Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

K VENKATASWAMI

125 judgments delivered by benches including this judge.

SMT. MARUA DEI @ MAKU DEI AND ORS.versusMURALIDHAR NANDA AND ORS.

1998 INSC 44630 November 1998Dismissed

The appellants sought a declaration that their family shrine, which originated as samadhis, was a private spiritual institution and not a public temple under the Orissa Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1951. The respondents contended that the shrine had evolved into a public temple where Hindu deities were regularly wor

MUKHTIAR SINGH AND ORS .versusSTATE OF PUNJAB

1995 INSC 81930 November 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The Special Court convicted Mukhtar Singh and several relatives under IPC sections 302 and 201 for the death of Pritam Kaur, relying mainly on the testimony of the deceased's cousin (PW‑3) and alleged extra‑judicial confessions. The Supreme Court examined the reliability of PW‑3, noting his failure to report the incide

UNION OF INDIA AND ANRversusN. CHANDRASEKHARAN AND ORS.

1998 INSC 4829 January 1998

The case concerned the promotion of candidates to the post of Assistant Purchase Officer in ISRO, where selection was based on a written test (50 marks), interview (30 marks) and assessment of confidential reports (20 marks) with a minimum of 50% in each component and 60% overall. Two candidates, dissatisfied with not

VINITA M. KHANOLKARversusPRAGNA M. PAI AND ORS.

1997 INSC 77128 November 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned an appeal to the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court against an order dated 15 November 1994 passed by a Single Judge in a suit for dispossession under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act. The respondents argued that Section 6(3) of the Act barred any appeal or revision against such orders, rend

LIVING MEDIA INDIA LTD. AND ANR. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1998 INSC 40328 October 1998Disposed off

The petitioners, including Living Media India Ltd., challenged Notification No. 49/89 Customs which imposed a 30% ad valorem duty on glazed newsprint imported for news magazines between 1 March 1989 and 24 January 1990. The Union later offered to levy only 15% and to refund any excess, subject to the Customs Act. The p

SRI SAUNUversusCOLLECTOR, LAND ACQUISITION

1996 INSC 95928 August 1996Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered an appeal by Sri Saunu against the Collector’s award of compensation for 221 bighas of land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for the Beas‑Sutlej Link Project. The Land Acquisition Officer had fixed compensation between Rs 2,000 and Rs 5,000 per bigha, which was confirmed by the

SMT. SANTOSH KUMAR! ETC.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

1996 INSC 96028 August 1996Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined an appeal by Santosh Kumar and others against the Punjab & Haryana High Court’s enhancement of compensation for land acquired under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for housing development in Panipat. The Land Acquisition Officer had fixed compensation per acre, which was later

SHARANAPPA BASAPPA DINDAWARversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 96128 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Sharanappa Basappa Dindawar owned 15 acres 6 gunthas in Survey No. 102 and 28 acres 10 gunthas in Survey No. 28/2. By a registered exchange deed dated 18 August 1971 he swapped the 28 acres 10 gunthas for 30 acres 24 gunthas of land in Survey No. 175, increasing his total holding to 45 acres 30 gunthas, still within th

P.G. ESHWARAPPAversusM. RUDRAPPA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 96228 August 1996Dismissed

Mohammed Khan sold a two‑acre parcel of land in Shimoga to P.G. Eshwarappa after the tenant, Channabasappa (father of the respondents), refused to purchase it. Channabasappa sued for declaration of title and possession, obtaining a decree in 1959 that forfeited his tenancy. The appellant took possession in 1967, and th

POSHETTY AND ORS.versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

1996 INSC 96328 August 1996Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered an appeal by Poshetty and others against the State of Andhra Pradesh concerning the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The issue was whether serving a notice of award under Section 11, together with its enclosure, is a pre‑condition under Section 12(2) for the limitation period prescribed in the p

VENKATASWAMAPPAversusTHE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (REVENUE)

1996 INSC 96428 August 1996Dismissed

The appellants challenged the validity of a notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, which sought to acquire 80 acres of land for a house‑building cooperative society. They argued that the notification was mala fide because some of their lands had previously been acquired for public pur

EICHER MOTORS LTD. AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ETC.

1999 INSC 2628 January 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, manufacturers including Eicher Motors Ltd., challenged Rule 57F(4A) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 which mandated that MODVAT credit unutilised as on 16 March 1995 would lapse. They argued that the credit represented a vested right under the existing law and that Section 37 of the Central Excise Act

M/S JK SYNTHETICS AND ANR. ETC.versusCOMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER AND ANR

1997 INSC 6928 January 1997Disposed off

J.K. Synthtics Ltd., a manufacturer of tyre‑cord fabric, claimed exemption from sales tax under a 1957 notification issued under Section 8(5) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The State of Rajasthan later issued notifications in 1980 and 1981, the latter stating that "all the notifications" issued under Section 8(5)

COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, GUNTURversusM/S ARUNA STRAW BOARDS (P) LTD.

1999 INSC 36127 August 1999Dismissed

The respondents, M/s Aruna Straw Boards Ltd., manufactured single‑ply straw boards, a portion of which was cleared on payment of excise duty and the remainder was used in‑factory to produce multiple‑ply straw boards that were also cleared on duty. The Revenue issued a show‑cause notice alleging that duty should be levi

GOVT. OF INDIA AND ORS.versusCOURT LIQUIDATORS EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION AND ORS.

