Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

S N PHUKAN

46 judgments delivered by benches including this judge.

BIRENDERA KUMAR DUBEY AND ANR.versusGIRJA NANDAN DUBEY AND ORS.

2001 INSC 41531 August 2001Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a second appeal (Civil Appeal No. 6060 of 2001) filed by Birendra Kumar Dubey and another against a judgment of the Patna High Court that had set aside the first appellate court's decision and restored the trial court's decree. The High Court had entertained the second appeal without first fr

STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.versusMANISHA DWIVEDI AND ANR.

2001 INSC 41631 August 2001Dismissed

The State of U.P. and others filed special leave petitions under Article 136 of the Constitution against interlocutory orders of the Allahabad High Court dated 2 September 1999 and 12 January 2000. The petitions were filed more than a year after the latter order, and the petitioners could not explain the delay. The Sup

NEERAJ KAPOORversusRANBIR SINGH DAHIYA AND ORS.

2001 INSC 32731 July 2001Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute concerned a 3‑sq‑yard municipal plot in Sonepat leased by the Municipal Committee to Prem Kumar Sardana, who sub‑let the ground floor to Janak Raj Kapoor (now the appellant) and the first floor to the first respondent. After the Haryana Government’s 1991 policy to grant direct leases to sub‑lessees, the fir

JOHN MATHAI ABRRAHAMversusM/S. BRITISH PHYSICAL LAB. INDIA LTD.

2001 INSC 54230 October 2001Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, John Mathai Abraham, owned a fractional undivided share in a large building in Bangalore and sought eviction of the respondent, British Physical Lab India Ltd, under Section 21(1)(h) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961, claiming a bona fide need for personal residence and professional use. The Rent C

J.P. ANANDversusD.G. BAFFNA

2001 INSC 54330 October 2001Dismissed

The landlord filed an eviction petition under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, claiming a bona‑fide personal requirement for the premises. The tenant applied under Section 25B(5) for leave to contest the eviction, but the Additional Rent Controller dismissed the application and ordered eviction, a decisi

KUNWAR BAHADUR SINGHversusSHEO BARAN SINGH AND ORS.

2000 INSC 55329 November 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The accused were convicted by a Sessions Court for offences under various sections of the Indian Penal Code. While their appeals were pending, the High Court discovered that the trial court records were missing and directed the trial court to reconstruct the file using carbon copies of witness statements and other docu

KONDA LAKSHMANA BAPUJIversusGOVT. OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ORS.

2002 INSC 5329 January 2002Dismissed

The appellant claimed title to a two‑acre parcel of land in Hyderabad based on an unregistered 1954 perpetual lease and a later registered lease, asserting that he had acquired ownership by adverse possession. The State of Andhra Pradesh, asserting that the land was Government property, invoked the Andhra Pradesh Land

SUGARBAI M. SIDDIQ AND ORS.versusRAMESH S. HANKARE (D) BY LRS.

2001 INSC 46727 September 2001Appeal(s) allowed

The landlords (appellants) sued the tenant (respondents) for eviction under the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates (Control) Act, 1947, alleging non‑payment of rent for the six‑month period January‑June 1978. A notice of demand was served on 14 July 1978, giving the tenant until 14 August 1978 to pay. The tena

MARIYAM BEGUMversusBASHEERUNNISA BEGUM AND ORS.

2001 INSC 46226 September 2001Disposed off

The landlady filed three eviction petitions against the tenant under the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960, alleging wilful default in rent and unauthorised sub‑letting. The tenant contended that, because an interlocutory application under Section 11 was pending, she was justified in

KIZHAKKAYIL SUHARA AND ORS.versusMANHANTAVIDA ABOOBACKER (D) BY LRS. AND ANR.

2001 INSC 46326 September 2001Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, legal representatives of a deceased tenant, occupied a shop room. The landlords sought eviction under Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, claiming a bona‑fide need for the premises to be used by their daughter and son‑in‑law. The tenants contested, arguing that the

HEM CHAND AND ORS.versusHARI KISHAN ROHTAGI AND ORS.

2001 INSC 46025 September 2001Dismissed

The landlords (Hem Chand and others) filed a suit under the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 seeking eviction of tenants and sub‑tenants on the ground of unauthorised sub‑letting. Only one sub‑tenant (respondent 5) was found to have been inducted without the landlord’s written consent, while six other sub‑tenants had been

HINCH LAL TIWARIversusKAMALA DEVI AND ORS.

