Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

M R SHAH

546 judgments delivered by benches including this judge — showing 201–400.

JOHN ANTHONISAMY @ JOHNversusSTATE, REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2023 INSC 5419 January 2023Dismissed

The appellant, John Anthonisamy, was convicted under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of a taxi driver and the subsequent concealment of the body. The prosecution’s case relied on circumstantial evidence, including the exhumation of the victim’s body from a location disclosed by the appellan

GAJANAND SHARMAversusAADARSH SIKSHA PARISHAD SAMITI & ORS.

2023 INSC 5819 January 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Gajanand Sharma, an employee of Aadarsh Siksha Parishad Samiti, was terminated after a departmental enquiry under the Rajasthan Non‑Governmental Educational Institutions Act, 1989. The Rajasthan Educational Institutions Tribunal set aside the termination, holding that prior approval of the Director of Education require

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusCONST SUNIL KUMAR

2023 INSC 5519 January 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Constable Sunil Kumar of the CRPF was found to have consumed liquor and threatened senior officers, an act of insubordination and misconduct. After a departmental enquiry, the disciplinary authority dismissed him under Section 11 of the CRPF Act, 1949, following Rule 27 of the CRPF Rules, 1955, and the dismissal was co

M/S ALPINE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION PVT. LTD.versusASHOK S DHARIWAL AND OTHERS

2023 INSC 5719 January 2023Dismissed

The dispute arose from an ex‑parte arbitral award dated 12‑03‑1998 in a matter concerning specific performance and land‑plot amalgamation. The respondents sought to set aside the award under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, invoking the public‑policy ground and sought to adduce additional evidenc

STATE OF U.P.versusJAI DUTT AND ANR.

2022 INSC 7119 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh prosecuted Jai Dutt and another accused for beating the victim, Ram Autar, with weapons, leading to his death six days later due to a head injury. The trial court convicted them under Section 302 IPC (murder) and Section 34 IPC (common intention). The Allahabad High Court altered the convicti

VILLAGE OFFICER AND OTHERSversusCHUNAYAMAKKAL JOSEPH AND ANOTHER

2022 INSC 6819 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute concerned 12‑acre parcels in Naduvil village that had been notified as vested forest land under the Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1971. The respondents, claiming ownership based on earlier jenmam rights and purchase certificates, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the

SMT. MEENA PAWAIA & ORS.versusASHRAF ALI & ORS.

2021 INSC 75018 November 2021Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined an appeal by the parents of a 21‑22‑year‑old civil engineering student who died in a motor vehicle accident. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal had fixed the deceased’s future loss of income at Rs.15,000 per month and applied a multiplier of 14 based on the parents’ age, awarding Rs.12,85,000

STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LIMITEDversusGOURI DEVI

2021 INSC 75518 November 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased employee of Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL) died in 1977. His eldest son applied for a compassionate appointment under the 1975 circular, but the application was rejected. Eighteen years later, in 1996, the widow filed a petition seeking a compassionate appointment for her second son; the Central A

UNION OF INDIAversusMANRAJ ENTERPRISES

2021 INSC 75418 November 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India entered into a work contract with Manraj Enterprises that contained clause 16(2) of the General Conditions of Contract, which expressly barred any interest on earnest money, security deposit, or amounts payable to the contractor. An arbitrator awarded pendente lite and future interest on the contract

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.versusASHISH AWASTHI

2021 INSC 75918 November 2021Disposed off

The father of the petitioner, Ashish Awasthi, was a work‑charge employee who died on 08‑Oct‑2015. At the time of his death, the applicable circular (dated 29‑Sep‑2014) provided only a Rs 2 lakh compensation and did not permit a compassionate appointment for his heirs. A later circular dated 31‑Aug‑2016 amended the rule

PRADEEP GOYALversusUNION OF INDIA

2022 INSC 72918 July 2022Disposed off

Petitioner, a chartered accountant, filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking a direction to all states and the GST Council to implement an electronic Document Identification Number (DIN) system for communications issued by state tax officers, arguing it would enhance transparency and accountability in indirect ta

RAJPAL SINGHversusSAROJ (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS AND ANR

2022 INSC 58918 May 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant purchased agricultural land from the original owner under an agreement to sell (1993) and a registered sale deed (1996), after which he took possession. Unbeknownst to him, the owner's wife obtained a collusive decree in 1995 declaring herself owner, but the decree was never registered. Five years later s

K. SRINIVASAPPA & ORS.versusM. MALLAMMA & ORS.

2022 INSC 58718 May 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The parties to a partition suit entered into a compromise that was recorded by a Lok Adalat on 7 July 2012, which under Section 21 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 is deemed a decree of a civil court. Plaintiffs 4‑6 later alleged that their signatures were obtained by fraud and filed writ petitions seeking t

A.DHARMARAJversusTHE CHIEF EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, PUDUKKOTTAI & ORS.

2022 INSC 20218 February 2022Appeal(s) allowed

A. Dharmaraj, a teacher, pursued a B.A. (English) by distance education from January 2012 to December 2014 and, concurrently, an M.A. (Tamil) from the 2013‑2014 to 2014‑2015 academic years. He was promoted to B.T. Assistant (English) on 6 August 2016. Respondent No.5 challenged the promotion, invoking Rule 14, which ba

K. KUMARA GUPTAversusSRI MARKENDAYA AND SRI OMKARESWARA SWAMY TEMPLE & ORS

2022 INSC 20718 February 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, K. Kumara Gupta, purchased temple land in a public auction on 24‑06‑1998, was declared the highest bidder, and the sale was confirmed and the deed executed. Over two decades later, third parties who had not participated in the auction claimed they could have paid a higher price and sought a re‑auction. T

NARENDER SINGHversusTHE STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

2022 INSC 5918 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a JBT teacher, applied for the post of Assistant Professor advertised by the Haryana Public Service Commission and was required to submit a No Objection Certificate (NOC) from his employer at the time of interview. Despite applying for the NOC in March 2016, the employer delayed issuance until June 2018;

GEETA DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2022 INSC 5418 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Special Court convicted the respondents under sections 452, 323/34 and 325/34 of the IPC but acquitted them of offences under sections 354, 504, 506 IPC and sections 3(1)(x) and 3(1)(xi) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The victim, Geeta Devi, appealed the acquittal. The Allahabad High Court dismissed t

MAMTAZ & ORS.versusGULSUMA ALIAS KULUSUMA

2022 INSC 5818 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants filed a suit for declaration and possession, which the trial court decided ex parte. The respondent appealed to the First Appellate Court after a delay of 2 years and 7 months, filed but later withdrew an application for condonation of delay, and the appeal was dismissed on the ground of limitation under

ISHWARJI NAGAJI MALIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ANOTHER

2022 INSC 5718 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The case involves an alleged murder of Daxaben, where the husband (respondent No.2) was accused of conspiring with co‑accused to kill her for insurance money and stage it as an accident. The investigation produced extensive material, including call records and a charge‑sheet linking the accused to the crime under Secti

K. ANJINAPPAversusK.C. KRISHNA REDDY AND ANR.

2021 INSC 92117 December 2021Disposed off

The appellant K. Anjinappa filed a professional misconduct complaint against an advocate before the Andhra Pradesh State Bar Council, which failed to dispose of the complaint within the one‑year period prescribed under Section 35 of the Advocates Act, 1961, leading to its transfer to the Bar Council of India (BCI) unde

M/S POLYFLEX (INDIA) PVT. LTD.versusTHE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANOTHER

2022 INSC 121117 November 2022Dismissed

M/s Polyflex (India) Pvt Ltd manufactures polyurethane foam, which is supplied to assemblers for making automobile seats. The company claimed a deduction under Section 80‑IB of the Income Tax Act for AY 2003‑04, but the assessing officer disallowed it on the ground that the foam falls within entry 25 of the Eleventh Sc

MRS. LEELAMMA MATHEWversusM/S INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK & ORS.

2022 INSC 121417 November 2022Appeal(s) allowed

Mrs. Leelamma Mathew purchased a secured property advertised as 54 cents in an auction conducted by Indian Overseas Bank under the SARFAESI Act. After paying the full consideration, she received possession of only 39.60 cents, the remaining 14.40 cents having been transferred earlier by the original debtor. She sued th

ACQUA BOREWELL PVT. LTD.versusSWAYAM PRABHA & OTHERS

2021 INSC 74217 November 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court heard appeals by third‑party defendants (Acqua Borewell Pvt Ltd and others) challenging a Karnataka High Court order that modified an interim injunction to restrain alienation of one‑seventh share in a large schedule of properties. The original suit sought declaration of a one‑seventh share in the pro

SARUP SINGH @ RAM SARUPversusHDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. AND ORS.