1999 INSC 36227 August 1999Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the claim of Company Paid Staff employed in the offices of the Official Liquidator and Court Liquidator across several High Courts, who had served for 10‑25 years on low pay without permanent status or retirement benefits. They filed writ petitions seeking to be regularised as Central Governm

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusDR. AKHILESH CHANDRA AGRAWAL

1998 INSC 11727 February 1998Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, originally appointed as ad hoc Group 'B' doctors under the Central Health Service Rules, 1963, were later regularised as Group 'A' doctors by the Supreme Court, with the direction that their promotions would be to supernumerary posts only. Directly recruited doctors (respondents) contended that only the

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusK.V. VIJEESH

1996 INSC 31727 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, K.V. Vijeesh, was placed at rank 172 in the select list for Diesel Assistant vacancies of the Southern Railways but was not appointed while lower‑ranked candidates were. He approached the Central Administrative Tribunal, which directed the Railways to consider him for any existing or future vacancy. The

SOLAPUR MIDC INDUSTRIES ASSOCIATION ETC.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 79526 July 1996Dismissed

The Solapur MIDC Industries Association filed Special Leave Petitions challenging a notification under Section 3(3) of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949 that brought their industrial estate within the limits of Solapur Municipal Corporation. The petitioners argued that the same industrial area was s

M/S. KASHMIR ELECTRIC AND HARDWARE CORPORATIONversusSTATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR

1996 INSC 79626 July 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Mis. Kashmir Electric and Hardware Corporation appealed against a decision of the Letters Patent Bench that held an arbitrator had misbehaved by conducting hearings in premises owned by the appellant and accepting tea and refreshments from them. The appellant argued that such courtesies were extended equally to both pa

H.M. KELOGIRAO AND ORS., ETCversusGOVERNMENT OF A.P. AND ORS.

1997 INSC 67024 September 1997Dismissed

The Government of Andhra Pradesh, at the request of the State Road Transport Corporation, acquired 9.87 cents of land in Anantapur for a bus stand under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, publishing a Section 4(1) notification and invoking emergency provisions. Earlier writ petitions had quashed the original notification

HAFIZ WASHI AHMEDversusKUTUBUDDIN AND ORS.

1996 INSC 109924 September 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Hafiz Washi Ahmed filed a suit for injunction to protect his possession of a portion of land and a structure, claiming exclusive title based on an alleged gift, while the land was partly declared evacuee property. The trial court held that the factual question of whether the disputed portion was part of the evacuee pro

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusSWAROPCHANDRA

1996 INSC 110024 September 1996Dismissed

The truck bearing No. 9493 was seized by a Divisional Forest Officer for carrying 22 logs of timber without a permit under the Madhya Pradesh Ven Upaj Vyapar Viniyaman Act, 1969. The driver compounded the offence by paying Rs.1,000, but the truck was not released because its value was not paid, leading to its confiscat

JAGANNATH KASHINATH PATILversusNARAYAN BALUGAIKAR

1996 INSC 110124 September 1996Dismissed

The respondent filed a suit to remove a structure erected by the appellant and to restrain interference with his possession of a 50 ft x 30 ft plot. The plot originally belonged to the respondent's maternal grandmother, who had executed a possessory mortgage in favor of Pukharaj, who later returned the mortgage deed an

STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR.versusUPPEGOUDA AND ORS. ETC.

1996 INSC 110224 September 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State appealed against a Karnataka High Court order that denied registration of occupancy to a tenant, Puppegouda, who had been in possession of 2 acres 30 gunthas of land since 1950 under successive lease renewals. The Karnataka Tenancy Act, 1961 protected his possession, and the Land Reforms (Amendment) Act, 1974

CHATTAR SINGH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

1996 INSC 110324 September 1996Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a challenge by OBC candidates to the proviso of Rule 13 of the Rajasthan State and Subordinate Services (Direct Recruitment by Combined Competitive Examinations) Rules, 1962, which allowed a 5% relaxation in preliminary‑exam cut‑off marks for Scheduled Caste (SC) and Scheduled Tribe (ST) cand

USHA AHUJAversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

1999 INSC 35124 August 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a partner in a firm, filed a criminal complaint alleging offences under Sections 405, 406 and 408 IPC against two former partners. A civil suit for dissolution of the partnership and accounts was simultaneously pending. The respondents moved the Punjab & Haryana High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C

SURENDRA NARAIN SINGH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

1998 INSC 19724 April 1998Dismissed

The case concerned the inter‑se seniority of Munsifs appointed under two different recruitment regimes in Bihar – the 15th Judicial Service Examination governed by the Bihar Judicial Service (Recruitment) Rules, 1955 and the ad‑hoc recruitment under the Bihar Civil Service (Judicial Branch) Rules, 1974. Thirty‑two resp

M/S. MODERN TAILORING HALL ETC.versusSHRI H.S. VENKUSA AND ORS.

1997 INSC 43324 April 1997Dismissed

The landlord sought eviction of tenants under the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1986, claiming a bona‑fide requirement for his own occupation after demolishing and reconstructing the premises. The tenants argued that the landlord’s claim should fall under Section 21(1)(j), which provides a right of re‑entry to the tenant

JANATA DAL (SAMAJWADI)versusTHE ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF INDIA

1995 INSC 77423 November 1995Dismissed

Janata Dal (Samajwadi) was recognised as a national party on 16 April 1991. After the Lok Sabha and several state assembly elections held between April and June 1991, the Election Commission found that the party no longer satisfied the criteria in paragraph 6(2) of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order

R. GANDHIversusU.0.I. AND ANR.

1999 INSC 34923 August 1999Dismissed

The appellant challenged the Government's Office Memorandum dated 22 August 1990 which changed the period for restoration of a commuted pension from "date of retirement" to "date of commutation". The appellant argued that the Supreme Court in Common Cause v. Union of India had fixed the 15‑year period from the date of

A.G. VARADARAJULU AND ANR.versusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS.