2001 INSC 31725 July 2001Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute concerned the allotment of 15 biswas of a pond (Talab) in village Ugapur to ten members of a Scheduled Caste family for house sites under the UP Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950. Objections were raised, the Additional Collector cancelled the allotment, and the Commissioner upheld the cancellat

P.K. ABRAHAM THARAKAN (D) THROUGH LRSversusSTATE OF KERALA AND ORS

2000 INSC 24825 April 2000Dismissed

The legal heirs of a deceased landowner owned 122.35 acres, of which about 95 acres were rubber plantation and 3.5 acres ancillary land, while 24.30 acres were dry land. Four sons each claimed exemption from ceiling limits for their 20.39‑acre shares, which the Taluk Land Board granted and the High Court upheld. The pa

SHRI GOKUL MAHTOversusTHE STATE BANK OF BIHAR AND ORS.

1999 INSC 8224 February 1999Dismissed

The appellant, a neighbour of a parcel of land, claimed a right of pre-emption under sub‑clause (3) of Section 16 of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961, after the land was gifted by his brother (the third respondent) to his sister (the fifth respondent) on 11 May

OIL AND NATURAL GAS COMMISSIONversusM/S M.C. CLELLAND ENGINEERS S.A.

1999 INSC 20023 April 1999Dismissed

The Oil and Natural Gas Commission (ONGC) appealed a decree based on an arbitral award that required M.C. Clelland Engineers to pay the principal amount plus interest at 12% and an additional interest on that interest. The appellant argued that the arbitrators had no power to award interest on interest under Section 3

VEDABAI @VAIJAYANATABAI BABURAO PATILversusSHANTARAM BABURAO PATIL AND ORS.

2001 INSC 30120 July 2001Appeal(s) allowed

Vedabai filed an appeal against a trial court order but missed the prescribed period by seven days, citing illness as the reason. The Additional District Judge dismissed her application for condonation of delay, and the Bombay High Court upheld that dismissal. The Supreme Court examined whether a short delay of a few d

MADRAS REFINERIES LTD.versusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2001 INSC 44618 September 2001Disposed off

Madras Refineries Ltd., a petroleum refinery, sold its products primarily to Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (IOCL). Under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, tax is levied only at the point of first sale in the State, and Explanation 1 excludes sales between oil companies from being treated as first sales. The Sta

S.K KUSHWAHAversusD.K. JOSHI AND ORS.

2002 INSC 14918 March 2002Appeal(s) allowed

Dr. S.K. Kushwaha, a lecturer with a Ph.D. but without the required M.Ed. or B.Ed., was appointed Principal of the College of Education, Kurukshetra University, after the Executive Council purportedly relaxed the qualification requirement. Respondent D.K. Joshi challenged the appointment, arguing that the B.Ed./M.Ed. q

K.D. DEWANversusHARBHAJAN S. PARIHAR

2001 INSC 51416 October 2001Dismissed

The appellant, K.D. Dewan, had occupied a residential premises in Chandigarh since 1965, initially paying rent to the father of the respondent and thereafter to the respondent, Harbhajan S. Parihar. The respondent filed an eviction application under Section 13(3)(a) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949,

STATE OF U.P.versusASHOK DIXIT AND ANR.

2000 INSC 7616 February 2000Dismissed

The State of Uttar Pradesh appealed the Allahabad High Court's acquittal of Ashok Dixit and Chaman Lal, who had been convicted by a Sessions Court for murder (IPC s.302), attempt to murder (IPC s.307) and illegal possession of arms (Arms Act s.25). The prosecution relied on eyewitnesses, a child witness, ballistic and

SARITA SHARMAversusSUSHIL SHARMA

2000 INSC 8216 February 2000Appeal(s) allowed

Sarita Sharma and Sushil Sharma, married in 1988, were involved in divorce proceedings in a Texas court which intermittently granted custody of their two minor children to the father and limited the mother to visitation. While the divorce was pending, the mother exercised her visitation rights and removed the children

V. SUDEER ETCversusBAR COUNCIL OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

1999 INSC 10515 March 1999

The Supreme Court examined the Bar Council of India’s (BCI) Training Rules, 1995 (as amended in 1998) which mandated a one‑year pre‑enrolment training for law graduates before they could be enrolled as advocates. The petitioners challenged the Rules as ultra vires the Advocates Act, 1961 and as violative of Articles 14

STATE OF ORISSAversusARJUN DAS AGRAWAL AND ANR.

