KUM. GEETHA, D/O LATE KRISHNA & ORS.versusNANJUNDASWAMY & ORS.
2023 INSC 96431 October 2023Appeal(s) allowed
The appellants, members of a joint family, filed a suit for partition and separate possession of family properties listed in Schedules A and B, alleging that earlier 'nominal' sale deeds were merely temporary financing measures and that the family retained possession. The defendants moved to dismiss the suit under Orde…
SANJAY KUMAR AGARWALversusSTATE TAX OFFICER (1) & ANR.
2023 INSC 96331 October 2023Dismissed
A batch of five review petitions was filed challenging the Supreme Court's common judgment and order dated 06‑09‑2022 in Civil Appeals No. 1661 of 2020 and No. 2568 of 2020, which interpreted the interplay between Section 48 of the Gujarat Value‑Added Tax Act, 2003 and Section 53 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, …
PARAMJEET SINGH PATHEJAversusICDS LTD.
2006 INSC 75531 October 2006Appeal(s) allowed
Paramjeet Singh Patheja, a guarantor, challenged an insolvency notice issued under Section 9(2) of the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act, 1909 on the basis of an arbitration award rendered under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The High Court had held that the award constituted a decree for the purpose of the …
CHHABIL DASversusPAPPU
2006 INSC 75831 October 2006Dismissed
The mother of the deceased plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction against the appellant, claiming possession of land inherited from her husband. The plaintiff died and the appellant, an adopted son, was substituted as legal heir. The trial court dismissed both the suit and the counter‑claim but allowed the sub…
SHYAMAL KUMAR ROYversusSUSHIL KUMAR AGARWAL
2006 INSC 75931 October 2006Dismissed
Shymal Kumar Roy and Sushil Kumar Agarwal entered into a development agreement in 1995. The agreement was exhibited as evidence in a suit for specific performance on 17‑02‑2003 without any objection. Two years later, Roy sought to have the document impounded under Section 38 of the Indian Stamp Act, claiming it was ins…
PONDICHERRY KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES BOARDversusP. KULOTHANGAN AND ANR.
2003 INSC 59131 October 2003Appeal(s) allowed
The respondent, a temporary instructor, was absent from work and later denied re‑employment by the appellant. He filed a writ petition in the Madras High Court seeking reinstatement and regularisation, which was dismissed along with his appeal. Subsequently, he raised an industrial dispute before the Labour Court, whic…
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusADANI EXPORTS LTD. AND ANR.
2001 INSC 54631 October 2001Appeal(s) allowed
The Union of India and others appealed against the Gujarat High Court’s order allowing special civil applications filed by Adani Exports Ltd. and others seeking the benefit of a Pass‑Book Scheme under the Import‑Export Policy for shrimp exports. The central issue was whether the Gujarat High Court at Ahmedabad possesse…
SRI KEMPAIAHversusLINGAIAH AND ORS.
2001 INSC 54731 October 2001Dismissed
The landlord, Sri Kempaiah, filed an eviction petition under the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961, claiming a reasonable and bonafide requirement for the premises and alleging arrears of rent. The trial court allowed eviction on the basis of bonafide requirement but rejected the landlord’s claim of arrears because he c…
M/S SHANTI CONDUCTORS (P) LTD. ANR.versusASSAM STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD & ORS.
2019 INSC 8131 August 2016Matter referred to larger bench
The Supreme Court examined whether the Interest on Delayed Payments to Small Scale and Ancillary Industrial Undertakings Act, 1993 (the 1993 Act) applies retrospectively to supply orders placed before its commencement on 23‑09‑1992. The Court held that the Act is prospective, its liability arising only after the buyer …
HUSSAINBHAI ALLARAKHBHAI DARIAYA & ORS.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
2010 INSC 55831 August 2010Dismissed
The Samast Sunni Muslim Jamat filed a suit seeking ownership of land, which was partially decreed by the trial court. The Jamat filed an appeal, but withdrew it through a pursis citing a compromise agreement that was actually between two community groups, not the parties to the suit. The first appellate court disposed …
JAMES JOSEPHversusSTATE OF KERALA
2010 INSC 56431 August 2010Dismissed
The State of Kerala issued a notification to declare certain lands as revenue forest, which the appellant's predecessor claimed title to. The Forest Settlement Officer rejected the claim, but the Additional District Judge allowed it on appeal under Section 11 of the Kerala Forest Act. The State appealed to the High Cou…
C.S. MANI (DECEASED) BY LR C.S. DHANAPALANversusB. CHINNASAMY NAIDU (DECEASED) BY LRS.
2010 INSC 56531 August 2010Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant obtained a money decree against Mokshammal, an agriculturist, and had his property attached on 29‑12‑1974. The Tamil Nadu Indebted Agriculturists (Temporary Relief) Act, 1975 (Debt Relief Act) came into force on 10‑1‑1975, and under its Section 4 the execution against agriculturists was stayed; the execut…
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…
SMITA CONDUCTORS LTD.versusEURO ALLOYS LTD.
2001 INSC 41731 August 2001Dismissed
Smita Conductors Ltd. (appellant) and Euro Alloys Ltd. (respondent) entered into contracts for the supply of aluminium rods that contained an arbitration clause but were never signed by the appellant. The appellant opened irrevocable letters of credit and made shipments, but later invoked a force‑majeure clause after R…
INDUSTRIAL CREDIT & INVESTMENT CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD. AND ORS.versusKARNATAKA BALL BEARINGS CORPN. LTD. AND ORS.
1999 INSC 36931 August 1999Appeal(s) allowed
The appellants, ICICI Ltd., filed a suit for recovery of a large sum and sought under Order 40 Rule 1 of the CPC the appointment of a receiver with authority to sell the respondents' immovable properties before any decree. The Bombay High Court dismissed the application, relying on a Full Bench decision in State Bank o…
RAM NARAIN ARORAversusASHA RANI AND ORS.
1998 INSC 32831 August 1998Dismissed
The landlord filed an eviction petition under Section 14(1)(e) read with Section 25B of the Delhi Rent Control Act, claiming a bona‑fide need for the suit premises. The tenant contended that the landlord already possessed an alternate residence at Subzi Mandi, which was concealed, and that the landlord shifted to the s…
K.MUTHUSWAMI GOUNDERversusN. PALANIAPPA GOUNDER
1998 INSC 32731 August 1998Dismissed
The dispute involved two competing auction purchasers over a suit property that had been subject to a 1950 security deed (Exhibit A6) executed to raise an attachment before judgment. The trial court held that Exhibit A6 created a charge, granting the appellant a right to redeem the first mortgage but denying possession…
SMT. SHANTI DEVI AND ORS.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS .
1994 INSC 34031 August 1994Dismissed
The appellants challenged the acquisition of land under the Rajasthan Land Acquisition Act, claiming that a subsequent order dated 4 November 1985 had regularised the conversion of agricultural land to non‑agricultural use and vested title in them. They relied on this order, which was produced for the first time before…
SHANTI VIJAY & CO. ETC.versusPRINCESS FATIMA FOUZIA & ORS. ETC.
1979 INSC 16531 August 1979Dismissed
The Nizam's Jewellery Trust, created by the late Nizam of Hyderabad, authorized its trustees to sell jewellery at their discretion after a three‑year period. In 1978 the Board of Trustees resolved to sell 37 items, but only four of the five trustees opened the tenders and purportedly accepted bids without the Chairman’…
ASHOK KUMARversusNEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.
2023 INSC 65931 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed
Ashok Kumar, the owner of a insured truck, filed a consumer complaint after his vehicle was stolen on 26 June 2008. The insurer, New India Assurance, repudiated the claim on the grounds of alleged breaches of policy conditions 1 (delay in intimation) and 5 (leaving the key in the vehicle). The original complaint filed …
RAJA VENKATESWARLU & ANR.versusMADA VENKATA SUBBAIAB & ANR.
2017 INSC 68931 July 2017Appeal(s) allowed
The appellants obtained a final decree for a permanent injunction and applied to the Execution Court for its enforcement, seeking police protection under Section 151 of the CPC. The Execution Court granted the protection, but the High Court set aside the order, holding that the application should have been filed under …
STATE BANK OF INDIA THR. GENERAL MANAGERversusNATIONAL HOUSING BANK & ORS.
2013 INSC 50431 July 2013Disposed off
The National Housing Bank (NHB) sued State Bank of Saurashtra (later merged with SBI) for recovery of a large cheque amount, alleging that the cheque was drawn for the purchase of IRFC bonds and that the defendant had misappropriated the funds. The case was tried before a Special Court established under the Special Cou…
M/S. JOHN IMPEX (PVT.) LTD. & ANR.versusATHUL KAPUR & ORS
2009 INSC 99331 July 2009Dismissed
The landlord filed a suit for eviction and recovery of rent arrears against the tenant, which was transferred from the Delhi High Court to the Additional District Judge after a jurisdictional amendment. The tenant received notice of an interlocutory application and the scheduled hearing date of 15 July 2004 but failed …
N.R. NARAYAN SWAMYversusB. FRANCIS JAGAN
2001 INSC 32631 July 2001Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, a landlord, initially filed an eviction suit under the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 on the ground of bona fide requirement, which he later withdrew after the tenant promised to vacate. When the tenant died and his son continued occupying the premises, the landlord filed a second eviction suit on the …
SHYAM SUNDER AND ANR.versusRAM KUMAR AND ANR.
2001 INSC 32331 July 2001Dismissed
The appellants purchased agricultural land from vendors and the respondents, as co‑sharers, filed a suit claiming a statutory right of pre‑emption. The trial court decreed in favour of the respondents and they deposited the purchase money under Order 20 Rule 14 CPC. While the appeal was pending, the Haryana Amendment A…
MAHABIR KISHORE & ORS.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
1989 INSC 21631 July 1989Appeal(s) allowed
The appellants, liquor contractors, were required to pay an additional 7.5% mahua and fuel cess on contracts awarded by the Madhya Pradesh Government. The High Court declared the levy illegal in Surajdin (1960) and Doongaji (1962), but the Government continued to collect it, resulting in the appellants paying Rs.54,606…
PARBATI DEVI & ORS.versusMAHADEO PRASAD TIBREWALLA
1979 INSC 13631 July 1979Dismissed
In a money suit based on a mortgage, a consent decree was passed and the decree-holder assigned his interest to Mahadeo Prasad Tibrewalla. After part‑payment, one judgment‑debtor died and his heirs were substituted. A 1953 consent order quantified the debt and prescribed satisfaction by conveyance of mortgaged houses, …
KRISHNA KUMAR BIRLAversusRAJENDRA SINGH LODHA AND OTHERS
2008 INSC 42431 March 2008Disposed off
The case concerned the grant of probate of a 1999 will of Smt. Priyamvada Devi Birla (PDB) and earlier 1982 mutual wills executed by her and her husband. Several members of the Birla family filed caveats claiming a "caveatable interest" in the estate, while Rajendra Singh Lodha (RSL) sought probate and the discharge of…
V.M. SALGAOCAR AND BROS.versusBOARD OF TRUSTEES OF PORT OF MORMUGAO AND ANR
2005 INSC 17231 March 2005Dismissed
The appellant, an iron‑ore exporter, claimed a rebate of Rs 62,46,548.10 from the Board of Trustees of Mormugao Port, alleging that the Board had unlawfully levied a surcharge and refused full rebate. The Board raised two defenses under Section 120 of the Major Port Trusts Act, 1963: that the appellant had not served t…
R. RATHINAVEL CHETTIAR AND ANOTHERversusV. SIVARAMAN AND OTHERS
1999 INSC 14531 March 1999Appeal(s) allowed
V. Sivaraman sued Shakunthala for a declaration of title and possession of a property. The trial court decreed in his favour, after which he sold the property to R.R. Chettriar and another purchaser, who were impleaded as respondents in the appeal filed by Shakunthala. While the appeal was pending, Sivaraman applied to…
SILVERLINE FORUM PVT. LTD.versusRAJIV TRUST AND ANR.
1998 INSC 16531 March 1998Appeal(s) allowed
Silverline Forum Private Limited, the new owner of a flat, obtained a decree for ejectment against its tenant Rajiv Trust for sub‑letting without consent. While executing the decree, the bailiff was resisted by the second respondent, a sub‑tenant of the first sub‑tenant, who claimed he was not a party to the decree. Th…
SUBHASH DESAIversusSHARAD J. RAO AND ORS.
1994 INSC 13631 March 1994Dismissed
Subhash Desai, elected from Goregaon as a Shiv Sena candidate, was challenged by Sharad J. Rao of Janata Dal for alleged corrupt practices. The election petition alleged that Desai had appealed to voters on religious grounds, published a false newspaper report to vilify Rao, and incited communal hatred, violating Secti…
SMT. PARKASH KAURversusSMT. SANDHOORAN AND ANR.
1993 INSC 12931 March 1993Appeal(s) allowed
Parkash Kaur mortgaged her house to Sandhooran and the property was later sold at auction. She first filed an application under Order XXI Rule 90 to set aside the sale on 16 September 1974 and subsequently filed an application under Order XXI Rule 89 on 23 September 1974 seeking to withdraw the sale and recover the mon…
BASANAGOUDAversusDR. S. B. AMARKHED AND ORS.
1992 INSC 9831 March 1992Case Partly allowed
Basanagouda was elected to the Karnataka Legislative Assembly and was challenged by Dr. S. B. Amarkhed, the nearest unsuccessful candidate, who alleged booth‑capturing and rigging of votes. The High Court, relying on Order XI Rule 14 and Order XVI Rule 6 of the CPC, ordered the production of various election documents,…
GOURANGA CHAKRABORTYversusSTATE OF TRIPURA AND ANR.