1998 INSC 15023 March 1998Dismissed

The appellants sought to exclude 36.74 acres allotted to the wife under a 1970 partition deed from the husband's land ceiling computation, claiming it was "Stridhana land" under the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling on Land) Act, 1961. The dispute centered on whether Section 21A's non‑obstante clause overrod

DHAN RAJ AND ORS.versusSTATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND ORS.

1998 INSC 15123 March 1998Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, former drivers and conductors of the Jammu & Kashmir State Road Transport Corporation, served for 30‑40 years as temporary employees and retired before 9 June 1981. A 1981 notification amended Article 177 of the J&K Civil Service Regulations to grant pension to temporary servants with at least 20 years

MRS. JUDITH FERNANDES AND ORS.versusCONCEICAO ANTONIO FERNANDESE AND ANR,

1996 INSC 92422 August 1996Dismissed

Mrs. Judith Fernandes and others leased land containing coconut trees to Conceicao Antonio Fernandes and others for six years. After the lease expired, the plaintiffs filed an eviction suit on 10 October 1973, before the Fifth Amendment to the Goa, Daman and Diu Agricultural Tenancy Act, 1964 came into force. The amend

SMT. SHANTI DEVI AND ANR.versusHUKUM CHAND

1996 INSC 92522 August 1996Dismissed

The land in dispute was transferred to the appellant in 1980, after which the respondent filed a suit for pre-emption that was decreed on 27 August 1983. The decree was affirmed by the court of appeal and a second appeal was dismissed by the High Court on 5 April 1984, making the decree final. When the respondent sough

BRIJ RAJ SINGH (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ORS.versusSEWAK RAM AND ANR.

1999 INSC 19722 April 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff, legal representatives of the deceased Brij Raj Singh, sued the defendants for possession of land on the basis of a registered gift deed dated 18‑Jan‑1961, executed by the donor Kanwar Chander Raj Saran Singh and presented for registration by a duly authorised attorney. The trial court held the deed valid

MOHD. ASLAMversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 42422 March 1996Dismissed

Mohd. Aslam filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking reconsideration of the Supreme Court's judgment in Manohar Joshi v. Nitin Bhaurao Patil, alleging it was incorrect. The Court held that Article 32 cannot be invoked to challenge the correctness of a decision on its merits or to obtain its reconsideration. It fu

ALL INDIA FEDERATION OF CENTRAL EXCISEversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1999 INSC 7522 February 1999Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the interpretation of the 6:1:2 quota rule for promotion to Group A posts in the Indian Customs and Central Excise Service, which allocates vacancies among three feeder categories. Petitioners argued that the ratio must be maintained at all times and that vacancies created by retirement of a

THE STATE OF PUNJABversusBALDEV SINGH

1999 INSC 28221 July 1999Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a batch of appeals concerning searches under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. It held that an empowered officer must inform a suspect of his right to be searched before a Gazetted Officer or Magistrate, and that this duty is imperative, not merely directory. Failure t

C. RANGASWAMAIAH AND ORS.versusKARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA AND ORS.

1998 INSC 26621 July 1998Dismissed

The Karnataka State Government deputed police officers to the Lokayukta and created the post of Director General of Police, Lokayukta by administrative order without amending the recruitment rules. Petitioners, who were under investigation, challenged the validity of investigations conducted by these deputed officers u

ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER (LEGAL) AND ANR.versusM/S JYOTI TRADERS AND ANR. ETC.

1998 INSC 43820 November 1998Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether a sales‑tax assessment for the year 1985‑86, completed before the expiry of the four‑year limitation under Section 21(2) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, could be reopened after the legislature enlarged the limitation to eight years by inserting a proviso in the 1991 amendment. The Court he

M/S. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.versusSMT. JIKUBHAI NATHUJI DABHI AND ORS.

1996 INSC 134620 November 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Mis. National Insurance Co. Ltd., sought to deny liability for an accident that occurred on 25 October 1983 at 11:14 a.m. The motor insurance policy had a renewal premium due on 14 October 1983, which was paid late on 25 October 1983 at 4:00 p.m. The policy expressly stated that coverage was suspended fr

M/S SANT RAM AND COMPANYversusTHE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

1996 INSC 134720 November 1996Dismissed

The appellant, a contractor, entered into a contract with the State of Rajasthan for bridge widening works. A dispute arose and, by mutual agreement, the matter was referred to an arbitrator. While arbitration was pending, the respondent attempted to adjust amounts due to the appellant against another contract. The app

NARAYAN DATTATRAYA RAMTEERTHAKHARversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 134820 November 1996Dismissed

The petitioner, a government servant, was found to have misappropriated Rs. 1,440 deducted from employees and only deposited it after being compelled in 1985. An enquiry officer held him guilty of misconduct, leading the disciplinary authority to remove him from service. The petitioner challenged the removal, alleging

DEPOT MANAGER, ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATIONversusMOHD. YOUSUF MIYA ETC.

1996 INSC 134920 November 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Depot Manager of Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation initiated disciplinary proceedings against driver Mohd Yousuf Miya under Regulation 28(ix) of the Employees Conduct Rules, 1963 after a fatal accident caused by his alleged failure to anticipate the incident. Simultaneously, the driver faced criminal

BISHUNDEO NARAIN RAI (DEAD) BY LRS.versusANMOL DEVI AND ORS.

1998 INSC 31720 August 1998Case Allowed

The plaintiffs (first purchasers) bought land from the vendors under a registered sale deed dated 30 April 1963 for Rs.15,000, part of which was to be kept in deposit for a mortgage. The vendors later cancelled this deed and executed a second sale deed in favour of other buyers, alleging that the plaintiffs had not pai

P.K. RAMACHANDRANversusSTATE OF KERALA AND ANR.