1999 INSC 32913 August 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Orissa appealed the acquittal of Manmohan Das (Manu Bangali) and Arjun Das Agrawal for the murder of Bhagirathi Panda. The trial court had convicted several accused under Sections 302/149 IPC, but the High Court acquitted Manmohan Das and Arjun Das, holding that the prosecution evidence was not corroborate

SHAMBHU MURARI SINHAversusPROJECT AND DEVELOPMENT INDIA LTD. AND ANR.

2002 INSC 13913 March 2002Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a draftsman trainee who rose to General Foreman, applied for voluntary retirement under a scheme effective 12-18 October 1995. The employer accepted the application on 30 July 1997, subject to a later release memo. Before the actual release date, the appellant sent two letters (7 August and 27 September

PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD AND ANRversusSHRI JASBIR SINGH

1999 INSC 6012 February 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent's son suffered a pituitary gland disorder and was prescribed the imported drug Norditropin, for which the Punjab State Electricity Board (PSEB) denied reimbursement of Rs. 313,200. The respondent filed a writ petition, and the Punjab & Haryana High Court directed reimbursement, treating the drug as a lif

KAPUS EKADHIKAR KARMACHARI SANGHversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

2000 INSC 21011 April 2000Dismissed

The Kapus Ekadhikar Karmachari Sangh filed a writ petition seeking to quash an award passed by the Industrial Court under the Maharashtra Raw Cotton (Procurement, Processing and Marketing) Act, 1971. The Bombay High Court dismissed the petition, relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Maharashtra State Co‑operative

RAJINDER PERSHAD (DEAD) BY LRS.versusSMT. DARSHANA DEVI

2001 INSC 35710 August 2001Dismissed

The landlady sought eviction of the tenant for non‑payment of rent, relying on a demand notice that was allegedly served by post. The tenant denied receipt of the notice, claiming the postman was on leave and therefore no refusal occurred. The Rent Controller, after examining the postman, found that the tenant had refu

JAMIL AHMAD AND ORS.versus5TH ADDL. DISTT. JUDGE MORADABAD AND ORS.

2001 INSC 4909 October 2001Appeal(s) allowed

Wali Mohammed, a Muslim landowner, executed a Will bequeathing 25.32 acres to the appellants and died leaving a son, Gulam Mohammed, and a daughter, Moti Begum. The Tehsildar, after public notice and examination of witnesses, held the Will genuine and ordered mutation of the bequeathed land in the appellants' names. Th

L.L. SUDHAKAR REDDY AND ORS.versusSTATE OF A.P. AND ORS.

2001 INSC 3529 August 2001Directions issued

The Manda Revenue Officer filed an application under Section 8 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 alleging that the first appellant had encroached upon five acres of government land and sold it to several respondents. The Special Court held that the land belonged to the government and ordered t

KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN AND ANR.versusSUBHAS SHARMA

2002 INSC 1307 March 2002Appeal(s) allowed

The employees of Kendriya Vidyalaya filed writ petitions in the Jammu & Kashmir High Court challenging service‑related decisions. The school sought transfer of the petitions to the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) on the ground that the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 governs such disputes. The High Court rejec

SURESH CHANDRA PODDARversusDHANI RAM AND ORS.

2001 INSC 5996 December 2001Disposed off

The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) ordered a fresh seniority list on 3 November 1999 without fixing a time‑limit for compliance. The Director of Education complied on 27 October 2000, while the order was simultaneously challenged before the Delhi High Court under Article 226. Despite the compliance and the pendi

HARNEK SINGHversusFINANCIAL COMMISSIONER, APPEALS, PUNJAB AND ORS.

2000 INSC 5756 December 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, legatee of the late Daljit Singh, challenged the allotment of land declared surplus under the PEPSU Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act to respondents 5‑10. The landowner had been declared surplus in 1976, but the Punjab Land Reforms Act, 1972 came into force in 1973 and its Section 28 saved pending surpl

STATE OF KERALAversusM.S. MANI AND ORS.

2001 INSC 4316 September 2001Dismissed

The State of Kerala filed a contempt petition against M.S. Mani and others for publishing a newspaper column that allegedly scandalised senior advocates and undermined the dignity of the Supreme Court. The petition was filed on 17 May 1999, but the required prior written consent of the Attorney General/Solicitor Genera

RAM BHAROSE SHARMAversusMAHANT RAM SWAROOP AND ORS.