1989 INSC 11531 March 1989Dismissed
Gouranga Chakraborty, a constable in the Border Security Force (BSF), was dismissed by the Commandant for overstaying leave and being absent without leave during a period of war. After being given a chance to explain, which he failed to utilize, he appealed internally without success and subsequently filed a civil suit…
JAMMU & KASHMIR STATE FOREST CORPORATIONversusABDUL KARIM WANI
1989 INSC 11331 March 1989Appeal(s) allowed
The Jammu & Kashmir State Forest Corporation awarded a timber extraction contract to Abdul Karim Wani for 6 lakh cft. Wani later claimed entitlement to the remaining 4.08 lakh cft based on alleged custom, practice and assurances, which the Corporation denied. Wani filed an application under the Jammu & Kashmir Arbitrat…
M. KARUNANIDHI ETC.versusH.V. HANDE & ORS. ETC.
1983 INSC 3031 March 1983Disposed off
The Supreme Court examined several election petitions filed by Dr. H.V. Hande challenging the election of M. Karunanidhi. The petitioners had deposited the required Rs.2,000 security for costs in the Reserve Bank of India on a pre‑receipted challan, and the petition included a photograph of a fancy banner but no copy o…
K. L. SUNEJA & ANRversusDR. (MRS.) MANJEET KAUR MONGA (D) THROUGH HER LR & ANR
2023 INSC 8931 January 2023Disposed off
The case concerned a flat purchase where the buyer paid seven instalments totalling Rs 4,53,750, but the developer cancelled the allotment in April 2005 and issued a pay order for refund. The buyer filed a complaint under the MRTP Act (later transferred to the Competition Appellate Tribunal) seeking possession of the f…
AJAY DABRAversusPYARE RAM & ORS.
2023 INSC 9031 January 2023Dismissed
Ajay Dabra filed suits for specific performance of two agreements for the sale of agricultural land in Himachal Pradesh, where the original seller had contracted with Himalayan Ski Village Pvt. Ltd., a non‑agriculturist. The sale was conditional on obtaining permission under Section 118 of the Himachal Pradesh Tenancy …
M/S MONGIA REALTY AND BUILDWELL PRIVATE LIMITEDversusMANIK SETHI
2022 INSC 12231 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed
Mongia Realty and Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. (appellant) sued Manik Sethi (respondent) for recovery of alleged business loans, claiming the loans were repayable within one year of the last instalment and that the suit was filed within the limitation period. The respondent denied any loan relationship, asserting the payments w…
SHIV DEVELOPERS THROUGH ITS PARTNER SUNILBHAI SOMABHAI AJMERIversusAKSHARAY DEVELOPERS & ORS.
2022 INSC 11931 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed
Shiv Developers, an unregistered partnership firm, filed a suit for declaration and injunction alleging fraud and non‑payment of consideration in a sale of its share in a property to Aksharay Developers. The respondents moved to dismiss the plaint under Section 69(2) of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932, arguing that an…
GHAT TALAB KAULAN WALAversusBABA GOPAL DASS CHELA SURTI DASS (DEAD) BY LR RAM NIWAS
2020 INSC 12331 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiff, Ghat Talab Kaulan Wala Trust, sued the sevadar Baba Gopal Dass for a mandatory injunction to remove him from managing the temple and its properties. The trial court denied the injunction but ordered rendition of accounts; the first appellate court decreed in favour of the trust. The High Court set aside …
SHRI RAJENDRA LALITKUMAR AGRAWALversusSMT. RATNA ASHOK MURANJAN & ANR.
2019 INSC 12131 January 2019Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance of a contract dated 08‑08‑1984, which the trial court decreed in his favour. The first appellate court reversed that decree, dismissing the suit, and the plaintiff appealed to the High Court. The High Court dismissed the second appeal, holding that it did not raise an…
AMBADAS KHANDUJI SHINDE & ORS.versusASHOK SADASHIV MAMURKAR & ORS.
2017 INSC 8231 January 2017Appeal(s) allowed
The landlords filed a suit for recovery of possession of a shop on the ground of bona‑fide need to start a kirana business for their unemployed sons, alleging willful default and change of usage by the tenants. The trial court and the first appellate court upheld the landlords' claim, finding a genuine need and grantin…
R. RAJAGOPAL REDDY (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ORS.versusPADMINI CHANDRASEKHARAN (DEAD) BY LRS.
1995 INSC 8531 January 1995Disposed off
The Supreme Court examined whether Section 4(1) of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988 could be applied to suits, claims or actions that were filed before the Act came into force, seeking to enforce rights over benami‑held property. The petitioners argued that the proceedings, initiated under the law then i…
COAL MINES PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONERversusRAMESH CHANDER JHA
1990 INSC 2331 January 1990Appeal(s) allowed
The respondent filed a suit against the Coal Mines Provident Fund Commissioner without the notice required under Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC). The Commissioner contended that he was a "public officer" within the meaning of Section 2(17)(h) CPC, making the suit incompetent. The trial court and the Pat…
SURESH CHANDversusGULAM CHISTI
1990 INSC 2131 January 1990Appeal(s) allowed
The landlord Suresh Chand let a premises completed in 1967 to tenant Gulam Chisti and filed an eviction suit on 27 May 1972, before the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 came into force on 15 July 1972. The tenant later deposited the arrears of rent and costs in September 1977, w…
M/S BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD. AND ANOTHERversusATM CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD.
2023 INSC 104230 November 2023Dismissed
The dispute involved a property originally leased to Burma Shell Oil Storage and Distribution Company, whose lease expired on 31‑12‑1997. The respondent, the absolute owner, filed a suit in 2006 seeking possession of the property, which was decreed in 2010, but did not claim damages for the period of unlawful occupatio…
ELDECO HOUSING AND INDUSTRIES LIMITEDversusASHOK VIDYARTHI AND OTHERS
2023 INSC 104330 November 2023Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, ELDECO Housing, filed a suit for specific performance of a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) dated 31‑08‑1998 concerning the sale of a property, after learning that the vendor was attempting to sell to third parties. The respondent filed an application under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC seeking dismissal of …
ANIL KUMAR SINGHversusV!JAY PAL SINGH & ORS.
2017 INSC 116130 November 2017Appeal(s) allowed
Anil Kumar Singh filed a civil suit for a permanent injunction over a parcel of land and obtained an ex‑parte temporary injunction. He later filed an application under Order XXIII Rule 1 of the CPC seeking to withdraw the suit, which the trial court allowed subject to payment of Rs 350 as costs to the defendant, a deci…
ARUN LAL & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.