2022 INSC 109817 October 2022Case Partly allowed

The deceased, a 28‑year‑old, died in a motor accident and his wife, minor daughter, father and sister claimed compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded Rs 20.64 lakh based on a notional monthly income of Rs 10,000, a 30% uplift for future prospects and a one‑quarter ded

RADHEY SHAMversusTHE STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

2022 INSC 110117 October 2022Case Partly allowed

The land in Hansi and Dhana villages of Haryana was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with a Section 4 notification on 29‑08‑2005 and a Section 11 award on 03‑08‑2007. The Reference Court in 2014 fixed the market value at Rs 1,000 per square yard, which the State accepted but the landowners challenged, lead

M/S. FASHION WORLDversusBANSHIDHAR MULTI BUILDERS PVT. LTD.

2022 INSC 109917 October 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The landlord filed an application under Section 13(6) of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961 to have the tenant's defence struck off because the tenant had not paid the GST liability arising under the lease. The trial court struck off the defence, and the High Court affirmed that order. The tenant subseq

RAJYA VIDYUT PRASARAN NIGAM LIMITED AND ANOTHERversusANIL KANWARIYA

2021 INSC 49017 September 2021Appeal(s) allowed

Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Ltd. appointed Anil Kanwariya as a Technical Helper on probation. The employee concealed a prior conviction under Sections 341 and 323 IPC and filed a false declaration stating no criminal case was pending or any conviction. After police verification revealed the conviction, the em

TRUSTEES OF H.C. DHANDA TRUSTversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.

2020 INSC 55117 September 2020Case Partly allowed

The H.C. Dhanda Trust executed a Deed of Assent to vest two immovable properties in its beneficiaries, paying only Rs.200 stamp duty. The Collector of Stamps treated the deed as a gift deed, levied a deficit duty of Rs.1.28 crore and imposed a ten‑times penalty of Rs.12.80 crore, which was upheld by the Board of Revenu

NAGAR PANCHAYAT MOONAK AND ORS.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

2022 INSC 84217 August 2022Directions issued

The petitioners, representing 25 villages affected by recurrent flooding of the Ghaggar basin, sought relief from the Supreme Court. The Court had earlier directed the Central Water Commission (CWC) to convene a meeting and ordered the Central Water and Power Research Station (CWPRS), Pune to prepare a Mathematical Mod

SATISH KUMAR JATAVversusTHE STATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2022 INSC 57717 May 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, the original complainant, challenged a High Court order that had quashed criminal proceedings against the accused under Sections 307, 504, 506 of the IPC and Sections 3(10)(15) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The High Court, relying on a single paragraph stating that no useful purpose would

SUDHIR RANJAN PATRA (DEAD) THR. LRS. & ANR.versusHIMANSU SEKHAR SRICHANDAN & ORS.

2022 INSC 57917 May 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration and injunction, but defendants 2 and 3 failed to file a written statement and were held ex-parte. They later filed a petition under Order IX Rule 13 of the CPC seeking condonation of delay, setting aside the ex-parte decree, and permission to file a written statement. The tria

STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR.versusM/S. SAW PIPES LTD.

2023 INSC 37617 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Gujarat appealed against the Gujarat High Court's order that set aside the penalty and interest imposed on M/s. SAW PIPES Ltd. under Sections 45(6) and 47(4A) of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969. The assessee had paid tax at a 2% rate on the basis of a civil works classification, but the Assessing Officer l

VISHALAKSHI AMMAversusSTATE OF KERALA & ORS

2023 INSC 25517 March 2023Dismissed

The appellant, Vishalakshi Amma, possessed a deer horn and filed an application for a certificate of ownership under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 and the Declaration of Wildlife Stock Rules, 2003 on 25 May 2011, well beyond the 180‑day deadline prescribed in Rule 4(2) of the Rules. The Chief Wildlife Warden reje

STATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS.versusJAYANTIBHAI ISHWARBHAI PATEL

2023 INSC 25317 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned land acquired in 1992 for a resettlement project under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, where a consent award was passed in 1993 and compensation was offered but refused by the landowner, who also continued to cultivate the land. The landowner later sought cancellation of the acquisition, and the High

INDIAN RAILWAY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITEDversusM/S NATIONAL BUILDINGS CONSTRUCTION

2023 INSC 24817 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

IRCON entered into a construction contract with NBCC for a railway station‑cum‑commercial complex. NBCC failed to complete the work and the work was abandoned, prompting IRCON to terminate the contract under clause 60.1. NBCC invoked the arbitration clause; the Arbitral Tribunal held the termination under clause 60.1 i

MODI RUBBER LIMITEDversusCONTINENTAL CARBON INDIA LTD.

2023 INSC 24617 March 2023Disposed off

Modi Rubber Ltd., a sick industrial company, obtained a rehabilitation scheme approved by the BIFR under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, which scaled down the dues of unsecured creditors, including Continental Carbon India Ltd. The Delhi High Court held that an unsecured creditor could ref

PRAKASH KUMAR JENA & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF ODISHA & ORS.

2023 INSC 25417 March 2023Disposed off

The petitioners, who had served as Home Guards in Odisha for 10‑15 years, filed a writ seeking payment of their Duty Call‑up Allowance (DCA) at Rs.533 per day as directed by the Supreme Court in Grah Rakshak. The Single Judge of the High Court ordered the State to implement this rate, but the Division Bench later limit

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI THROUGH THE SECRETARY, LAND AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT & ANOTHERversusM/S. K.L. RATHI STEELS LIMITED AND OTHERS

2023 INSC 25917 March 2023Matter referred to larger bench

The Government of NCT of Delhi and the Delhi Development Authority sought review of several civil appeals that had been dismissed on the basis of the Supreme Court’s decision in Pune Municipal Corporation v. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki, which interpreted Section 24(2) of the 2013 Land Acquisition Act. After the Consti

NATIONAL TECHNICAL RESEARCH ORGANIZATION & ORSversusDIPTI DEODHARE

2023 INSC 13417 February 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Dipti Deodhare, a Scientist G in DRDO, was appointed on probation as Scientist H in NTRO. She was repatriated to DRDO on 12 February 2019 before completing her probation and resumed duty as Scientist G. She challenged the repatriation and sought voluntary retirement, but the Central Administrative Tribunal dismissed he

S. M. PASHA & ORSversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2023 INSC 13117 February 2023Disposed off

The petitioners, who are tenants occupying certain premises, filed Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) challenging the termination of a development agreement that favored respondent No. 5, a developer. While the SLPs were pending, the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) terminated that agreement and e

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusMGS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS

2023 INSC 13517 February 2023Appeal(s) allowed

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

LAND & BUILDING DEPARTMENT & ANR.versusMANISH SETHI AND ORS.

2023 INSC 13717 February 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Land & Building Department appealed a Delhi High Court order that had declared the acquisition of certain land to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, relying on the Pune Municipal Corporation decision. The

GOVT. OF NCT DELHI & ORS.versusDHANNU & ANR

2023 INSC 13817 February 2023Appeal(s) allowed

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

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusJAGAN SINGH & ORS.

2023 INSC 13917 February 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Delhi Development Authority (DDA) had taken physical possession of land on 16 July 2007 under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Delhi High Court held that the acquisition had lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 201

GOVERNMENT OF NCT DELHI & ORS.versusKRISHAN KUMAR & ORS.

2023 INSC 14017 February 2023Appeal(s) allowed

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

M/S IL&FS TAMIL NADU POWER COMPANY LIMITEDversusT. MURUGANANDAM & OTHERS

2023 INSC 13617 February 2023Disposed off

The appellant, IL&FS Tamil Nadu Power Company Ltd, obtained environmental clearance (EC) for a 2x600 MW coal‑based thermal power plant under the EIA Notification, 2006. The National Green Tribunal (NGT) upheld the EC but directed the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF) to review it based on a cumu

MAJJI SANNEMMA @ SANYASIRAOversusREDDY SRIDEVI & ORS.

2021 INSC 90916 December 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The original plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction which was dismissed by the trial court and set aside by the appellate court. The original defendants obtained a certified copy of the appellate decree in March 2017 but filed a second appeal only after a delay of 1011 days, in 2021. The High Court of Andhra P

THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.versusMADHU KANT RANJAN & ANR.