1997 INSC 66519 September 1997Dismissed

The State of Kerala filed a Miscellaneous First Appeal against a Sub‑Court decree in an arbitration matter, but the appeal was filed 565 days after the limitation period expired. The High Court, despite the respondent’s strong opposition, condoned the delay without recording any satisfaction that the explanation offere

DELHI CLOTH AND GENERAL MILLS CO. LTD. AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

1996 INSC 108219 September 1996Dismissed

Delhi Cloth and General Mills Co. Ltd. imported tyre‑cord grade wood pulp from the United States and were required to pay additional duty under Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act. The company contended that because wood pulp is not produced in India, the additional duty should be calculated on the excise duty applicab

SH. S.R. MURTHYversusTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.

1999 INSC 34219 August 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a senior general‑category employee, was passed over for promotion to the single post of Head of Section (Ceramics) in a government polytechnic, where a junior Scheduled Caste employee was appointed on the basis of a reservation roster. The Karnataka Administrative Tribunal upheld the appointment, holding

CHHIDDA SINGHversusDY. DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION AND ORS.

1998 INSC 10419 February 1998Dismissed

The petitioner, Chhidda Singh, filed a review petition (No. 315 of 1998) after the Supreme Court dismissed his Special Leave Petition (C) No. 6347 of 1997, which challenged orders of the Deputy Director of Consolidation and the High Court. The review petition merely reproduced verbatim the same grounds that had been ra

SMT. JAYA DEVIversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

1996 INSC 10519 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Smt. Jaya Devi, an assistant teacher, was terminated by the Bihar Directorate of Education in 1990 and successfully obtained reinstatement through a writ petition before the Patna High Court. In a later, unrelated writ petition filed by another teacher, the same High Court judge, believing his earlier order to be erron

TRIPURA GOODS TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION AND ANR.versusCOMMISSIONER OF TAXES AND ORS.

1998 INSC 48718 December 1998Dismissed

The Tripura Goods Transport Association, a body of transporters, challenged the constitutional validity of several provisions of the Tripura Sales Tax Act, 1976 and its 1994 amendment rules that required transporters to maintain accounts, file Form XXIV and obtain a Certificate of Registration. The association argued t

MRS. HELEN C. REBELLO AND ORS.versusMAHARASHTRA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND ANR.

1998 INSC 37218 September 1998Appeal(s) allowed

The husband of Mrs. Helen C. Rebello died in a collision between a Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation bus and a Karnataka State Transport bus, the accident being caused by negligent driving. The legal heirs filed a claim for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 and were awarded Rs.3,90,000 by the t

MOHAN KARANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANR.

1998 INSC 14418 March 1998Dismissed

Mohan Karan, an Assistant Architect who was promoted to Executive Officer (RBO) on 7 February 1983, challenged the promotion of the second respondent to Chief Town Planner on the ground that he was senior in the feeding cadre. The High Court dismissed the writ, holding that the appellant's post was not a cadre post und

LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIAversusSHIVA PRASAD TRIPATHI AND ORS.

1996 INSC 9618 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Shiva Prasad Tripathi, a former employee of Life Insurance Corporation of India, was allotted corporation premises which he was required to vacate after his service ended. He refused to leave, prompting the Estate Officer to issue a notice and subsequently an eviction order under Section 7 of the Public Premises (Evict

JAVED ABIDIversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1998 INSC 48517 December 1998Case Allowed

The Supreme Court entertained a writ petition under Article 32 filed by Javed Abidi seeking full implementation of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995. The petitioner demanded that Indian Airlines provide aisle chairs, ambulifts, and a 50% fare conc

STATE OF M.P. AND ORS.versusR.N. MISHRA AND ANR.

1997 INSC 66117 September 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a Forest Range Officer, was alleged to have committed misconduct and a preliminary inquiry was launched in 1976. While the inquiry was pending, he was promoted to Assistant Conservator of Forest in 1977. After the inquiry concluded, the State Government penalised him by withholding two salary increments

RAMESHWAR PRASADversusMANAGING DIRECTOR U.P. RAJKIYA NIRMAN NIGAM LTD. AND ORS.

1999 INSC 41516 September 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a civil engineer appointed in U.P. Small Industries Corporation, was deputed to U.P. Rajkiya Nirman Nigam Ltd. (the Nigam) in 1985 and completed five years of deputation in November 1990. He exercised his option for permanent absorption in 1987, but the Nigam neither repatriated him nor issued an absorpt

C. SAMPATH KUMARversusTHE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE, MADRAS

1997 INSC 65916 September 1997Dismissed

The appellant was served a summons under Section 40 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, requiring him to appear before the Enforcement Officer and give a written, signed statement. He challenged the summons, contending that he could not be compelled to provide a written statement, alleging that the process am

TUKARAM RAMCHANDRA MANE (DEAD) BY LRS.versusRAJARAM BAPU LAKULE (DEAD) BY LRS.

1998 INSC 18216 April 1998Dismissed

The appellant, the creditor, claimed that a regular sale deed executed by the debtor was revived after the Insolvency Court annulled its earlier adjudication, thereby extinguishing the debtor‑creditor relationship under the Maharashtra Debt Relief Act, 1975. The debtor‑creditor relationship originated from a deed of mo

RADHEY SHYAM GUPTAversusU.P. STATE AGRO INDUSTRIES CORPORATION LTD. AND ANR.