2010 INSC 83530 November 2010Dismissed
The Government of India had granted 3.563 acres of land in the Agra Cantonment to Hamid Ali Khan, who built a bungalow and later sold it with its appurtenant land to the petitioners. The petitioners sued the Union of India for arrears of rent, damages, and vacant possession of the bungalow and the surrounding land, whi…
CHANDRIKA SINGH (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ANR.versusSARJUG SINGH AND ANR.
2006 INSC 93330 November 2006Appeal(s) allowed
The case concerned land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act that had been mutated in the name of Damoder Mahto. After Damoder's death, his widow Koleshra Devi (Kaulashwari) possessed a share of the land in lieu of maintenance. She executed a deed of gift on 7 May 1960 in favour of the appellants, heirs of Ram Layak…
LANKESHWAR MALAKAR AND ORS.versusR. DEKA AND ORS.
2006 INSC 93530 November 2006Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiffs, descendants of Durga Malakar, filed a title suit claiming ownership of certain lands based on a will dated 8 October 1958 and a probate order. The defendants asserted title through a sale deed executed by Durga's widow Gandhari and a subsequent deed of exchange. The trial court ruled in favor of the pla…
SYEDABAD TEA CO. LTD.versusSTATE OF BIHAR
1982 INSC 8830 November 1982Appeal(s) allowed
Syedabad Tea Co. Ltd. owned three parcels of land in Bihar that were acquired by the State of Bihar in 1951 under the Land Acquisition Act. While the State of Bihar appealed the compensation awarded by the District Judge, the West Bengal (Transfer of Territories) Act, 1956 came into force, transferring the territory (a…
PRADEEP MEHRAversusHARIJIVAN J. JETHWA (SINCE DECEASED THR. LRS.) & ORS.
2023 INSC 95830 October 2023Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, a landlord, obtained a consent decree in 2005 allowing eviction of the respondents, tenants, upon default of rent. After the tenants defaulted, the executing court on 12 February 2013 ordered execution of the decree. Four years later the tenants filed an application before the same executing court seekin…
JAGDISH SINGHversusHEERALAL AND OTHERS
2013 INSC 73430 October 2013Appeal(s) allowed
The Bank of India advanced a loan secured by equitable mortgages on several properties, the title deeds of which were deposited with the bank. After the borrowers defaulted, the bank invoked the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) and aucti…
STATE OF A.P.versusSMT. PRAMEELA MODI AND ORS
2006 INSC 74630 October 2006Dismissed
The dispute concerned a 3.27‑gunta parcel in Khairatabad village, originally granted to Smt. Prameela Modi by a supplementary Sethwar issued by the Nizam government in 1947 and subsequently confirmed by various revenue authorities. The State of Andhra Pradesh later claimed the land as Government property (Survey No. 11…
DR. MRS. RENUKA DATLAversusSOLVAY PHARMACEUTICAL B.V. AND ORS.
2003 INSC 58330 October 2003Disposed off
The petitioners, shareholders of two pharmaceutical companies, filed three suits seeking to restrain the transfer of their 4.91% shareholdings and obtained interim injunctions, which were later vacated by the trial and High Courts. The parties subsequently entered into a written settlement whereby the respondents would…
REGU MAHESH @ REGU MAHESWAR RAOversusRAJENDRA PRATAP BHANJ DEV AND ANR.
2003 INSC 58830 October 2003Dismissed
The appellant Regu Mahesh filed an election petition challenging the election of Rajendra Pratap Bhanj Dev from the Saluru (ST) constituency on the ground that the respondent did not belong to a Scheduled Tribe. The Andhra Pradesh High Court dismissed the petition, holding that it lacked proper verification, did not co…
ANTONYSAMIversusARULANANDAM PILLAI (D) BY LRS. AND ANR.
2001 INSC 53930 October 2001Dismissed
The appellant, Antonysami, obtained a decree for specific performance of a sale, directing the judgment debtor to measure and demarcate the land by 23‑Sep‑1966 and to deposit the balance price by the same date. The appellant complied with the deposit, but the debtor delayed the measurement until 1973. An execution peti…
MITHILESH KUMARversusMANOHAR LAL
1996 INSC 125730 October 1996Appeal(s) allowed
Mithlesh Kumar filed a suit for perpetual injunction against Manohar Lal to prevent construction that would violate a 1964 agreement restricting openings and structures on the land purchased by the respondent. The respondent argued that the agreement, though unregistered, was a compulsorily registrable document under S…
KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD.versusJHABUA POWER LIMITED AND OTHERS
2024 INSC 76830 September 2024Disposed off
The Kerala State Electricity Board (KSEB) procured power through competitive bidding but accepted tariffs and quantities that deviated from standard bidding guidelines, leading to the execution of Power Supply Agreements (PSAs) for 865 MW. KSEB sought approval of these PSAs from the Kerala State Electricity Regulatory …
C.S. RAMASWAMYversusV. K. SENTHIL & ORS
2022 INSC 104630 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiffs filed suits in 2015‑2016 to cancel sale deeds executed in 2005, alleging fraud. The defendant moved to reject the plaints under Order VII Rule 11(d) of the CPC, contending the suits were barred by the 10‑year limitation period. The trial court and High Court refused to reject the plaints, holding that li…
SANGHI INDUSTRIES LIMITEDversusRAVIN CABLES LTD., AND ANR
2022 INSC 105030 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed
Sanghi Industries Ltd invoked performance bank guarantees issued by Ravin Cables Ltd in respect of three purchase orders and subsequently commenced arbitration. Ravin Cables filed two applications under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before Commercial Courts seeking to secure the disputed amoun…
PLACIDO FRANCISCO PINTO (D) BY LRS. & ANRversusJOSE FRANCISCO PINTO & ANR.
2021 INSC 58130 September 2021Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, an elder brother, purchased the southern half of a family property from his younger brother by a registered sale deed that recorded a nominal consideration of Rs 3,000, after paying Rs 12,000 to discharge the brother’s debts and avert a court‑ordered auction. The brother and his wife later claimed the de…
ARUN DEV UPADHYAYAversusINTEGRATED SALES SERVICE LTD & ANR.
2016 INSC 120330 September 2016Dismissed
Arun Dev Upadhyaya appealed against a judgment of the Single Judge of the Bombay High Court that enforced an international arbitration award against one of the respondents but not the other. The appeal raised the question of whether a Letters Patent appeal could be filed before the Division Bench under the Commercial C…
SYED ZAINUL ABEDEENversusTHE RAJASTHAN BOARD OF MUSLIM WAKF
2019 INSC 98030 August 2019Dismissed
The appellant sought a declaration that a property, which had been surveyed and listed as "Wakf‑Al‑Allah" and published in the Official Gazette on 2 December 1965, was in fact "Wakf‑Al‑Aulad". He filed a suit under Section 6 of the Wakf Act, 1954 on 17 January 1967, more than one year after the Gazette publication, con…
BUOY SINHA ROY (D) BY LR.versusBISWANATH DAS & ORS.