2021 INSC 90316 December 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Bihar appealed a High Court order that had directed the appointment of Madhu Kant Ranjan as constable with five extra marks for his NCC ‘B’ certificate. The advertisement for the 2004 constable recruitment required candidates to submit self‑attested photocopies of all documents, including the NCC certifica

SAFIQ AHMADversusICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & OTHERS

2021 INSC 91016 December 2021Directions issued

The Supreme Court examined the widespread filing of fraudulent compensation claims under the Motor Vehicles Act and the Workmen's Compensation Act, as investigated by a Special Investigating Team (SIT) in Uttar Pradesh. The SIT reported 1,376 suspicious claims, of which 247 had been examined, leading to 92 criminal cas

PUNEET DALMIAversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, HYDERABAD

2019 INSC 137916 December 2019Disposed off

The appellant, accused No.3 in a CBI case involving offences under Sections 120‑B, 420, 409 IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act, was required to appear before the trial court in Hyderabad every Friday despite residing in Delhi. He applied under Section 205 of the CrPC to be exempted from personal appearance, citin

M/S STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LIMITEDversusCOMMISSIONER, CENTRAL EXCISE & CUSTOMS, BHUBANESWAR

2022 INSC 96716 September 2022Case Partly allowed

M/s Steel Authority of India Ltd. claimed Modvat credit on "Guide Cars" used to transport hot coke from its coke oven battery, arguing that the vehicles were components of the battery under Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Adjudicating Authority and the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal re

RAMESHversusKARAN SINGH & ANR

2022 INSC 97416 September 2022Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a merchant navy seaman earning USD 1,000, suffered a severe vehicular accident on 2 January 1997 resulting in amputation of his right upper limb below the elbow and required five surgeries. He claimed Rs 1.02 crore compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, s.166 for permanent disability, but the M

VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL (DEAD) THR. LR.versusNEENA RANI & ORS.

2022 INSC 96916 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, original plaintiff, filed a suit for specific performance of a 1996 Memorandum of Agreement and a 2011 agreement to sell concerning a piece of land. The trial court directed him to pay deficient stamp duty with penalty under Entry No.5 of Schedule 1‑A of the Indian Stamp Act (Punjab), a view affirmed by

SURESH PASWANversusM/S. KLA CONSTRUCTION TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. & ORS.

2022 INSC 97316 September 2022Case Partly allowed

Suresh Paswan, an employee of M/s KLA Construction Technologies, fell from a roof at a construction site and claimed 60% permanent disability, supported by a 2009 disability certificate. The Commissioner, Employees’ Compensation awarded him Rs 3,74,364 as compensation. The employer appealed, and the Delhi High Court, r

OMKAR SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2019 INSC 76516 July 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the eligibility criteria for the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) under the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) guidelines, specifically the meaning of the term “pursuing” in clause 5(ii). The petitioners, who had been appointed as Assistant Teachers while still enrolled in a Teacher

STATE OF M.P. & ANR.versusDUNGAJI (D) BY LRS. & ANR.

2019 INSC 75816 July 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh challenged a decree of the High Court that had set aside an order of the Competent Authority under the Madhya Pradesh Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1960, which had treated land inherited by the plaintiff's wife as part of the family holding and declared surplus. The plaintiff, Dungaj

NEENA ANEJA & ANR.versusJAI PRAKASH ASSOCIATES LTD.

2021 INSC 18916 March 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants filed a consumer complaint before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) on 18 June 2020 under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, seeking a refund of Rs. 2.19 crores. The Consumer Protection Act, 2019 came into force on 20 July 2020, raising the NCDRC's pecuniary jurisdiction from Rs

SRS ADVERTISING & MARKETING PVT. LTD. ORSversusMR. KAMAL GARG & ANR.

2022 INSC 19216 February 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, who purchased property at auction under a Recovery Certificate, paid 25% earnest money but had 10% of that amount forfeited by the Recovery Officer. Their appeal to the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) was dismissed, and a further appeal to the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) remained pending witho

DEENADAYAL NAGARI SAHAKARI BANK LTD. & ANOTHERversusMUNJAJI AND OTHERS

2022 INSC 19116 February 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The borrower, a director of Vaishnavi Hatcheries, defaulted on loans from two cooperative banks and mortgaged four properties. After a recovery certificate was issued, the appellant bank conducted a public auction, issuing a sale certificate and deed in favour of the highest bidder. The borrower failed to apply within

THE UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusRAJIB KHAN & ORS.

2023 INSC 4116 January 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned Nursing Assistants employed by the Border Security Force who were paid a Hospital Patient Care Allowance and claimed entitlement to the Nursing Allowance granted to Staff Nurses. A single judge of the Gauhati High Court allowed the claim, holding that the duties performed were similar and that educat

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusEMINENT MARKETING PVT. LTD. & ORS.

2023 INSC 4316 January 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Delhi Development Authority (DDA) acquired land and took possession on 27 September 2012, depositing the full compensation amount with the Treasury but not disbursing it to the landowner. The Delhi High Court held that, under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Reha

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusBEENA GUPTA (D) THROUGH LRS. & ORS.

2023 INSC 4716 January 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Delhi Development Authority (DDA) acquired a parcel of land in 2007 under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, taking possession by drawing a panchnama. The land was later sold to Beena Gupta in 2010, who filed a writ petition seeking a declaration that the acquisition had lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusMANPREET SINGH & ORS

2023 INSC 4616 January 2023Appeal(s) allowed

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

THE STATE THROUGH CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusT. GANGI REDDY @ YERRA GANGI REDDY

2023 INSC 4416 January 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The State, represented by the CBI, sought cancellation of the default bail granted to T. Gangi Reddy under Section 167(2) of the Cr.P.C. after the CBI filed a chargesheet for the murder of former MLA Y.S. Vivekananda Reddy. The High Court dismissed the application, holding that bail granted on default could not be canc

KUMARI LAXMI SAROJ & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2022 INSC 128615 December 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh advertised for the post of Health Worker (Female) requiring candidates to be registered with the Uttar Pradesh Nurses and Midwife Council. The appellants, already registered with the Madhya Pradesh Council, applied for UP registration before the advertisement but faced delays in obtaining a N

NEW OKHLA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusOMVIR SINGH & ORS.

2022 INSC 128415 December 2022Case Partly allowed

The New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (NOIDA) acquired land in 1982 for the development of NOIDA and awarded compensation of Rs.30,000 per bigha. The original owners filed a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 seeking enhanced compensation, which was dismissed, and subsequent review ap

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusCHANDERMAL & ORS.

2022 INSC 129015 December 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Delhi Development Authority (DDA) and the Land Acquisition Collector (LAC) appealed a Delhi High Court order that declared the land acquisition of certain parcels to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 beca

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHIversusMOHD. MAQBOOL & ORS

2022 INSC 128915 December 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Government of NCT of Delhi appealed against a Delhi High Court order that declared the land acquisition proceedings against Mohd. Maqbool and others to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, on the ground tha

THE BIJNOR URBAN COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, BIJNOR & OTHERSversusMEENAL AGARWAL & OTHERS

2021 INSC 89915 December 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The Bijnor Urban Cooperative Bank Ltd. rejected the original writ petitioner's application for a One Time Settlement (OTS) on the ground that she was a willful defaulter, her loan was classified as an NPA and the bank could recover the full amount by auctioning the secured property. The petitioner challenged the reject

YASHPAL SINGHversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR

2022 INSC 96615 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Yashpal Singh alleged that a land dispute led the accused, including respondent No.2 Mehtab, to drive a tractor over standing crops and attack him and his family, resulting in the death of his brother and serious injuries to others. The FIR named the accused and they were arrested; the trial court denied

SUDHIR KUMAR @ S. BALIYANversusVINAY KUMAR G.B.

2021 INSC 48415 September 2021Case Partly allowed

The plaintiff filed a commercial suit in October 2018 seeking a permanent injunction against the defendant for alleged trademark infringement and obtained an ex‑parte interim injunction. Realising the suit was not compliant with the Commercial Courts Act, the plaintiff withdrew it on 27 July 2019 and filed a fresh suit

STATE OF HARYANAversusM/S. SHIV SHANKAR CONSTRUCTION CO. & ANR.

2021 INSC 88814 December 2021Case Partly allowed

The State of Haryana awarded a road‑maintenance contract to M/s. Shiv Shankar Construction Co. for Rs 5.26 crore at a rate of Rs 1,000 per km per month, assuming traffic of 3,364 PCU/day. After the closure of a nearby road, traffic on the contract road surged to 24,418 PCU/day, causing additional maintenance costs. The

KAPIL KUMARversusRAJ KUMAR

2022 INSC 109414 October 2022Appeal(s) allowed

Kapil Kumar sued Raj Kumar for recovery of Rs 1 lakh, alleging that Raj Kumar had borrowed the sum and executed a promissory note in Kapil's favour. The trial court, after evaluating the handwriting expert and deed‑writer testimony, held that the note was executed and decreed in favour of the plaintiff; the first appel

KESAR BAIversusGENDA LAL & ANR.

