)(ii)(b) and 10(2)(iii) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Le…
MOHINDER KUMARversusSTATE OF HARYANA
2004 INSC 3615 January 2004Disposed off
The prosecution alleged that a batch of Tata iodized salt sold by the appellant, Mohinder Kumar, was deficient in iodine, violating the Food Adulteration Act. The first accused, Naresh Kumar, purchased five packets, which were tested and found to contain only 5 ppm iodine instead of the required 15 ppm, and he claimed …
M/S. GIRNAR TRADERSversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.
2004 INSC 60614 October 2004Matter referred to larger bench
Girnar Traders, a partnership firm, owned land reserved under the Jalgaon Development Plan. After the State Government confirmed the firm's purchase notice, the municipal council failed to acquire the land under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act (M.R.T.P. Act). The State later declared the land required fo…
SATYA NARAIN SHUKLAversusUNION OF LNDIA & ORS.
2006 INSC 31411 May 2006Disposed off
Satya Narain Shukla, an IAS officer of the Uttar Pradesh cadre, challenged his non‑empanelment as Additional Secretary to the Government of India, contending that the Central Staffing Scheme (CSS) was unconstitutional, that its provisions were ultra vires Articles 309 and 312 of the Constitution, that the post constitu…
K.P. SUDHAKARAN AND ANR.versusSTATE OF KERALA AND ORS.
2006 INSC 31511 May 2006Appeal(s) allowed
The case concerned Lower Division Clerks (LDCs) recruited in different districts of Kerala, some of whom were transferred on their own request to another district and placed below the junior‑most local LDCs. The dispute arose over whether the seniority of these transferred LDCs for promotion to Upper Division Clerk (UD…
HARIGOVIND YADAVversusREWA SIDHI GRAMIN BANK & ORS.
2006 INSC 3079 May 2006Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, a clerk‑cum‑cashier of Rewa Sidhi Gramin Bank, challenged the promotion of his juniors, arguing that the bank's promotion policy violated the seniority‑cum‑merit requirement under the Regional Rural Banks (Appointment & Promotion of Officers and other Employees) Rules, 1988. The High Court had earlier qu…
SANJAY KUMAR AND ORS.versusNARINDER VERMA AND ORS.
2006 INSC 3038 May 2006Disposed off
The Jammu & Kashmir Power Development Department recruited Junior Engineers (Electrical) under its 1981 Service Rules, which required either a degree or a diploma and made no distinction between the two at the recruitment stage. Unsuccessful degree‑holder candidates challenged the selection list, but the High Court Sin…
S. NARAYANAversusMD. AHMEDULLA KHAN AND ORS.
2006 INSC 3048 May 2006
S. Narayana, a senior assistant, was promoted and later appointed temporarily as an Extension Officer in the Andhra Pradesh Panchayati Raj Service. His services were regularised in the Extension Officer post, and his lien on the senior assistant post was terminated on the ground that he was not confirmed in that post. …
ALAKH RAMversusSTATE OF U.P.
2004 INSC 268 January 2004Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant Alakh Ram was charged under Sections 8 and 20 of the NDPS Act for allegedly planting ganja in his agricultural field. The police seized 17 ganja plants from the field and the trial court convicted him, imposing three years’ imprisonment, a decision affirmed by the High Court. On appeal, the Supreme Court …
SRIKANTHA S.M.versusM/S. BHARATH EARTH MOVERS LTD.
2005 INSC 4927 October 2005Appeal(s) allowed
Srikanta S.M., a senior manager of Bharath Earth Movers Ltd., submitted a resignation on 4 January 1993 which was accepted the same day, but the company granted him casual leave until 13 January and relieved him on 15 January. He withdrew his resignation by letter on 8 January, seeking to remain in service. The company…
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CHENNAIversusM/S. T.V.S. SUZUKI LTD. HOSUR
2003 INSC 3706 August 2003Dismissed
M/S T.V.S. Suzuki Ltd. filed a refund claim after the final assessment of excise duty. The Assistant Commissioner rejected it on limitation grounds, but the Commissioner of Central Excise reversed the decision, and the CEGAT affirmed the reversal. The Revenue appealed, arguing that a proviso added in 1999 to sub‑rule (…
LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusSMT. S. SINDHU
2006 INSC 2904 May 2006Appeal(s) allowed
The Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) issued a 20‑year life insurance policy to K, who paid premiums for three years before the policy lapsed and later died. LIC paid the statutory paid‑up value of Rs 1,13,750 as per the policy’s non‑forfeiture clause, but the claimant, Smt. S. Sindhu, sought the full sum assur…
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., SHIMLAversusTILAK SINGH AND ORS.
2006 INSC 1994 April 2006Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant insurer had issued a statutory third‑party motor insurance policy for a scooter sold by respondent No.5 to respondent No.1 in March 1989, but no notice of the transfer was given to the insurer. The scooter was involved in an accident on 31 October 1989, after the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 came into force, …
MOHANNANversusPRABHA G. NAIR AND ANR.
2004 INSC 774 February 2004Disposed off
Mohannan filed a criminal complaint before a Judicial Magistrate alleging that Dr. Prabha G. Nair, a gynaecologist, was medically negligent, leading to the death of Mohannan's pregnant wife after delivery of a dead child. The magistrate took cognizance of an offence under Section 304-A of the Indian Penal Code. The doc…
RAJ KUMAR AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.
2006 INSC 94 January 2006Dismissed
The petitioners were Border Security Force (BSF) personnel who, relying on a 1995 government circular, resigned under Rule 19 of the BSF Rules in the hope of receiving pension benefits, although they had not completed the qualifying service required under the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972. After the mist…
BIJOY KUMAR DUGARversusBIDYADHAR DUTT AND ORS.
2006 INSC 1311 March 2006Appeal(s) allowed
The case involved a head‑on collision between a car and a bus in which the car driver, Raj Kumar Dugar, died. His parents claimed compensation from the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT), which awarded a sum based on his present earnings, applied a multiplier, and held both drivers equally liable, directing the ins…