2017 INSC 82630 August 2017Disposed off
The appellant's wife died after a hysterectomy performed at a nursing home that lacked ICU facilities, despite her having uncontrolled high blood pressure and severe anemia. The appellant filed a complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 alleging medical negligence for proceeding with surgery without stabilisin…
YUSUF KHAN @ DILIP KUMAR THROUGH POWER OF ATTORNEYversusPRAJITA DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. & ANOTHER
2017 INSC 82930 August 2017Disposed off
The appellant, Yusuf Khan, owned a 2412 sq. yard property in Mumbai and entered into a development agreement on 23 June 2006 with two developers to construct a building, granting the developers a 50% share of the development potential. The developers failed to commence or complete construction within the stipulated 24‑…
BAL GOPAL MAHESHWARI & ORSversusSANJEEV KUMAR GUPTA
2013 INSC 57930 August 2013Appeal(s) allowed
The appellants, landlords, filed an eviction suit against the respondent tenant for non-payment of rent. The tenant filed his written statement after the prescribed period and failed to deposit the rent as required, prompting the plaintiffs to invoke Order XV Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure to have the defence st…
RAJAN PUROHIT & ORS.versusRAJASTHAN UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCE & ORS.
2012 INSC 36330 August 2012Case Partly allowed
The Supreme Court examined admissions to a private unaided medical college in Rajasthan where 117 students were admitted without a competitive entrance test, contrary to Regulation 5(2) of the MCI Regulations. The Court held that there was no consensual agreement between the college and the State to admit students on t…
MIS. SHIV COTEXversusTIRGUN AUTO PLAST P. LTD. & ORS.
2011 INSC 62430 August 2011Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiff, Mis. Shiv Cotex, sued the Punjab Financial Corporation for allegedly illegal takeover of its mortgaged assets under the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951. The trial court dismissed the suit after the plaintiff failed to produce evidence on three scheduled dates, invoking Order XVII Rule 3(a) of the …
SMT. AJAMBI (DEAD) BY LRS.versusROSHANBI AND ORS.
2010 INSC 55630 August 2010Hearing Adjourned
The respondents filed a suit for partition and separate possession of a 7/8 share in a property, which was decreed in their favour. The decree was set aside by the first appellate court, but the High Court later restored it. After the original defendant died, his widow Ajambi (deceased) allegedly executed a Will on 20‑…
DEFIANCE KNITTING INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.versusJAY ARTS
2006 INSC 56730 August 2006Appeal(s) allowed
Defiance Knitting Industries filed a summary suit for Rs.98.81 lakh and applied for unconditional leave to defend under Order XXXVII Rule 3(5) of the CPC, which was rejected. The Bombay High Court, in a civil revision, directed the defendant to deposit Rs.20 lakh to show bonafides and allowed a subsequent application f…
ASHUTOSHversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.
2005 INSC 39030 August 2005Disposed off
A decree for a construction work claim was passed against the State of Rajasthan and the partnership firm Sharma & Co. The State recovered the decree amount and sought execution against the firm’s securities, including a house owned by partner Smt. Dhanwanti Devi, who had earlier executed a will bequeathing the house t…
K. RUDRAPPAversusSHIVAPPA
2004 INSC 48530 August 2004Leave Granted & Allowed
The appellant, K. Rudrappa, sought to be recognized as the legal representative of his deceased father, who had an appeal pending for a land grant under the Karnataka Village Offices Abolition Act, 1961. Unaware of the appeal, the appellant learned of it only after receiving a letter from his father's advocate and prom…
MADHO SINGH AND ORS.versusMONI SINGH (D) BY LRS. AND ORS.
2004 INSC 48630 August 2004Leave Granted & Allowed
The villagers of Kanardipura filed a suit in representative capacity under Order I Rule 8 of the CPC seeking declaration of title, permanent injunction and possession of land they claimed was grazing (Charnoi) land, not a grove. The Board of Revenue had earlier settled the land as a grove in favour of Kalu Singh’s heir…
SHIV SARUP GUPTAversusDR. MAHESH CHAND GUPTA
1999 INSC 36430 August 1999Dismissed
The appellant, a tenant, occupied the first floor and barsati of a house in Defence Colony, New Delhi. The landlord, a doctor, sought eviction under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, claiming a bona‑fide need for the premises for himself and his family. The Additional Rent Controller dismissed the e…
N.R. DONGRE AND ORS.versusWHIRLPOOL CORPORATION AND ANR.
1996 INSC 97130 August 1996Dismissed
The plaintiffs, Whirlpool Corporation and its Indian joint‑venture TVS Whirlpool Ltd., claimed prior use and trans‑border reputation of the word mark "Whirlpool" and alleged that the defendants, trustees of Chinar Trust and related entities, had obtained a registration for the same mark in 1992 on the basis of proposed…
ABDUR RAHMAN & ORSversusATHIFA BEGUM AND ORS .
1996 INSC 97330 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed
Abdur Rahman & Ors appealed to the Supreme Court against a Karnataka High Court order that dismissed their appeal under Order 41 Rule 17 of the CPC because their counsel was absent. While dismissing the appeal, the High Court also examined the merits of the case and concluded that there was no ground for interfering wi…
UMRI POOPH PRATAPPUR (UPP) TOLLWAYS PVT. LTD.versusM.P. ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND ANOTHER
2025 INSC 90730 July 2025Disposed off
Umri Pooph Pratappur (UPP) Tollways Pvt. Ltd. entered into a 2012 concession agreement with Madhya Pradesh Road Development Corporation (MPRDC) for a state highway project. Disputes over cost overruns and delays led the appellant to first file a reference before the Madhya Pradesh Arbitration Tribunal under the 1983 Ac…
THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.versusBIHAR RAJYA BHUMI VIKAS BANK SAMITI
2018 INSC 64830 July 2018Appeal(s) allowed
The appeal arose from a Section 34 petition challenging an arbitral award where the filing party had not issued the prior notice or filed the required affidavit under Section 34(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Patna High Court had held the provision mandatory and dismissed the petition, but the Su…
SHAHAZADA BI AND ORS.versusHALIMABI (SINCE DEAD) BY HER LRS.
2004 INSC 41130 July 2004Dismissed
The wife and children of the deceased Essanullah sued for possession of seven rooms in a property they claimed was self‑acquired by Essanullah. Defendants 1‑4 asserted they were tenants‑in‑common and claimed title by adverse possession, each occupying a distinct room. During the suit, Defendant 4 died and the plaintiff…
DANDA RAJESHWARIversusBODAVULA HANUMAYAMMA AND ORS.
1996 INSC 80230 July 1996Dismissed
The petitioners challenged a High Court order directing them to file an election petition within three weeks of the writ petition's disposal and to have the Election Tribunal decide the matter without considering the statutory limitation of 30 days prescribed under Rule 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj (Election T…
VIJAY PRATAP AND ORSversusSAMBHU SARAN SINHA AND ORS.