2022 INSC 109214 October 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The original plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration of ownership and a permanent injunction, relying on a registered sale deed dated 31‑08‑1967 and on alleged adverse possession. The trial court dismissed the suit; the first appellate court rejected the sale deed claim but granted title and an injunction on the basis

STATE THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICEversusLALY @ MANIKANDAN & ANOTHER ETC

2022 INSC 109314 October 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The State prosecuted Laly @ Manikandan and another for murder under IPC s.302 r.w. s.34, alleging that the accused attacked the deceased in a car and later in a shed, causing fatal injuries. The trial court convicted them based on the testimony of PW1, the sole eye‑witness who saw the accused at both stages of the inci

VELLADURAIversusSTATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2021 INSC 47714 September 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, married to the deceased for 25 years, had a quarrel with his wife on the day she later ingested pesticide and died; the appellant also consumed pesticide and survived. He was convicted under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code for abetment of suicide and under Section 4(b) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition

SRI BISWANATH BANIK & ANR.versusSMT. SULANGA BOSE & ORS.

2022 INSC 30014 March 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiffs filed a title suit seeking a declaration under Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, a permanent injunction and related reliefs, alleging continuous possession of the property for over twelve years. The defendants moved an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC to have the plaint rejected

SURAJ JAGANNATH JADHAVversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2019 INSC 136813 December 2019Dismissed

Suraj Jagannath Jadav was convicted of murder for pouring kerosene on his pregnant wife and setting her ablaze. He appealed, arguing that he was intoxicated, lacked intent to kill, and that the subsequent act of pouring water should reduce the offence to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Exception 4 to Se

S. KRISHNA SRADHAversusTHE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ORS.

2019 INSC 136213 December 2019Reference answered

The appellant, a meritorious candidate claiming reservation in the sports and games category, was denied admission to the MBBS course after the statutory cut‑off date of 30 September 2015. The High Court, relying on the decision in Jasmine Kaur, refused admission and awarded only monetary compensation. The Supreme Cour

WAHAB UDDIN & ORS.versusKM. MEENAKSHI GAHLOT & ORS.

2021 INSC 72613 November 2021Dismissed

The appellants participated in the 1987 competitive exam for English stenographers and were placed on a select list dated 14‑07‑1987, which under Rule 14(3) of the Subordinate Civil Courts Ministerial Establishment Rules, 1947, was valid for only one year. They were subsequently appointed on a temporary basis to Hindi

RAMESH KUMAR & ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS. ETC.

2021 INSC 72713 November 2021Dismissed

The dispute concerned promotion to the post of Accounts Officer (AO) in the Himachal State Electricity Board. Direct recruits to the lower post of Assistant Accounts Officer (AAO) argued that the amendment notification of 02.01.2010, which made passing the SAS Part II examination mandatory for promotion to AO, was arbi

THE DIRECTOR OF TREASURIES IN KARNATAKA & ANR.V. V. SOMYASHREEversusV. SOMYASHREE

2021 INSC 47213 September 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The mother of V. Somyashree, a government employee in Karnataka, died on 25 March 2012. At the time of her death the daughter was married; she later obtained a decree of divorce by mutual consent on 20 March 2013 and applied for a compassionate appointment on 21 March 2013 under the Karnataka Civil Services (Appointmen

RAMESH KUMAR V. BHATINDA INTEGRATED COOPERATIVE COTTON SPINNING MILL AND ORS.versusBHATINDA INTEGRATED COOPERATIVE COTTON SPINNING MILL AND ORS.

2021 INSC 46613 September 2021Dismissed

A notification under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (s.4) acquired 297 kanals of land in Bhatinda for a cotton spinning mill. The Land Acquisition Officer initially fixed compensation at Rs 25,000 per acre. The Reference Court, relying on a 1979 sale deed (Rs 50,000 per acre), applied a flat 12% annual increase and a 2

UTTAR PRADESH JAL VIDYUT NIGAM LIMITED & ORS.versusBALBIR SINGH

2021 INSC 47313 September 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The Labour Court, Dehradun awarded reinstatement and back wages to Balbir Singh, which the appellants challenged by filing Writ Petition No.6898 of 1997 before the Allahabad High Court. After the creation of Uttarakhand, Section 35(2) of the Uttar Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2000 required such proceedings to be transfe

KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITEDversusNARENDRA JAYANTILAL TRIVEDI & ANR.

2022 INSC 57213 May 2022Disposed off

Kotak Mahindra Bank sought recovery of a loan defaulted since 1986, invoking the SARFAESI Act after the debt had been assigned to it. The borrower, Narendra Jayantilal Trivedi, repeatedly filed various applications and a writ petition to stall the bank's recovery proceedings, which the Debt Recovery Tribunal and the Hi

IBRAT FAIZANversusOMAXE BUILDHOME PRIVATE LIMITED

2022 INSC 57313 May 2022Dismissed

The appellant, a consumer who booked a flat, obtained a decree from the Delhi State Consumer Redressal Forum directing possession and compensation, which was appealed to the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) under Section 58(1)(a)(iii) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The NCDRC upheld the Sta

PARSVNATH DEVELOPERS LTD.versusGAGANDEEP BRAR AND ANOTHER

2023 INSC 37013 April 2023Disposed off

Parsvnath Developers Ltd entered into a development agreement with the Chandigarh Housing Board (CHB) for the Pride Asia project, which included a flat buyer agreement containing clause 9(c) that provided compensation for delay. A dispute over land possession led to arbitration, where the sole arbitrator awarded liabil

INDRESH KUMAR MISHRA AND ORS.versusTHE STATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS.

2022 INSC 42613 April 2022Dismissed

The Jharkhand government advertised posts for Postgraduate Trained Teachers (PGTT) and Graduate Trained Teachers (GTT) in History (or History/Civics) requiring a degree in History as a whole. Several candidates possessed postgraduate or graduate degrees in specific branches of History such as Ancient History, Medieval

UNION OF INDIA THROUGH LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTORversusRAJESH KUMAR AND ORS.

2023 INSC 21613 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India appealed a Delhi High Court order that declared land acquisition proceedings to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 because compensation had not been paid. The land in question was an agricul

LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR & ANR.versusASHOK KUMAR & ORS.

2023 INSC 22013 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Delhi High Court had held that the acquisition of certain land had deemed lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 because neither possession nor compensation had been effected, relying on Pune Municipal Corporation

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANRversusMANJEET KAUR & ANR.

2023 INSC 22113 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

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

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANRversusDAYANAND & ANR.

2023 INSC 21913 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Government of NCT of Delhi acquired a parcel of land (Khasra No.115) measuring 20 biswa, taking possession of 19 biswa and issuing a notice under Section 12(2) of the 1894 Land Acquisition Act for the payment of compensation to the landowner, who failed to collect it, leading to the amount being deposited in the re

GOVERNMENT OF NCT DELHI & ORSversusJAI PAL

2023 INSC 21813 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Government of NCT Delhi had taken possession of land on 11 July 2008 under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, but had not paid compensation to the landowner, Jai Pal. The Delhi High Court held that the acquisition proceedings had deemed to lapse under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in

RAJENDRA KUMAR SHRIVASversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & OTHERS

2023 INSC 21113 March 2023Disposed off

The appeal arose from a writ petition challenging appointments to the higher judiciary in Madhya Pradesh that allegedly exceeded the 10% quota for limited departmental competitive examinations mandated by the Supreme Court in All India Judges Association v. Union of India (2010). The High Court had dismissed the petiti

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHIversusSIDDHARTH KAPOOR & ORS.

2023 INSC 21513 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Government of NCT of Delhi appealed a Delhi High Court order that declared the acquisition of a parcel of land to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The land had an award under the Land Acquisition Act, 1

LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR AND ANR.versusB. S. DHILLION & ORS.

2023 INSC 21413 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The land in question was awarded under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in 1992, and possession was taken in 2006 and handed over to the DDA. A private respondent filed a writ petition seeking a declaration that the acquisition had deemed lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in La

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANRversusM/S. BEADS PROPERTIES PVT. LTD. & ORS.