1998 INSC 48115 December 1998Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a temporary Branch Manager of U.P. State Agro Industries Corp., was accused of taking a Rs.2000 bribe. An enquiry officer examined witnesses, recorded statements and concluded that the appellant had taken the money, recommending termination. A simple termination order was issued the next day without a ch

STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.versusMINISTERIAL KARAMCHARI SANGH

1997 INSC 69315 October 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned a dispute over pay‑scale discrimination between ministerial employees of the Uttar Pradesh Directorate of Information and those of the State Secretariat. A 1964 Pay Rationalisation Committee recommended that, from 1‑April‑1965, new appointments in the Information Directorate be placed on a lower cler

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.versusSMT. SHEELA RANI AND ORS.

1998 INSC 36215 September 1998Dismissed

A Fiat car was sold and the transferee informed New India Assurance Co. Ltd. of the transfer by letters that did not follow the prescribed form under Section 103-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. The insurer gave no reply. The car later met with an accident, and the victims claimed compensation from the insurer. The i

KANNAN AND ANR.versusTAMIL TALIR KALVI KAZHAGAM

1998 INSC 24515 May 1998Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, tenants of premises owned by Tamil Thalir Kalvi Kazhagam, faced an internal dispute between two claimants to the landlord's title after a change of president. Fearing liability, they applied under Section 9(3) of the Pondicherry Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1969, to deposit rent with the Rent

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusSHRI RAM GOPAL AGARWAL AND ORS.

1998 INSC 2715 January 1998Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners (Union of India and others) challenged a tribunal order that directed payment of 50% of the ration allowance to non‑gazetted, non‑combatant hospital staff of the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) who had not opted for combatant status. These staff were governed by the Central Civil Services Rules, whe

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusBINOD BIHARI BEHERA

1995 INSC 72814 November 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a Sub‑Inspector of the Central Industrial Security Force, tendered his resignation which was accepted by the Deputy Inspector‑General (DIG) on 17 October 1984. He later sought to withdraw the resignation and asked for re‑enlistment, but both requests were rejected by the DIG. The High Court held that th

BINA MURLIDHAR HEMDEV AND ORS.versusKANHAIYALAL LAKRAM HEMDEV AND ORS.

1999 INSC 25714 May 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The widowed wife and children of the deceased Murlidhar Hemdev claimed a right to specific plots in a Thane development, alleging that a registered rectification deed admitted their title and that a release deed dated 27‑03‑1979 was forged. The builder, having obtained sale agreements from various partners, argued he w

GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKAversusC. DINAKAR AND ORS.

1999 INSC 25914 May 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the promotion and appointment of the fourth respondent as Director General and Inspector General of Police (DG & IGP) by a Karnataka Government notification dated 6 March 1997. The first respondent, an IPS officer, challenged the appointment alleging that the selection process was arbitrary, ignored

ARUN VYAS AND ANR.versusANITA VYAS

1999 INSC 26014 May 1999Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether a magistrate could discharge accused persons after taking cognizance of offences under Sections 406 and 498‑A IPC when the complaint was filed beyond the statutory limitation period. The magistrate correctly discharged the accused on the Section 406 charge because the complaint was ba

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusANIL KUMAR AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

1999 INSC 27113 July 1999Dismissed

The case concerned the classification of pay scales and inter‑se seniority of Senior Scientific Assistants, Assistant Foremen and Chief Draughtsmen in the DRDO after the 1995 Technical Cadre Recruitment Rules created two pay grades for Senior Scientific Assistants based on an arbitration award. The Senior Scientific As

SHREENATH AND ANR.versusRAJESH AND ORS.

1998 INSC 17613 April 1998Appeal(s) allowed

Shreenath and others, who were tenants of a mortgaged property, opposed the execution of a decree for vacant possession granted to Rajesh, the mortgagee, by filing an objection under Order 21 Rule 97 of the Code of Civil Procedure, claiming an independent right in the premises. The executing court dismissed the objecti

RAM JANAMversusRADHAKRISHNA CHAUBE AND ORS.

1996 INSC 38013 March 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Ramjanam filed a suit under Sections 59 and 61 of the Uttar Pradesh Tenancy Act, 1939, claiming hereditary tenancy rights after possessing the land for more than 50 years. The trial court and the appellate court held that he was a tenant and had acquired title by adverse possession, but the Allahabad High Court set asi

M/S. SOUTH EAST ASIA SHIPPING CO. LTD.versusM/S. NAV BHARAT ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD. AND ORS.

1996 INSC 38113 March 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff, M/s South East Asia Shipping Co. Ltd., filed a suit in the Delhi High Court seeking a perpetual injunction against the enforcement of a bank guarantee dated 16 July 1977. The underlying contract was executed in Bombay and required performance (transport of livestock) to be carried out in Bombay. The defe

VIJAY KUMAR SHROTRIYAversusSTATE OF U.P AND ORS.

1998 INSC 9313 February 1998Appeal(s) allowed

V.K. Shrotri was appointed ad hoc as Assistant Engineer in the Uttar Pradesh Irrigation Department in 1962 and was selected in a combined examination for the Public Works Department (PWD) the same year. Although allocated to the PWD, he was not relieved from the Irrigation Department and continued there until he finall

RAMESHWAR SWARUP (DEAD) BY LRS.versusSMT. SAROJ TYAGI AND ORS.

1998 INSC 39412 October 1998Appeal(s) allowed

The vendors sold a bungalow in the Meerut cantonment to the vendee, with the agreement stipulating that the vendee must obtain permission from the Military Estate Officer (MEO) for the transfer. Clause 5 provided that if such permission were not granted, the vendee could be released from the contract and recover the ea

SH. BAKSHISH SINGH (DEAD) BY LRS.versusARJAN SINGH AND ORS.