1996 INSC 80330 July 1996Dismissed
The petitioners, sons of a deceased plaintiff, applied to be added as parties to a specific performance suit after their father's name was deleted following his death. They alleged that the relinquishment deed signed by their father was forged and that being excluded would prejudice their rights. The trial court held t…
M.S.R. PRASADversusBOMMISETTI SUBBA RAO AND ORS.
1996 INSC 80530 July 1996Dismissed
The petitioner obtained an injunction from a civil court restraining the respondent from constructing a building that allegedly infringed his easement of air and light. The respondent filed a writ petition under Article 226 against the Municipal Corporation, claiming the construction was authorized, and the High Court …
AGENCIA COMMERCIAL INTERNATIONAL LTD. & OTHERSversusCUSTODIAN OF THE BRANCHES OF BANCO NACIONAL ULTRAMARINO
1982 INSC 5830 July 1982Dismissed
The Banco Nacional Ultramarino (BNU) operated branches in Goa, Daman and Diu until the territories were liberated from Portuguese rule in 1961. On the eve of liberation BNU transferred assets to its Lisbon head office, leaving local depositors and borrowers in distress. The President of India promulgated the Goa, Daman…
R. JANAKIAMMALversusS.K. KUMARASAMY(DECEASED) THROUGH LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES AND OTHERS
2021 INSC 31630 June 2021Case Partly allowed
The case involved a joint Hindu family of three brothers who executed a partition deed on 07‑11‑1960 but continued to live and conduct business together, later executing a compromise decree on 06‑08‑1984 to settle disputes. The plaintiff challenged the decree, alleging fraud, misrepresentation and lack of free consent,…
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusDILER SINGH
2016 INSC 47930 June 2016Appeal(s) allowed
Constable Oiler Singh of the CRPF left his camp without permission, consumed alcohol and quarrelled with civilians. The disciplinary authority dismissed him under Section 11(1) of the Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949. Singh filed a civil suit seeking a declaration that the dismissal was illegal; the trial court s…
STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.versusSURENDRA MOHNOT & ORS.
2014 INSC 43230 June 2014Appeal(s) allowed
The respondents were appointed on an ad‑hoc basis as Lower Division Clerks and later regularized. They sought selection‑grade pay from the date of their initial appointment, relying on earlier circulars, while the State Government issued circulars stating that service for selection‑grade eligibility should be counted o…
GAYATRI BALASAMYversusM/S ISG NOVASOFT TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED
2025 INSC 60530 April 2025Disposed off
The Supreme Court was asked to resolve a long‑standing controversy over whether courts exercising jurisdiction under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 can modify an arbitral award. The issue arose from the earlier decision in Project Director, NHAI v. M. Hakeem, where the Court held that …
AJAY ISHWAR GHUTE & ORS.versusMEHER K. PATEL & ORS.
2024 INSC 35330 April 2024Case Partly allowed
The Supreme Court examined an appeal challenging a Bombay High Court order that disposed of a writ petition by adopting a "Minutes of Order" signed by counsel, without impleading parties who would be affected by the construction of a compound wall. The writ petition sought police protection for the wall's construction,…
SWAMI VEDVYASANAND JI MAHARAJ (D) THR LRSversusSHYAM LAL CHAUHAN & ORS.
2024 INSC 35230 April 2024Disposed off
The case concerned a second appeal pending before the Patna High Court in which the original defendant, Swami Shivdharmanand, had died, and two claimants sought substitution as legal representatives. The High Court, after a trial‑court enquiry under Order 22 Rule 5 of the CPC, substituted Swami Satyanand as the appella…
Y. SAVARIMUTHUversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.
2019 INSC 59230 April 2019Disposed off
The appellant, a government contractor, entered into an agreement with the State of Tamil Nadu to strengthen a highway. The contract was partially terminated by the Superintending Engineer on 16‑12‑1999 for alleged lack of progress, leading the appellant to file a writ petition (dismissed) and subsequently a civil suit…
MANDALI RANGANNA & ORS. ETC.versusT. RAMACHANDRA & ORS.
2008 INSC 56030 April 2008Dismissed
The appellants filed a suit seeking a declaration that certain Bangalore properties were joint family assets, along with a preliminary decree of partition and a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from constructing or alienating the land. The defendants contended that the properties had been partitioned in …
GOVERNMENT OF ORISSAversusM/S. ASHOK TRANSPORT AGENCY AND ORS.
2002 INSC 24930 April 2002Matter referred to larger bench
The plaintiff obtained an ex‑parte decree against the Charge Chrome Division of Orissa Mining Corporation before the division was taken over by the State of Orissa under the 1991 Ordinance. The State, not being impleaded, objected to execution of the decree on the ground that the decree was not binding on it. The Court…
S.G.P. COMMITTEEversusM.P. DASS CHELA (DEAD) BY LRS.
1998 INSC 21230 April 1998Dismissed
The Supreme Court examined an appeal by the Shiromani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee challenging a High Court decision that had been referred to a third judge on a difference of opinion. The Court held that, under the Letters Patent governing the Punjab & Haryana High Court, a third judge may be appointed even on factu…
MEHARBAN AND ORS. ETC. ETC.versusTHE STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.
1997 INSC 45630 April 1997Appeal(s) allowed
The Supreme Court examined appeals by landowners (Meharban & others) against the State of U.P. concerning compensation for lands acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for the planned development of Meerut City. The High Court had reduced the compensation awarded by the reference court to very low rates (e.g., R…
STATE BANK OF INDIAversusINDEXPORT REGISTERED AND ORS.
1992 INSC 14630 April 1992Appeal(s) allowed
The State Bank of India (SBI) granted a packing credit to a partnership and secured it by an equitable mortgage of a shop and a personal guarantee. SBI obtained a composite decree comprising a money decree against all defendants, including the guarantor, and a mortgage decree for sale of the shop. The guarantor objecte…
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.versusNACHHATTAR SINGH
1990 INSC 16730 April 1990Appeal(s) allowed
Nachhattar Singh, a constable of the Punjab Police, was convicted under IPC sections 325 and 34 and sentenced to six months' rigorous imprisonment, leading to his dismissal from service. He filed a suit challenging the dismissal, which the trial court dismissed as barred by limitation; the First Appellate Court reverse…
STATE BANK OF SAURASHTRAversusCHITRANJAN RANGNATH RAJA AND ANR.
1980 INSC 10030 April 1980Dismissed
The State Bank of Saurashtra extended a cash‑credit facility to Harilal Adatia on two securities: a pledge of 5,000 tins of groundnut oil and a personal guarantee by Chitranjan Rangnath Raja. The bank negligently lost the pledged oil tins while they were in its custody. After the principal debtor’s death, the bank sued…
SHRIPATI LAKHU MANEversusTHE MEMBER SECRETARY, MAHARASHTRA WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE BOARD & ORS.