2023 INSC 21313 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Government of NCT of Delhi appealed a Delhi High Court order that had allowed a writ petition filed by M/s Beads Properties Pvt. Ltd., a subsequent purchaser of land, declaring that the acquisition of the land was deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land A

THE STATE OF KARNATAKAversusM/S ECOM GILL COFFEE TRADING PRIVATE LIMITED

2023 INSC 21213 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Karnataka appealed against the High Court’s order allowing Input Tax Credit (ITC) claimed by several purchasing dealers, including M/s Ecom Gill Coffee Trading Private Limited. The Assessing Officer had denied ITC on the ground that the transactions were not genuine and the sellers were either deregistered

ASSOCIATION OF OLD SETTLERS OF SIKKIM AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2023 INSC 2913 January 2023Disposed off

The petitioners, old Indian settlers of Sikkim, challenged the definition of “Sikkimese” in Section 10(26AAA) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the proviso that excluded a Sikkimese woman who married a non‑Sikkimese after 1 April 2008 from the tax exemption. They argued that the exclusion of settlers whose names were not

THE STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.versusSUSHILA & ORS.

2023 INSC 3613 January 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Haryana appealed a High Court order that had declared the acquisition of certain lands to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, on the ground that the subsequent purchasers (respondents) had not bee

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.versusBHAGRATI & ANR

2023 INSC 3813 January 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Government of NCT of Delhi appealed a Delhi High Court order that had declared the acquisition of a parcel of land to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The land had an award dated 1992 and physical posse

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHIversusSUNIL JAIN & ORS

2023 INSC 3913 January 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Government of NCT of Delhi appealed a Delhi High Court order that declared the acquisition of a parcel of land to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The respondents, who were subsequent purchasers of the

K.L. SWAMYversusTHE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR.

2023 INSC 2813 January 2023Case Partly allowed

The case arose from a search under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act on the Khoday Group, where the appellant K.L. Swamy, a director, was served a notice under Section 158BD to file a return for the block period. He filed the return late, and the Assessing Officer levied interest under Section 158BFA(1) and surcharge u

M/S OSWAL PLASTIC INDUSTRIESversusMANAGER, LEGAL DEPTT. N.A.I.C.O. LTD

2023 INSC 3013 January 2023Appeal(s) allowed

M/s Oswal Plastic Industries held a fire insurance policy (standard fire & special perils) that provided for reinstatement of damaged plant and machinery. After a fire on 17‑10‑2009, a surveyor valued the loss at Rs. 29,17,500 on a reinstatement basis and Rs. 12,60,000 on a depreciated basis. The State Consumer Dispute

C. HARIDASANversusANAPPATH PARAKKATTU VASUDEVA KURUP & OTHERS

2023 INSC 3713 January 2023Matter referred to larger bench

The appellant, C. Haridasan, entered into an agreement to sell Kanam and Kuzhikoor rights in 2005, paid a nominal advance and was to pay the balance within six months after the defendants provided title documents. The defendants failed to provide the documents, the plaintiff delayed serving a legal notice until Novembe

MANIK MAJUMDER AND OTHERSversusDIPAK KUMAR SAHA (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. & OTHERS

2023 INSC 3413 January 2023Matter referred to larger bench

The plaintiffs sought a declaration of title over land based on two sale deeds dated 3 September 1968 and 29 September 1968, the first executed by plaintiff 2 as an attorney of the original owner who allegedly executed a power of attorney (PoA) in East Pakistan. The trial court and the first appellate court dismissed t

CHANDI PULIYAversusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL

2022 INSC 127612 December 2022

The appellant was acquitted in 2010 of offences under Sections 148, 149, 448, 364 and 506 IPC arising from FIR No. 61/2002. In 2011 a second FIR was lodged alleging that the appellant and co‑accused caused the death of the informant's father, a matter discovered only after a skeleton was identified. The appellant sough

LUCKNOW DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusMEHDI HASAN (DECEASED) THR. LRS. & ORS.

2022 INSC 127512 December 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Lucknow Development Authority (LDA) had taken possession of a plot of land on 13 February 2003 under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and later deposited compensation in court under Section 30(2) of that Act. The High Court held that the acquisition was deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair

D.N. KRISHNAPPAversusTHE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER

2022 INSC 127312 December 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a workman dismissed from a bank in 1996, obtained a reinstatement award with back wages from the Central Government Industrial Tribunal (CGIT) dated 18 July 2007. The award was stayed by the High Court and only confirmed after the dismissal of writ appeals on 12 July 2013, after which the appellant was r

THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESHversusKARUNESH KUMAR & ORS

2022 INSC 127412 December 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh recruited Gram Panchayat Adhikari (Group C) posts in 2015 under the Uttar Pradesh Direct Recruitment to Group ‘C’ Posts Rules, 2015, which required a written exam and interview, and appointed candidates in 2017. Unsuccessful candidates later invoked Rule 15 of the older 1978 Service Rules, cl

M/S B. K. ENTERPRISESversusTHE STATE OF MANIPUR

2021 INSC 72012 November 2021Disposed off

M/s B.K. Enterprises appealed against the State of Manipur for continuing transportation contracts for the Wheat Based Nutrition Programme (WBNP) under an interim arrangement since 2017-18 without issuing fresh tenders, despite a High Court order directing the issuance of a new Notice Inviting Tender (NIT) within ten d

SADAKAT KOTWAR AND ANR.versusTHE STATE OF JHARKHAND

2021 INSC 71912 November 2021Dismissed

The appellants, Sadakat Kotwar and another, were convicted for stabbing two victims, PW7 and PW8, with a dagger, causing grievous injuries to vital parts of the body. The prosecution presented ten witnesses, including the injured eye‑witnesses PW7 and PW8, whose testimonies were found reliable. The appellants argued th

MARIANO ANTO BRUNO & ANR.versusTHE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2022 INSC 107312 October 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The husband (Appellant No.1) and his mother-in-law were convicted under IPC sections 498A (dowry harassment) and 306 (abetment of suicide) for the death of Dr. Amali Victoria, who allegedly suffered mental torture and was compelled to have a child, leading to her suicide in 2014. The prosecution's case relied mainly on

BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD. (BPCL) & ORSversusNISAR AHMED GANAI & ORS.

2022 INSC 107412 October 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The lands were acquired for BPCL under the Jammu & Kashmir Land Acquisition Act, 1990. The landowners challenged the acquisition and, after the 1990 Act was repealed, sought compensation under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (the 2013 Act).

ASIAN HOTELS (NORTH) LTD.versusALOK KUMAR LODHA & ORS

2022 INSC 71312 July 2022Appeal(s) allowed

Asian Hotels (North) Ltd., the licensor, granted individual shop licenses to various shopkeepers, including the respondents, and later revoked those licenses. The respondents filed suits seeking a declaration that their licenses were irrevocable and perpetual. While the suits were pending, they applied to amend their p

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERSversusANAND ENGINEERING COLLEGE AND ANOTHER

2022 INSC 71112 July 2022Disposed off

The State of Uttar Pradesh sought to impose Rs 10 crore in damages on Anand Engineering College for discharging effluent into the National Chambal Sanctuary, invoking Section 33 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972. The Forest Department had issued multiple notices since 2003, but the college continued the discharge

MAGIC EYE DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.versusM/S. GREEN EDGE INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD. & ORS. ETC.

2023 INSC 52812 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Magic Eye Developers Pvt. Ltd. challenged the Delhi High Court’s order referring its dispute with Green Edge Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. and others to arbitration, arguing that no valid arbitration agreement existed. The appellant contended that the arbitration clause was present only in certain agreements (SHA‑1, SHA‑2,

DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENTversusADITYA TRIPATHI

2023 INSC 53112 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) investigated alleged tampering of e‑tender bids that led to charges under the IPC, IT Act and the Prevention of Corruption Act. Because those offences are scheduled under the Prevention of Money‑Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA), the ED opened a money‑laundering investigation and the accused,

RAVIKUMAR DHANSUKHLAL MAHETA & ANR.versusHIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AND ORS.

2023 INSC 53212 May 2023Directions issued

The petitioners, senior civil judges, challenged the Gujarat High Court's select list and the State Government's notification promoting 68 judges to the district judge cadre, alleging that the selections violated Article 14 of the Constitution and Rule 5 of the Gujarat State Judicial Service Rules, 2005, which require

DR. V. R. SANAL KUMARversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2023 INSC 52612 May 2023Dismissed

Dr. V. R. Sanal Kumar, a senior ISRO scientist, was dismissed from service under Rule 16(iii) of the Department of Space Employees (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1976, which allows dismissal without an inquiry when the President is satisfied it is not expedient in the interest of the security of the State.