1996 INSC 36912 March 1996Dismissed

A suit for dissolution of a partnership and rendition of accounts was filed by one partner against the other partners of the Modern Ice Factory. The trial court dismissed the suit, and the first appeal was also dismissed. While the second appeal was pending, two of the partners died and their legal representatives were

GURNAM SINGH AND ORS.versusTHE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER (CIVIL), KAITHAL AND ORS.

1996 INSC 37012 March 1996Dismissed

The appellants had occupied certain Shamlat Deh lands as tenants for about twenty years before 1975, after which their lease expired and no new lease was granted. The lands are vested in the Gram Panchayat. The Assistant Collector, invoking Section 7 of the Punjab Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 and Rules 19 and 20

SMT. AMBEY DEVIversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ANR.

1996 INSC 37112 March 1996Dismissed

The State of Bihar acquired 25 acres of land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and awarded compensation equally to four co‑owners, each receiving a one‑fourth share. One co‑owner filed a reference under Section 18 of the Act, leading the civil court to enhance his compensation. The appellant, another co‑owner, did n

RAM PIARI AND ANR. ETC.versusLAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR, SOLAN AND ORS. ETC.

1996 INSC 37212 March 1996Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined appeals by landowners against a Himachal Pradesh High Court order that reduced compensation for lands acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Collector had originally offered compensation of Rs 14,195 per bigha for Kuhal land and Rs 9,425 per bigha for Katuhal land, while the High

A. MAHUDESWARAN AND ORS.versusGOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS.

1996 INSC 37312 March 1996Appeal(s) allowed

After the abolition of the Village Officer post in 1982, about 2,000 Section Writers were trained and appointed as Surveyor‑cum‑Draftsman in the Survey and Settlement Department on a contract basis, later regularised with regular pay‑scales and promotions. The Government later issued a clarification directing that thei

MANOHAR JOSHIversusNITIN BHAURAO PATIL AND ANR.

1995 INSC 86911 December 1995Appeal(s) allowed

Manohar Joshi, the BJP‑Shiv Sena candidate, was elected from Dadar in 1990. Bhaurao Patil filed an election petition alleging corrupt practices under sections 123(3) and 123(3A) of the Representation of the People Act, relying on Joshi's speeches, those of party leaders and audio‑video cassettes. The Bombay High Court

CHANDRAKANTA GOYALversusSOHAN SINGH JODH SINGH KOHLI

1995 INSC 87311 December 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, ChandraKanta Goyal, a BJP candidate, was declared elected to the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly from Matunga in 1990. The respondent, S.S.J.S. Kohli of Janata Dal, filed an election petition alleging that the appellant committed corrupt practices under Sections 123(3) and 123(3A) of the Representation

M/S. GUJARAT MACHINERY MANUFACTURERS LTD.versusCOLLECTOR, CENTRAL EXCISE, BARODA.

1996 INSC 103911 September 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent transferee-company sought sanction of a scheme of amalgamation with the transferor-company. The appellant, a shareholder, objected on grounds of non-disclosure of director's interest, unfairness to minority, and unfair exchange ratio. The High Court sanctioned the scheme, and the Division Bench confirmed

R.C. SAHI AND ORS. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1998 INSC 41810 November 1998Dismissed

The petitioners, former Emergency Commissioned Officers (ECOs) in the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), challenged the seniority list prepared by the Union of India, alleging that the list improperly accounted for their past Army service. The Court examined whether the 1967 Rules on ECOs applied to seniority matters

P.K. GHOSH, I.AS. AND ANR.versusJ.G. RAJPUT

1995 INSC 71310 November 1995Appeal(s) allowed

J.G. Rajput, an employee of Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation, challenged his suspension in the Gujarat High Court, where he was initially represented by advocate B.J. Shethna. After Shethna was elevated to the bench, Rajput faced a later charge‑sheet for theft and filed a contempt petition alleging the corporation’s con

JINDA RAM (DEAD) BY LRS.versusRAM PRAKASH AND ANR.

1995 INSC 71410 November 1995Appeal(s) allowed

Jinda Ram, a co‑sharer and tenant, filed a suit under Section 15(b) of the Punjab Pre‑emption Act, 1913 seeking to pre‑empt agricultural land that had been sold. The trial court recognized his co‑sharer status and granted partial relief, but the first appellate court dismissed the suit. The Punjab & Haryana High Court

LIEWELLYN FURTADO AND ORS.versusGOVERNMENT OF GOA AND ORS.

1997 INSC 64910 September 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners challenged a land acquisition on the ground that the declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was made after the one‑year limitation period prescribed by Section 4, and that an unreasonable gap between the initial and gazette notifications, coupled with the invocation of emergency p

M/S. RANADEY MICRONUTRIENTS ETC.versusCOLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE

1996 INSC 102810 September 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, manufacturers of micronutrients, challenged the classification of their products for excise duty. An earlier Board circular (June 1990) classified micronutrients as "plant growth regulators" under heading 38.08, while a later circular (November 1994) re‑classified them as "other fertilisers" under headi

NAZIM ALI AND ORS.versusANJUMAN ISLAMIA CHHATARPUR AND ORS.

1999 INSC 5210 February 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants' ancestors obtained a decree in 1960 declaring them owners of the land known as 'Badi Takia' and that the mosque on it was wakf property. The High Court later held the entire property was wakf, relying on a 1953 agreement, and reversed the earlier decree. In a subsequent suit, the respondents sought a de

CHINMOY MOULIK AND ORS.versusDAMODAR VALLEY CORPORATION AND ORS.