2022 INSC 36830 March 2022Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, a registered contractor, was awarded a work order for a water supply scheme but faced non‑availability of specified pipes and was asked to substitute them, leading him to seek a modified rate. The respondents subsequently directed him to stop the pipeline work and commence a different project, while also…
RAGHAVENDRA SWAMY MUTTversusUTTARADI MUTT
2016 INSC 29130 March 2016
The appellant Raghavendra Swamy Mutt challenged an interim injunction granted by the Karnataka High Court in a dispute with Uttaradi Mutt over possession of a religious property. The High Court, without first admitting the second appeal under Section 100 of the CPC or formulating the required substantial question of la…
M/S. PUSHPA SAHAKARI AVAS SAMITI LTD.versusM/S. GANGOTRI SAHAKARI AVAS S. LTD. AND ORS.
2012 INSC 15330 March 2012Appeal(s) allowed
In a suit for permanent injunction, the parties entered into a compromise decree dated 06‑09‑1996 requiring the defendant to pay a sum within six months. The defendant failed to pay, and the decree-holder filed an execution petition on 17‑02‑1997, before the six‑month period had expired. The defendant objected under Se…
RAMESHKUMAR AGARWALversusRAJMALA EXPORTS PVT. LTD. & ORS.
2012 INSC 15630 March 2012Dismissed
The respondent filed a suit for specific performance of a sale agreement in 2007. In 2008 the plaintiff sought to amend the plaint to implead additional parties and to detail how the consideration was paid. The High Court allowed the amendment in part, which the appellant (defendant) challenged on the ground that it al…
K.K. VELUSAMYversusN. PALANISAMY
2011 INSC 24330 March 2011Case Partly allowed
The appellant, K.K. Velusamy, filed a suit for specific performance of a sale agreement, which he claimed was merely a security for a loan. After the evidence was closed, he sought to reopen the evidence and recall two witnesses to cross‑examine them about admissions recorded on a compact disc, alleging that the record…
SHIV GOPAL SAH@SHIV GOPAL SAHUversusSITA RAM SARAUGI AND ORS.
2007 INSC 35330 March 2007Appeal(s) allowed
In 1986 the original plaintiff filed an eviction suit which was later converted into a title suit after the defendant claimed ownership based on a sale deed dated 4‑Oct‑1985. The plaintiff failed to amend the pleadings to challenge that deed despite being directed to do so, and the suit remained pending for many years.…
SMT. MANJURI BERAversusTHE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. AND ANR.
2007 INSC 35630 March 2007Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, a married daughter of a deceased motor‑vehicle accident victim, filed a claim petition under Section 140(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The insurer contended that she was not entitled to compensation because she was not financially dependent on her father. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal dismisse…
MAHARASHTRA STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATIONversusASHOK K. AGARWAL AND ORS .
2006 INSC 18930 March 2006Dismissed
Maharashtra State Financial Corporation (MSFC) had sanctioned a loan to Crystal Marketing Pvt Ltd, whose directors stood as sureties. After default, MSFC invoked Sections 31 and 32 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 to sell hypothecated property, and later, after a shortfall, issued notice to the sureties an…
SRI MOHAN WAHIversusCOMMISSIONER, INCOME TAX, VARANASI AND ORS
2001 INSC 18730 March 2001Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, a partnership firm, owned a house property that was attached and proclaimed for sale under tax recovery proceedings. The property was auctioned in 1980 and a bid was accepted, but the tax demands against the firm were later reduced to nil after successful appeals before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.…
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusRAKESH KUMAR
2001 INSC 18830 March 2001Appeal(s) allowed
The respondent, a former constable of the Border Security Force (BSF), resigned after 12 years and 8 months of service under Rule 19 of the BSF Rules, 1969. The Government of India, relying on a 1995 Government Order, granted him full pensionary benefits, which were not released, leading to a writ petition and subseque…
P.K. VIJAYANversusKAMALAKSHI AMMA AND ORS.
1994 INSC 13130 March 1994Dismissed
The landlords filed an eviction petition under Section 11 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, which the Rent Controller accepted, directing them to sue in civil court. The tenant first sought relief under Section 72B of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, claiming assignment of title as a cultivating t…
RAM PRASAD (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ORS.versusTHE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION AND ORS.
1994 INSC 13430 March 1994Appeal(s) allowed
The widow Jivani, after the death of her husband Bahadur Singh (the last male holder of tenancy rights), claimed to have created a joint tenancy with Jwala Singh under Section 59 of the U.P. Tenancy Act, 1939. The appellants, heirs of the original tenant, challenged the decree, alleging it was collusive and fraudulent …
URMILA DEVI & ORS.versusBRANCH MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. & ANR.
2020 INSC 10730 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed
The claimants filed a claim under the Motor Vehicles Act after the husband/father suffered a road accident, and the Motor Vehicle Accidental Claim Tribunal ordered the National Insurance Company to pay Rs.2,47,500. The insurer appealed to the Patna High Court, challenging its liability to pay, and the claimants filed a…
THE MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, RAGHOGARH & ANR.versusNATIONAL FERTILIZER LTD. & ORS.
2018 INSC 6930 January 2018Dismissed
The Municipal Council of Raghogarh demanded external development charges of Rs.5 per square metre from National Fertilizers Ltd. and Gas Authority of India Ltd. for colonies they had constructed on forest land within the municipal limits. The respondents, both public sector undertakings, argued that they are not coloni…
SURJIT KAUR GILL & ANR.versusADARSH KAUR GILL & ANR.
2014 INSC 7130 January 2014Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiff, acting as administrator of his deceased sister's will, filed a suit for partition of her estate and related reliefs. The defendant moved an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC, claiming the suit was barred by limitation. The trial judge dismissed the application, but the Division Bench of the …
GODREJ & BOYCE MFG. CO. LTD. & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.
2014 INSC 6830 January 2014Appeal(s) allowed
Godrej & Boyce acquired a 133-acre parcel in Vikhroli, which was declared waste land and cultivated before 1951. The State later issued a show‑cause notice under Section 35(3) of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 (notice No. WT/53) in 1956‑57, but never served it or took possession, while repeatedly granting building permiss…
MARGRET ALMEIDA & ORS. ETC. ETC.versusTHE BOMBAY CATHOLIC CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. & ORS. ETC. ETC.