M/S. K.B. TEA PRODUCT PVT. LTD. & ANR.versusCOMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, SILIGURI & ORS.

2023 INSC 53012 May 2023Matter referred to larger bench

The appellants, K.B. Tea Product Pvt. Ltd. and others, set up small‑scale units for blended tea under a tax‑holiday scheme that exempted manufacturers from sales tax under the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994. The scheme was based on the then‑existing definition of "manufacture" which included "blending of tea". In Augu

ANJANA SARAIYAversusTHE STATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2022 INSC 56112 May 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a 55‑year‑old woman, was allotted a residential plot under Uttar Pradesh's Middle‑Income Group Scheme at a cost of Rs.2,70,000. She paid the upfront amount and the first three instalments but defaulted on the next four due to her husband's ill‑health. She later paid the outstanding instalments with inter

URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE REAL ESTATE FUNDversusDHARMESH S. JAIN AND ANOTHER

2022 INSC 56412 May 2022Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained a contempt petition filed by Urban Infrastructure Real Estate Fund against Dharmesh S. Jain and another for wilful disobedience of a Supreme Court order dated 28 October 2021 and a Bombay High Court order dated 8 August 2019. Despite repeated opportunities to comply with the orders or to s

PRABHA TYAGIversusKAMLESH DEVI

2022 INSC 56312 May 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a widow, alleged that after her husband's death she was harassed by her in‑laws and denied her stridhana, prompting her to file an application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 seeking protection, residence and compensation orders. The trial magistrate granted p

PTC INDIA FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITEDversusVENKATESWARLU KARI AND ANOTHER

2022 INSC 56212 May 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appeal concerned PTC India Financial Services Ltd (PIFSL) who, after a corporate debtor defaulted, invoked a pledge over 31,80,678 dematerialised shares of NEVPL under a pledge deed and sought to enforce its rights under the Contract Act, 1872. The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal had held that the pledge cr

ANIL AGARWAL FOUNDATION ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF ORISSA AND ORS.

2023 INSC 36112 April 2023Dismissed

The Anil Agarwal Foundation, a private company at the time of land acquisition, sought 6,000 acres of agricultural land in Odisha to establish a university. The State issued Section 4(1) notifications and proceeded with acquisition despite the company’s conversion to a public company occurring only after the notificati

PHOENIX ARC PRIVATE LIMITEDversusVISHWA BHARATI VIDYA MANDIR & ORS.

2022 INSC 4412 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The borrowers Vishwa Bharati Vidya Mandir and St. Ann’s Education Society obtained large loans from Saraswat Co‑operative Bank, which were classified as NPA in 2013. The bank issued a notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act and later assigned the NPA account to Phoenix ARC Private Ltd. After the borrowers failed

STATE OF ODISHAversusPRATIMA MOHANTY ETC.

2021 INSC 87211 December 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Odisha filed a criminal appeal against the High Court’s order that quashed FIR proceedings under Sections 420 r/w 120B IPC and Sections 13(2) and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act against public servants of the Bhubaneswar Development Authority (BDA) and the Housing & Urban Development Departmen

Y. SAI SATYA PRASAD & ORS.versusD. PRABHAKARA RAO & ORS.

2022 INSC 106511 October 2022Directions issued

After the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh, a One‑Man Committee headed by Justice D.M. Dharmadhikari prepared a final report allocating 655 power‑utility employees from each state and the Supreme Court approved it on 7 December 2020. Eighty‑four former Andhra Pradesh power‑utility employees were relieved by their employer

HEMANTHA KUMARversusR. MAHADEVAIAH & ORS.

2022 INSC 69411 July 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance of a sale agreement and, together with defendants 1 and 2, applied under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC for a consent decree, stating that the dispute was settled and the full consideration had been paid. The trial court referred the matter to a Lok Adalat, which, befo

GREGORY PATRAO AND ORS.versusMANGALORE REFINERY AND PETROCHEMICALS LIMITED & ORS.

2022 INSC 69311 July 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Karnataka government acquired land under the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 (KIAD Act) for industrial development, and the original owners were compensated. After acquisition, Mangalore Refinery & Petrochemicals Ltd (MRPL) was allotted the land by the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (

MOHAMED ALIversusV. JAYA & ORS.

2022 INSC 69611 July 2022Appeal(s) allowed

Mohamed Ali sued for specific performance of a sale agreement. The trial court passed an ex‑parte judgment and decree in 2012. The defendants filed applications to set aside the decree after delays of 1,522 days (defendant 1) and 2,345 days (defendants 2‑4); the trial court refused to condone these delays. The defendan

HSBC PI HOLDINGS (MAURITIUS) LIMITEDversusPRADEEP SHANTIPERSHAD JAIN & ORS

2022 INSC 68511 July 2022Directions issued

HSBC PI Holdings (Mauritius) Ltd. invested USD 60 million in Avitel, a company owned by the respondents. The Supreme Court, affirming a 2014 order, directed the respondents to maintain a USD 60 million balance in a Corporation Bank account. The respondents failed to comply, repeatedly sought exemption, and claimed lack

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III, BANGALORE AND ANOTHERversusM/S WIPRO LIMITED

2022 INSC 68711 July 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The assessee, Wipro Ltd., filed its original return for AY 2001-02 claiming exemption under Section 10B of the Income Tax Act and stating that no loss would be carried forward. Later it submitted a declaration to the Assessing Officer opting out of the Section 10B benefit and filed a revised return claiming carry‑forwa

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusDIWAN CHAND ANAND & ORS

2022 INSC 66811 July 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Delhi Development Authority (DDA) appealed a trial court decree that declared land acquisition notifications void and restrained DDA from dispossessing co‑owners of the land. The High Court dismissed the appeal as abated because several respondents had died and their legal representatives were not brought on record

BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITEDversusM/S. NEMICHAND DAMODARDAS & ANR.

2022 INSC 69711 July 2022Appeal(s) allowed

Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) appealed against a Bombay High Court order that had increased compensation for land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act from Rs.21 per sq. ft. to Rs.174 per sq. ft., relying on the Ready Reckoner rates. BSNL argued that the Ready Reckoner, prepared for stamp‑duty purposes, cannot

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.versusAKHIL SHARDA & ORS.

2022 INSC 70511 July 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh and the original informant appealed against a judgment of the Allahabad High Court that, invoking Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, quashed the criminal proceedings arising from FIRs (Cr. No. 260/2018 and 227/2019) alleging disappearance of trucks loaded with beer and offences under

STATE OF GUJARATversusCADILA HEALTHCARE LTD.

2022 INSC 67611 July 2022Disposed off

The State of Gujarat appealed a High Court judgment that the product Kadiprol, sold in 100‑gram sachets and mixed with poultry feed, should be classified as "poultry feed" under Entry 25 of Schedule I of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969, rather than as a "drug and medicine" under Entry 26(1) of Schedule II Part A. The D

M/S. R.S. INFRA-TRANSMISSION LTD.versusSAURININDUBHAI PATEL AND ORS.

2022 INSC 67211 July 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute arose from an auction sale of two immovable properties attached under a recovery certificate issued by IndusInd Bank. The judgment debtor (borrower) filed an application under Rule 60 of the Second Schedule of the Income Tax Act, 1961, depositing the amount specified in the sale proclamation along with pena

NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIAversusTRANSSTROY (INDIA) LIMITED

2022 INSC 68011 July 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) entered into an EPC contract with Transstroy (India) Limited, which was later terminated by NHAI for alleged breaches. The contractor invoked the arbitration clause, filing a claim, while NHAI reserved its right to claim damages and filed a counter‑claim under Section 23(2

HAJABHAI RAJASHIBHAI ODEDARAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2022 INSC 70411 July 2022Dismissed

The appellant, Hajabhai Rajashibhai Odedara, together with his co‑accused Jagrutiben, conspired to kill members of Jagrutiben’s family to facilitate their marriage. They strangulated Jagrutiben’s mother Simbhiben and brother Mukesh, and attempted to kill another brother Rajdeep, who survived and became the sole eye‑wit

DR. GAJENDRA SINGHversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2022 INSC 67711 July 2022Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a branch manager of United Insurance Company, issued a cover note for a vehicle without collecting the premium, relying on the insured's assurance of payment, and later issued a second cover note without cancelling the first, resulting in a loss to the insurer. The disciplinary authority charged him with

MALTI SAHUversusRAHUL & ANR.