1998 INSC 7710 February 1998Dismissed

Damodar Valley Corporation (DVC) recruited both science graduates and engineering diploma holders as Assistant Operators/Operators between 1969 and 1977. Later DVC decided to upgrade all existing diploma engineers to the rank of Assistant Controller and to create a separate Sub‑ordinate Engineering Service Cadre for th

STATE OF ORISSA ETC.versusS.K. AGARWALLA ETC

1999 INSC 1648 April 1999Matter referred to larger bench

The Supreme Court heard Civil Appeals No. 710-711 of 1991 filed by the State of Orissa and others against S.K. Agarwala and others, concerning an arbitrator's award of interest for the pre‑reference period. The core issue was whether the arbitrator could award such interest. The Court noted that this question had alrea

G. GOVINDANversusNEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ORS.

1999 INSC 1658 April 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant purchased a bus from the fourth respondent but neither party gave the insurer the notice required under Section 103A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. After the bus met with an accident, two third parties claimed compensation. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal held the insurer liable because it had contin

STATE THROUGH CBIversusMOHD. ASHRAFT BHAT AND ANR.

1995 INSC 8537 December 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, Ashraf Bhat, was arrested under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 in connection with two FIRs. In FIR No. 56 of 1991 he was arrested on 17‑April‑1992, but the prosecution filed the police report (challan) on 23‑December‑1992, after the one‑year period prescribed under the Ac

V. L. PATILversusARJUN HALAPPA NAIKAWAD! AND ORS.

1996 INSC 8377 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether the Karnataka High Court was justified in criticizing the appellant, V.L. Patil, for allegedly using his ministerial position to influence a land tribunal's decision. The High Court had linked Patil's role as a minister to the tribunal's order, despite finding no direct or circumstant

M/S. B.R. ENTERPRISES ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

1999 INSC 2307 May 1999Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of the Lotteries (Regulation) Act, 1998, particularly Section 5 which allows a State to prohibit the sale of lottery tickets organised by any other State. The Court held that State‑run lotteries remain gambling and cannot be classified as ‘trade’ within the meaning

NAVANEETHAMMALversusARJUNA CHETTY

1998 INSC 3496 September 1998Appeal(s) allowed

Navaneethammal, the plaintiff, purchased land and sued Arjuna Chetty, the tenant, for declaration of title and recovery of possession. The tenant claimed he had surrendered the lease, re‑entered the land and acquired title by adverse possession, contending that the suit was barred by Article 139 of the Limitation Act.

LIPTON INDIA LTD. ETC.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

1996 INSC 8286 August 1996Disposed off

Lipton India Ltd. and Brook Bond India Ltd., tea companies, maintained godowns in 1968 where a single salesman opened and closed the premises, loading tea onto a manually‑operated push‑cart for door‑to‑door sales. They sought clarification on whether such premises required registration under Section 7 of the Bombay Sho

LAXMAPPA AND ORS.versusSMT. BALAWA KOM TIRKAPPA CHAVDI

1996 INSC 8296 August 1996Dismissed

The widow, a destitute and widowed daughter, adopted her brother as her son with her father's consent. The father and the adopted son jointly gifted her agricultural land in 1950, stipulating that the land would revert to them (or their heirs) upon her death. After the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 came into force, the wi

SHRI KANWAR PAL AND ORS.versusGAON SABHA KIRARI AND ORS.

1996 INSC 8306 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Gaon Sabha of Kirari Suleman Nagar complained that a co‑sharer, Narender Singh, had converted agricultural land to non‑agricultural use, violating Section 81 of the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954. A notice was served on Singh to restore the land to agricultural use within three months or face ejectment and vesting of

SRI RAM NIWAS TOD! AND ANR.versusBIBI JABRUNNISSA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 8316 August 1996Dismissed

The appellants challenged the validity of a gift of a house and its appurtenant land made by the father‑in‑law to the respondent, who was already in possession of the property. The gift was evidenced by an oral declaration and a written deed that had not been registered. The trial court and the High Court held that the

NATIONAL ORGANIC CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES LTD.versusCOLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, BOMBAY

1997 INSC 16 January 1997Appeal(s) allowed

National Organic Chemical Industries Ltd., a recognised refinery, manufactured ethylene, butylene and propylene and claimed that these products fell under Item 11‑AA(2) of the Central Excise Tariff, thereby qualifying for an exemption notification of 21‑December‑1967. The Revenue, relying on a 24‑Nov‑1984 Trade Notice,

BEHARILAL AND ANR.versusSMT. BHURI DEVI AND ORS.

1996 INSC 14395 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Rajasthan Government’s Mandi Committee allotted two plots to Beharilal in 1953, issued a patta and delivered possession in 1954. After the patta was cancelled in 1956, the same plots were re‑allotted to Ram Gopal (husband of Bhuri Devi) and possession was handed over to him. Criminal proceedings under S. 145 Cr.P.C

SMT. PRITAM KAURversusDY. SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS AND ORS.