2001 INSC 716 February 2001Dismissed

The case concerned a 19th‑century grant of six bighas of land in Jaipur as “Udak Jagir” to Swami Ram Ballabh, a disciple of the Ram Sanehi sect. The tenants of the present holder challenged the grant, arguing it was made to a religious institution or as a public trust, and sought exemption under the Rajasthan Land Refo

UMASHANKARversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2001 INSC 4885 October 2001Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Umashankar, was charged with circulating counterfeit currency after paying for mangoes with a fake Rs 100 note and police recovered additional counterfeit notes and related items from his possession. He was convicted under IPC sections 489‑B (using counterfeit notes as genuine) and 489‑C (possession of c

STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD.versusSTATE OF M.P. AND ORS.

1999 INSC 1555 April 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The Central Government sought land in Madhya Pradesh for the Bhilai Steel Plant and, under the 1925 Rules, agreed to pay the State a one‑time capitalised amount equal to 25 times the assessed land revenue, thereby obtaining exemption from further land revenue. The land was transferred to Hindustan Steel Ltd, whose succ

STATE OF BIHARversusS.A. HASSAN AND ANR.

2002 INSC 1185 March 2002Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents were employees of a private medical college that was taken over by the State of Bihar under the Bihar Private Medical Colleges (Taking over) Act, 1977. After the takeover they continued on an ad‑hoc basis and were later regularised as government employees, receiving pension calculated only from the date

CHITRANJAN BURMANversusOM PRAKASH BAJORIA AND ORS.

2001 INSC 4844 October 2001

The landlords (Bajorias) sought eviction of the tenants (Burmans) from a shop under the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1947 on grounds of non‑payment of rent and personal requirement. The tenants had repeatedly sent the monthly rent by postal money order to one co‑owner, Anar Devi, who refused

S.R. BABUversusT.K. VASUDEVAN AND ORS.

2001 INSC 4254 September 2001Disposed off

The landlord, who occupied part of a building, filed an eviction petition against the tenant occupying the remaining part, invoking Sections 11(3), 11(8) and 11(4)(iv) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965. The Rent Controller rejected the claim under 11(8) and 11(4)(iv) but ordered eviction under

K. RAJAMOULIversusA.V.K.N. SWAMY

2001 INSC 2533 May 2001Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute arose from an arbitration award where the decree did not include pendente lite interest. The decree holder sought such interest in execution, which was rejected, leading to a series of revision, interlocutory, and review petitions in the High Court. While a review petition was pending, the appellant filed a

STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ORSversusHARBANS LAL

2000 INSC 2823 May 2000Appeal(s) allowed

Harbans Lal, a clerk-cum-cashier of State Bank of India, was suspended on 29 November 1990 pending a departmental enquiry into alleged misconduct. He filed writ petitions under Article 226 seeking payment of full salary during the suspension, invoking the Sastry Award as adopted by the bank. The Punjab and Haryana High

N. PRABHAKAR RAOversusJ.R. RAMESH KUMAR@RAMESHJI

2001 INSC 5522 November 2001Leave Granted & Allowed

The tenant, N. Prabhakar Rao, occupied a building (both residential and non‑residential) under a lease dated 5 February 1974, paying Rs.160 per month. The landlord, J.R. Ramesh Kumar, filed an eviction petition under Section 10(3)(a) of the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 1960, claiming a

STATE OF ORISSA AND ORS.versusBAIDHAR SAHU

2000 INSC 2752 May 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a Stipendiary Engineer employed by the State Government in community development, was suspended by the District Collector of Koraput under Rule 12 of the Orissa Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1962 while disciplinary proceedings were contemplated. He challenged the suspension

K,M. ABDUL RAZZAKversusDAMODHARAN

2000 INSC 2762 May 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The landlord sought eviction of the tenant under Section 14(1)(b) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960, claiming the building was dilapidated and needed reconstruction, and that he had sufficient funds. The Rent Controller, after an inspection, found the building not dilapidated and dismissed

VANEET JAINversusJAGJIT SINGH

2000 INSC 2772 May 2000Disposed off

The landlord applied to the Rent Controller under Section 13 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973, seeking eviction of the tenant on the ground of a bona‑fide need to start a Karyana business, despite being unemployed and suffering from asthma. The Rent Controller and the appellate authority fo

SUMAN SETHIversusAJAY K. CHURIWAL

2000 INSC 482 February 2000Dismissed

The appellant, Suman Sethi, issued a cheque of Rs.20,00,000 to the respondent, Ajay K. Churiwal, which was returned for insufficient funds. Within 15 days, the respondent served a notice demanding the cheque amount plus incidental and notice charges. The magistrate held the notice invalid because the demand exceeded th

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