2022 INSC 70211 July 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The mother of two children filed a complaint alleging that her son Rahul murdered her daughter Kavita and son Gaurang. The trial court convicted Rahul under Section 302 IPC, sentencing him to life imprisonment. On appeal, the High Court acquitted him, holding that the prosecution failed to establish a complete chain of

AMRIK SINGHversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB

2022 INSC 66711 July 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants Amrik Singh and Subhash Chander were convicted of murder and robbery under IPC s.302 r/w s.34 and s.392 based primarily on the eye‑witness PW1’s identification of them in the courtroom and the recovery of Rs.1 lakh each from them. No Test Identification Parade (TIP) had been conducted, and the FIR did no

NANDA DULAL PRADHAN & ANR.versusDIBAKAR PRADHAN & ANR.

2022 INSC 68111 July 2022Case Partly allowed

The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration and title, and the original defendants 2 and 3 failed to file a written statement despite several extensions, leading the trial court to pass an ex‑parte decree. The defendants applied under Order IX Rule 13 of the CPC to set aside the decree; the trial court dismissed the app

THE STATE OF NAGALAND & ORS.versusNISHEVI ACHUMI

2022 INSC 69511 July 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Nagaland appealed against a High Court order that directed the regularization of a deceased work‑charge employee’s services one day before his death, thereby entitling his widow to a family pension. The employee died in 2005 and never applied for regularization during his lifetime; his widow filed a writ p

BIJU K.K.versusCOCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, KOCHI & ORS.

2022 INSC 67411 July 2022Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a daily-wage Technical Assistant Grade‑II at Cochin University, applied for a regular Technical Assistant post but was placed low in the merit list because the Selection Committee gave him fewer marks for experience, ignoring his prior service as a daily wager. He challenged the Committee's decision, als

ALL MANIPUR PENSIONERS ASSOCIATION BY ITS SECRETARYversusTHE STATE OF MANIPUR AND OTHERS

2019 INSC 74811 July 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Manipur issued an office memorandum in 1999 revising pension benefits, granting a higher percentage to employees who retired on or after 1 January 1996 and a lower percentage to those who retired earlier. All Manipur Pensioners Association challenged this classification as violative of Articles 14 and 16 o

STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.versusCHETAN JEFF

2022 INSC 55611 May 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan recruited constables and the petitioner, Chetan Jeff, applied claiming no criminal antecedents, while a pending FIR under Sections 143, 341 and 336 IPC existed. The recruitment authority rejected his candidature for suppressing this material fact and making a false declaration. The petitioner cha

THE DIRECTOR (ADMN. AND HR) KPTCL & ORS.versusC.P. MUNDINAMANI & ORS.

2023 INSC 35211 April 2023Dismissed

The appellants, KPTCL, denied annual increments to several employees who had completed a year of service with good conduct because the increment, under Regulation 40(1) of the Karnataka Electricity Board Employees Service Regulations, 1997, was deemed to accrue on the day after it was earned and the employees had retir

SURENDRA SINGHversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANR.

2023 INSC 35411 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The FIR dated 01.12.2010 named five persons as perpetrators of a lathi‑blow assault that resulted in the death of Bhawani Singh. Although the charge‑sheet initially named only two accused, the remaining three were later added and tried separately under Section 319 Cr.P.C. The High Court acquitted the respondent Vijendr

HARYANA STATE INDUSTRIAL AND INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. (HSIIDC) & OTHERSversusM/S HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL (INDIA) PVT. LTD.

2023 INSC 35311 April 2023Disposed off

The Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd. (HSIIDC) and the State of Haryana appealed against a Punjab & Haryana High Court judgment that declared land acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to have "deemed lapse" under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensat

P. RAMASUBBAMMAversusV. VIJAYALAKSHMI & OTHERS

2022 INSC 41311 April 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant filed a suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell dated 12‑04‑2005, alleging payment of a substantial advance consideration and that the vendor (defendant No.1) had admitted both the execution of the agreement and receipt of the money. The vendor’s attorney (defendant No.2) later executed two

SHOBHA & ORS.versusTHE CHAIRMAN, VITHALRAO SHINDE SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD. & ORS.

2022 INSC 29811 March 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased was a sugarcane‑cutting labourer who died from a snake bite while employed by a contractor supplying a sugar factory. His heirs claimed compensation under the Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923 and the Commissioner awarded Rs 306,180 with simple interest at 12% per annum from the date of the accident (29‑No

UMESH KUMAR PAHWAversusTHE BOARD OF DIRECTORS UTTARAKHAND GRAMIN BANK & ORS.

2022 INSC 17811 February 2022Case Partly allowed

Umesh Kumar Pahwa, a branch officer of Uttarakhand Gramin Bank, was accused of demanding a bribe from a borrower and reducing the loan amount from Rs.1,50,000 to Rs.75,000. A departmental inquiry found him guilty of ten charges and ordered his removal from service, which was upheld by the High Court. Pahwa challenged t

MEERAversusSTATE BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE THIRUVOTRIYUR POLICE STATION CHENNAI

2022 INSC 3511 January 2022Case Partly allowed

In 2006 a married woman self‑immolated after allegedly being subjected to cruelty by her mother‑in‑law over jewelry, while her husband was abroad. A complaint under Sections 498A and 306 IPC led to the conviction of the mother‑in‑law, her husband, sister‑in‑law and father‑in‑law, with the mother‑in‑law receiving one ye

HARYANA TOURISM LIMITEDversusM/S KANDHARI BEVERAGES LIMITED

2022 INSC 3211 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

Haryana Tourism Ltd invited tenders for supplying aerated drinks and accepted a bid from M/s Kandhari Beverages Ltd, which was to pay Rs.20 lakh for brand promotion. A dispute arose over the amount spent on promotional activities, leading to termination of the contract and referral to a sole arbitrator, who awarded Rs.

MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION CO. LTD.versusM/S. JSW STEEL LIMITED & ORS.

2021 INSC 86610 December 2021Dismissed

Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd., a distribution licensee, sought to recover an additional surcharge under Section 42(4) of the Electricity Act, 2003 from a group of captive consumers represented by M/s JSW Steel Ltd. The State Commission had held the surcharge applicable, but the Appellate Tribunal

RAJENDRA DIWANversusPRADEEP KUMAR RANIBALA & ANR.

2019 INSC 135310 December 2019

The petitioners challenged the validity of Section 13(2) of the Chhattisgarh Rent Control Act, 2011, which provides a direct appeal to the Supreme Court from orders of the Rent Control Tribunal. The Court examined whether the State Legislature had competence to legislate on the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. By ana

THE STATE OF UTTARAKHANDversusNALANDA COLLEGE OF EDUCATION AND OTHERS

2022 INSC 119510 November 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttarakhand issued an opinion refusing to grant recognition to new B.Ed. colleges and seeking cancellation of recognition for Nalanda College of Education, citing that approximately 13,000 B.Ed. graduates per year far exceed the state's requirement of 2,500 teachers, leading to potential unemployment. The

THE MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY AND ORS.versusRINCYMOL MATHEW

2022 INSC 119710 November 2022Dismissed

The Mahatma Gandhi University denied Rincymol Mathew the benefits of the Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) on the ground that her initial appointment as Lecturer in 1998 was to a temporary post not duly sanctioned under the university statutes. The respondent filed a writ petition, and the Single Judge of the Kerala High

PROF. NARENDRA SINGH BHANDARIversusRAVINDRA JUGRAN AND OTHERS

2022 INSC 119810 November 2022Dismissed

The appellant, Prof. Narendra Singh Bhandari, was appointed Vice‑Chancellor of Soban Singh Jeena University in August 2020. The appointment was challenged on the ground that he did not satisfy the statutory requirement of a minimum of ten years of teaching experience as a professor and that the selection process did no

GALI JANARDHAN REDDYversusTHE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2022 INSC 105910 October 2022Disposed off

Gali Janardhan Reddy, accused of several serious offences under the IPC, Indian Forest Act and the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, was granted bail by the Supreme Court in 2015 with a condition that he not visit Bellary (Karnataka) and Ananthapuram and Cuddapah (Andhra Pradesh). He later applied to

DR. ASTHA GOEL AND ORS.versusTHE MEDICAL COUNSELLING COMMITTEE & ORS.

2022 INSC 64110 June 2022Dismissed

The petitioners, who had participated in all rounds of NEET‑PG 2021 counselling, sought a Special Stray Round to fill 1,456 vacant seats (mostly non‑clinical) that remained after eight to nine rounds of counselling. The respondents, the Medical Counselling Committee and the Union of India, declined, citing the need to

GOMANTAK MAZDOOR SANGHversusSTATE OF GOA & ANR.