1996 INSC 14405 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents, sons of a West‑Pakistani resident who migrated to India in 1947, filed an application on 19 December 1955 under Section 4 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 seeking rehabilitation compensation for land in Pakistan. The authorities verified the claim and allotted land b

P. RAMA RAOversusP. NIRMALA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 14415 December 1996Dismissed

The petitioner, a contractor for Indian Oil, hired the respondent truck owner to transport 12,000 litres of oil. An accident caused a leak and only 1,755 litres were delivered, leading the petitioner to sue the truck owner and the insurer, Oriental Fire & General Insurance Co., for the shortfall. The trial court decree

PREETI MITTAL ETC. ETC.versusGAGANJOT KAUR SAIRA AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

1999 INSC 1565 April 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned admission to the MBBS course at Government Medical College, Chandigarh for 1998‑99, where 85% of seats were reserved for the Chandigarh pool and 15% for the All India pool. The petitioners challenged the administration’s method of first filling the Chandigarh pool and then the All India pool, arguing

NARESH KUMARI (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ANOTHERversusSHAKSHI LAL (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ANOTHER

1999 INSC 465 February 1999Dismissed

The appellant, Naresh Kumari, bought a house from Kesri, the widow of Radhakishan, in 1954. The respondents, reversioners of Radhakishan, argued that the widow had only a limited right in the property before the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 and could sell only for legal necessity, rendering the sale void. The trial court

INDIRA SAWHNEYversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 12734 November 1996Disposed off

The Supreme Court revisited the implementation of its earlier Mandal judgment, which required the exclusion of socially advanced persons (the "creamy layer") from reservations for Other Backward Classes (OBCs). The State of Kerala had repeatedly failed to comply with the Court's directions despite multiple extensions,

BALKRISHNA RAMCHANDRA KADAMversusSANGEETA BALKRISHNA KADAM

1997 INSC 6414 September 1997Disposed off

The husband and wife married and later the wife sought judicial separation, maintenance and relief under Section 27 of the Hindu Marriage Act for jewellery and other property she claimed were given at or about the time of marriage. The husband filed for divorce on grounds of cruelty, which was eventually granted, while

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusBIJOY LAL GHOSH AND ORS.

1998 INSC 1304 March 1998Dismissed

The respondents were primary school teachers employed under the Dandakaranya Development Project (DDP) of the Ministry of Home Affairs until the schools were handed over to the states on 1 April 1986, after which they were placed on the Central Surplus Staff Cell and later redeployed in non‑teaching posts. They claimed

VIJAY SINGH DEORA ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANR. ETC. ETC.

1996 INSC 11403 October 1996Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the method for fixing inter se seniority among three categories of officers (Group A, B and C) in the Rajasthan Engineering Subordinate Service (Irrigation Branch) for promotion to Assistant Engineer. Group A officers were temporarily appointed before 30 June 1978, while Group B and C officer

NISHANT PURIversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND ORS.

1998 INSC 4552 December 1998Dismissed

Nishant Puri, a resident of Himachal Pradesh, applied for admission to the MBBS programme under the Himachal Pradesh University prospectus. Clause (iii) of the prospectus exempts wards of defence personnel or serving Central Government employees who are bona fide Himachalis from the requirement of passing two examinati

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusSHRI RAMESH KUMAR

1997 INSC 6322 September 1997Appeal(s) allowed

Shri Ramesh Kumar, a government inspector, was arrested and convicted under Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 for accepting illegal gratification. The disciplinary authority dismissed him under Rule 19 of the Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1965 and the Vigilance Manual without a detailed e

THE STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.versusSURESH CHANDRA MUKHERJEE

1996 INSC 6152 May 1996Disposed off

The State of Bihar appointed retired Patna High Court Judge Suresh Chandra Mukherjee as Presiding Officer of an Industrial Tribunal, but failed to honor the re‑employment conditions stipulated in the notification. Mukherjee filed a writ petition in the Patna High Court seeking enforcement of those benefits, and the Hig

SAIYAD MOHAMMAD BAKER EL-EDROOS (DEAD) BY LRS.versusABDULHABIB HASAN ARAB AND ORS.

1998 INSC 1702 April 1998Dismissed

The case concerned applications under Section 50A of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 for settling the scheme of a public trust. One of the original applicants died and, after a long delay, his son sought substitution; another set of applicants also sought to be joined. The Charity Commissioner allowed both substitut

V. KARNAL DURAIversusTHE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, TUTICORIN AND ANR.

1998 INSC 4501 December 1998Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant V. K. Dura submitted the highest tender for a sand quarry lease but his offer was rejected. He appealed to the Director of Geology and Mines, who allowed the appeal on 1 April 1997 but granted the lease only for the remaining period up to 31 March 1998 and imposed seigniorage fees under the amended Rule 8

SAMIR CHANDAversusMANAGING DIRECTOR, ASSAM STATE TPT. CORPN.

1998 INSC 3311 September 1998Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a passenger in a bus owned by the Managing Director of Assam State Transport Corporation, suffered serious injuries when a bomb exploded inside the bus while passengers were alighting at the last stop during the Assam agitation. He claimed compensation under Sections 92‑A and 110 of the Motor Vehicles Ac

MUTHAIAH SEKHARversusNESAMONY TPT. CORPORATION LTD. AND ANR.

1998 INSC 3321 September 1998Appeal(s) allowed

Muthiah Sekhar, a 25‑year‑old lawyer, was injured in a collision between a taxi and a bus owned by Nesamony TPT. Corporation Ltd. He suffered permanent dislocation of the right hip, 60% loss of vision in the left eye and 50% loss of hearing in the left ear, and had to travel to New York for balloon embolisation of a ca

KRISHANversusSTATE OF HARYANA

1997 INSC 4621 May 1997Disposed off

Krishan, already serving life imprisonment for a prior murder, was convicted of murdering his brother‑in‑law Ranbir inside District Jail, Sonepat, using a spade. The trial court sentenced him to death, a decision affirmed by the High Court. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined whether the death penalty was justified u

THE PROPERTY OWNERS' ASSOCIATION AND ORS.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 5981 May 1996Matter referred to larger bench

The petition challenged the constitutional validity of Chapter VIII‑A of the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976, which allows acquisition of properties on payment of one hundred times the monthly rent, and argued that Article 31C of the Constitution shields the Act from attack under Articles 14 and 19.

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