Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA

9 judgments delivered by benches including this judge.

IN RE: T. N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPADversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2024 INSC 7831 January 2024Directions issued

The petition sought the institutionalisation and reconstitution of the Central Empowered Committee (CEC), which had functioned as an ad‑hoc body since its Supreme Court‑ordered creation in 2002. The Court examined the need for a permanent statutory authority to monitor compliance with its environmental orders and consi

PRAKASHCHANDRA JOSHIversusKUNTAL PRAKASHCHANDRA JOSHI @ KUNTAL VISANJI SHAH

2024 INSC 5524 January 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant and respondent were married in 2004 and lived in Canada until 2011, when health and employment issues forced their return to India. The couple separated in February 2011, and the respondent thereafter refused to resume cohabitation, even after multiple summons and notices, effectively deserting the appell

SYED BASHEER AHMEDversusM/S TINNI LABORATORIES PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR.

2025 INSC 103021 August 2025Rejected

Syed Basheer Ahmed filed a suit for specific performance of a sale agreement concerning two parcels of land. The trial court found the plaintiff ready to pay the balance consideration and decreed specific performance. The High Court reversed this decision, holding that the agreement showed a material alteration—differe

S.C. GARGversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2025 INSC 49315 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, S.C. Garg, Managing Director of Ruchira Papers Ltd., was charged under Section 420 IPC for allegedly cheating respondent R.N. Tyagi after the parties had already resolved a dispute over seven dishonoured cheques under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The earlier NI Act case resulted in Tyag

CHATRAPALversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2024 INSC 11515 February 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Class‑IV employee appointed as Ardly, was transferred to the post of Process Server but continued to receive Ardly salary, prompting him to lodge representations alleging salary discrepancy and corruption. The District Judge suspended him and a departmental inquiry was instituted, charging him with usi

STATE OF HARYANAversusMOHD. YUNUS & ORS.

2024 INSC 3412 January 2024Dismissed

Four persons were tried for the killing of Akbar on 9 January 1999. The trial court convicted A1, A2 and A3 under sections 302 and 323 read with section 34 of the IPC, while acquitting them of section 325, and later the High Court altered the convictions, acquitting A1 of 302/34 and A2 of 302/34 but upholding A2's conv

KAPADAM SANGALAPPA AND OTHERSversusKAMATAM SANGALAPPA AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 130711 November 2025Dismissed

The case concerned a long‑standing dispute between two sections of the Kuruba community over the performance of rituals and custody of idols of Lord Sangalappa Swamy. A compromise decree dated 1 November 1933 required the respondents to pay half the pooja expenses, to rotate the idols every six months and to appoint tr

R. RAJENDRANversusKAMAR NISHA AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 130410 November 2025Case Allowed

The appellant, a doctor, was alleged to have had an extramarital affair with respondent No.1, resulting in the birth of a child in 2007 while she was married to Abdul Latheef. Respondent No.1 filed criminal complaints for cheating and harassment and sought a DNA test to establish the appellant as the biological father,

HITESH NAGJIBHAI PATELversusBABABHAI NAGJIBHAI RABARI & ANR.

2025 INSC 10708 August 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an 8‑year‑old child, suffered permanent disability after being struck by a negligent vehicle in 2012 and filed a claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.3.90 lakh, assessing only 30% disability and providing a modest loss‑of‑earnings component

JAIPUR VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD. & ORS.versusMB POWER (MADHYA PRADESH) LIMITED & ORS.

2024 INSC 238 January 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The Rajasthan Electricity Regulatory Commission (State Commission) was asked to approve the procurement of 1,000 MW of power through a competitive bidding process. After negotiations, the Commission approved only 500 MW and adopted the tariffs of the lowest bidders, while the higher‑priced bids of L‑4 and L‑5 were reje

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