2022 INSC 54610 May 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Goa issued a notification on 23/24 May 2016 fixing minimum wages, including a basic rate and a special allowance, after consulting the Minimum Wage Advisory Board and following the procedure prescribed under Sections 4 and 5 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. Subsequently, an Errata Notification dated 14 July

RESHMA SULTANAversusTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.

2022 INSC 54810 May 2022Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined a dispute over the appointment of Reshma Sultana as a full‑time Urdu Lecturer in a Karnataka college. The High Court Single Judge had quashed her appointment, finding the entire 2007 selection process tainted by fraud, collusion and manipulation, and had directed the college to forward docume

REKHA JAINversusTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR.

2022 INSC 54910 May 2022Case Partly allowed

The original complainant lodged a complaint against her husband, Kamalesh Mulchand Jain, alleging that he cheated her and took 2 kg of gold jewellery, leading to an FIR under Section 420 of the IPC. During investigation, the gold jewellery was found in the possession of the husband’s wife, Rekha Jain, who was also char

NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI & ORS.versusSUBHASH CHANDER KHATRI & ORS.

2023 INSC 33910 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court heard an appeal by the National Capital Territory of Delhi and others against a Delhi High Court order that declared land acquisition proceedings to be deemed lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, b

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusARYAN SINGH ETC.

2023 INSC 33810 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) filed appeals after the Punjab & Haryana High Court, exercising its power under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, quashed the criminal proceedings against Aryan Singh and Gautam Cheema, holding that the charges were not proved and the prosecution was malicious. The ac

QAMAR GHANI USMANIversusTHE STATE OF GUJARAT

2023 INSC 33710 April 2023Dismissed

The appellant was arrested on 29 January 2022 and the 90‑day period under Section 167 of the CrPC was set to expire on 29 April 2022. The investigating officer sought a 30‑day extension on 22 April 2022, which the trial court granted without the accused being present, and the accused was informed of the extension on 23

RAJALAKSHMIversusTHE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) KOYILANDY & ANOTHER

2023 INSC 33310 April 2023Disposed off

The State acquired land in Kozhikode for an IT Park under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, issuing a notification on 21‑08‑2009. While many landowners accepted a negotiated price of Rs 1,00,000 per cent, a group of owners dissatisfied with the compensation filed references under Section 18, leading the Reference Court t

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusVIKAS MISHRA @ VIKASH MISHRA

2023 INSC 34510 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The CBI arrested Vikas Mishra for offences under sections 409 and 120B of the IPC and obtained a seven‑day police‑custody remand on 16 April 2021. Mishra was hospitalized on 18 April and subsequently released on interim bail on 21 April, which was later cancelled on 8 December 2021 for non‑cooperation. He filed an appl

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CENTRAL EXCISE & SERVICE TAXversusM/S SUZLON ENERGY LTD.

2023 INSC 33210 April 2023Disposed off

Suzlon Energy Ltd imported engineering design and drawing blueprints from its sister companies abroad for manufacturing wind turbine generators and classified them as "paper" goods for customs, claiming nil duty and arguing they were not liable to service tax. The Revenue issued show‑cause notices demanding service tax

M/S. SARAF EXPORTSversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR-III

2023 INSC 33110 April 2023Dismissed

M/S. Saraf Exports, a partnership engaged in manufacturing and exporting wooden handicrafts, claimed deductions under s.80‑IB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for amounts received under the Duty Entitlement Pass Book (DEPB) and Duty Drawback schemes for AY 2008‑09. The Deputy Commissioner disallowed the deductions, a decisi

BHIMASHANKAR SAHAKARI SAKKARE KARKHANE NIYAMITAversusWALCHANDNAGAR INDUSTRIES LTD. (WIL)

2023 INSC 33510 April 2023Dismissed

The appellant, a cooperative society, sought to set aside an arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, but filed the application after the 90‑day statutory period and the additional 30‑day discretionary period had expired because the court was on winter vacation. The appellant argue

M/S US TECHNOLOGIES INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTDversusTHE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

2023 INSC 32910 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, M/s US Technologies International Pvt. Ltd., had deducted tax at source (TDS) but remitted it to the government after a delay of up to ten months. The Revenue levied a penalty equal to the amount of TDS under Section 271C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which the High Court upheld. The appellant contended t

M/S RECKITT BENCKISER (INDIA) LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAXES & ORS.

2023 INSC 32810 April 2023Case Partly allowed

Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. appealed against the Kerala Commercial Taxes Department’s classification of several of its products under the Kerala VAT Act. The appellant claimed that mosquito mats, coils, vaporizers and Mortein insect killers were insecticides (Entry 44(5), HSN 3808) taxable at 4%, that Harpic and Liz

MANSAROVAR COMMERCIAL PVT. LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI

2023 INSC 33010 April 2023Dismissed

The appellants, five companies incorporated under the Sikkim Companies Act, claimed to be residents of Sikkim and argued that their income from cardamom commissions for assessment years 1987-88 to 1989-90 was taxable only under the Sikkim State Income‑Tax Manual, 1948, as the Income Tax Act, 1961 had not yet been exten

JAI PARKASH ETC ETCversusUNION TERRITORY, CHANDIGARH ETC ETC

2022 INSC 29010 March 2022Case Partly allowed

The Chandigarh Administration issued a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to acquire about 63.70 acres of land for defence security forces, and the Land Acquisition Officer initially valued the land at Rs 6,87,837 per acre. The Reference Court enhanced this valuation to Rs 9,65,000 per acre,

URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE REAL ESTATE FUNDversusDHARMESH S. JAIN AND ANR.

2022 INSC 29610 March 2022Disposed off

The Urban Infrastructure Real Estate Fund (U.I.R.E.F) obtained an arbitral award of Rs 78.33 crore against Dharmesh S. Jain and others, which the Bombay High Court stayed on the condition that the respondents deposit 50% of the amount. The High Court’s order dated 08‑08‑2019 was later extended twice by the Supreme Cour

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHIversusSUSHIL KUMAR GUPTA & ORS.

2023 INSC 12110 February 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Government of NCT of Delhi had taken possession of certain land on 12 March 1981 but had not paid compensation to the owners. The Delhi High Court, relying on Pune Municipal Corporation v. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki, held that the acquisition had deemed to lapse under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensati

GAS POINT PETROLEUM INDIA LTD.versusRAJENDRA MAROTHI & ORS.

2023 INSC 11910 February 2023Appeal(s) allowed

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

STATE OF HARYANA & ANR.versusSUBHASH CHANDER & ORS.

2023 INSC 12010 February 2023Case Partly allowed

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

BANK OF BARODAversusM/S KARWA TRADING COMPANY & ANR.

2022 INSC 16910 February 2022Appeal(s) allowed

Bank of Baroda granted a term loan and cash credit facility to M/s Karwa Trading Company secured by two mortgaged properties. After the borrower defaulted, the bank invoked the SARFAESI Act, took symbolic possession, and issued a public auction notice. The borrower filed an application under Section 17 of the SARFAESI

M.P. HOUSING BOARD & ANR.versusSATISH KUMAR BATRA AND ORS

2022 INSC 17210 February 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents purchased land that had been subject to a Section 4 notification under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and objections were filed by the predecessor‑in‑title, Gajanand Mali. While the predecessor’s writ appeals challenging the Section 4 and Section 6 notifications (Writ Appeal No. 447 of 2009) were pendi

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.versusBHAGWAN & ORS.

2022 INSC 2910 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Water and Land Management Institute (WALMI), a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, operates as an autonomous body with its own service rules that do not provide for pension benefits. The State of Maharashtra, in a 2005 policy decision, resolved that employees of aided institutes and auton

JAYABENversusTEJAS KANUBHAI ZALA & ANR

2022 INSC 2810 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The case involves the murder of Mukeshbhai, the husband of complainant Jayaben, who was brutally beaten and tied to a gate by five accused persons. The accused were identified in a Test Identification Parade, and the incident was captured on CCTV and a mobile phone. The High Court had released the principal accused, Te

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusDAYANAND & ORS.

2022 INSC 12699 December 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Delhi Development Authority (DDA) had taken possession of land on 26 November 2012 and handed it over to itself under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. A subsequent purchaser filed a writ petition claiming that the acquisition proceedings had lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparen

LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR (SOUTH EAST)versusDHARAMVIR AND ORS.

2022 INSC 12709 December 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Land Acquisition Collector appealed a Delhi High Court order that declared the acquisition of land (possession taken on 16‑03‑2004) to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 because compensation had not been p

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