2012 INSC 5530 January 2012Disposed off
The appellants, tenant members of a housing co‑operative society, filed suits in the Bombay High Court seeking declaration that a resolution to sell society land and the subsequent conveyance to third parties were illegal and void. The respondents argued that the suits were barred by Sections 91 and 163 of the Maharash…
RAJENDRAN AND OTHERSversusSHANKAR SUNDARAM AND OTHERS
2008 INSC 12030 January 2008Dismissed
The plaintiff obtained a loan of Rs 70.30 lakh, secured by a cheque drawn in the name of a partnership firm, and filed a suit for recovery along with an application for attachment before judgment under Order XXXVIII Rule 5 CPC. The High Court rejected the attachment, holding that the loan was not for the benefit of the…
MAYAR (H.K.) LTD. AND ORS.versusOWNERS & PARTIES, VESSEL M.V. FORTUNE EXPRESS AND ORS.
2006 INSC 4630 January 2006Appeal(s) allowed
Mayar (HK) Ltd. and other plaintiffs filed an admiralty suit in the Calcutta High Court alleging that the carrier, Trustrade Enterprises PTE Ltd., failed to deliver 456 timber logs that were to be shipped on the deck of the vessel M.V. Fortune Express from Malaysia to Calcutta. The defendants argued that the Bill of La…
ACHINTYA KUMAR SAHAversusM/S. NANEE PRINTERS AND ORS.
2004 INSC 7330 January 2004Dismissed
The appellant, having purchased a property bequeathed to a widow with a life interest, filed a title suit for eviction against M/s Nanee Printers, alleging that their 11‑year agreement dated 5 July 1976 was a revocable licence. The trial court held it a licence and dismissed the suit; the first appellate court reversed…
RATAN LAL JAIN AND ORS.versusUMA SHANKAR VYAS AND ORS.
2002 INSC 5730 January 2002Dismissed
The plaintiffs, owners of a plot of land, leased it to the respondents who built a commercial complex and sub-let the shops. After the respondents defaulted on lease premium, the plaintiffs sued for arrears and eviction. The trial court decreed actual possession against the respondents and only symbolic possession agai…
RAM CHANDRA VERMAversusSHRI JAGAT SINGH AND ORS.
1996 INSC 14830 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed
The respondents filed eviction suits against tenant Harkesh Rai Agarwal in 1975, both of which were dismissed, after which a compromise decree was entered on 26 Nov 1981 whereby Harkesh Rai agreed to surrender a room now occupied by the appellant, Ram Chandra Verma. When execution of the decree was sought, the appellan…
STATE OF HARYANAversusCHANDRA MANI AND ORS.
1996 INSC 15030 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed
The State of Haryana filed a Letters Patent Appeal against a judgment of the Punjab & Haryana High Court, but delayed filing the appeal by 109 days. The High Court refused to condone the delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The Supreme Court examined the meaning of "sufficient cause" and held that the pro…
HIRA LAL AND ANOTHERversusGAJJAN AND OTHERS
1990 INSC 1930 January 1990Dismissed
The plaintiff, Hira Lal, claimed that his father was a sub‑tenant recorded in Khasra 1356 Fasli and had acquired adhivasi and sirdari rights under the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, which extinguished the defendants' title. The trial court and the first appellate court rejected this claim, holding…
SMT. PATASIBAI & ORS.versusRATANLAL
1990 INSC 2030 January 1990Appeal(s) allowed
Motilal, the owner of Goyal Talkies, entered into a partnership with Ratanlal and later obtained a decree dissolving the partnership and ordering a refund after a compromise. Ratanlal subsequently filed a suit in 1980 seeking a declaration that the 1959 decree was a nullity and claiming possession of the talkies. The a…
HASMAT ALIversusAMINA BIBI & ORS.
2021 INSC 80029 November 2021Appeal(s) allowed
Hasmat Ali filed a suit seeking a declaration that Amina Bibi was his tenant until 31‑03‑2003 and an order for eviction. The trial court decreed in part and directed the defendant to vacate the premises. The defendant's first appeal was dismissed, and a second appeal under Section 100 of the CPC was dismissed by the Or…
BISMILLAH BE (DEAD) BY LRS.versusMAJEED SHAH
2016 INSC 107329 November 2016Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, a co‑owner of a house in Jabalpur, proved her title to the suit property through a series of registered sale and partition deeds and served a quit notice on the respondent, who had been a tenant of the original owner, Rai Bahadur Motiram Mathuradas. The respondent denied any landlord‑tenant relationship …
M/S. PARAGON RUBBER INDUSTRIESversusM/S. PRAGATHI RUBBER MILLS & ORS.
2013 INSC 79829 November 2013Dismissed
The plaintiff, Paragon Rubber Industries, filed a suit in the District Court of Kottayam seeking relief under the Copyright Act, 1957 and the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958. The defendants challenged the suit's territorial jurisdiction, arguing that the court lacked jurisdiction under the 1958 Act. The trial cou…
STATE OF HARYANA & ANR.versusKARTAR SINGH (D) THROUGH LRS.
2012 INSC 54929 November 2012Disposed off
The State of Haryana acquired land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and the reference court enhanced compensation in 1980, awarding 15% solatium and 6% interest. After the 1984 amendment to the Act, the landowners filed applications under CPC sections 151 and 152 in 1989 seeking the enhanced benefits of the amended…
M/S TRANSCOREversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.
2006 INSC 92429 November 2006Disposed off
The Supreme Court examined whether a bank, having filed an original application before the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) for recovery of dues, must withdraw that application before invoking the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (NPA Act). It held that th…
U.P. STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATIONversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANR.
2004 INSC 67829 November 2004Appeal(s) allowed
The Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (UPSRTC) prepared a draft scheme on 13‑Feb‑1986 to nationalise 39 bus routes under Section 68‑C of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. After objections were filed, the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 came into force and the competent authority declared the scheme to have lapsed und…
SHAKEELUR RAHMANversusSYED MEHDI ISPAHANI
2002 INSC 50129 November 2002Dismissed
The landlord sought eviction of the tenant under Section 14(1)(b) of the Tamil Nadu Building (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960, claiming a bona‑fide need to demolish and rebuild the premises for better financial returns. The Rent Controller and the Appellate Authority rejected the petition, holding that the landlord m…
PRATIBHA SINGH AND ANR.versusSHANTI DEVI PRASAD AND ANR.
2002 INSC 50329 November 2002Disposed off
The Supreme Court dealt with a suit for specific performance of a contract to sell immovable land where the plaint failed to give a precise description of the property and no map was annexed. The trial court decreed specific performance, but the decree did not identify the land, leading to execution difficulties, inclu…
ISHWAR DASS JAIN (DEAD) THROUGH L.RS.versusSOHAN LAL (DEAD) BY L.RS.
1999 INSC 53329 November 1999Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, the legal representative of the mortgagor, filed a suit for redemption of a usufructuary mortgage and possession of a shop. The defendant claimed the mortgage was a sham designed to evade rent‑control law and that the parties were landlord and tenant. The trial court and the first appellate court dismiss…
STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS. ETC.versusS. THANGAVEL AND ORS. ETC.
1996 INSC 141829 November 1996Dismissed
The Supreme Court examined whether the Tamil Nadu Government could prepare a supplementary promotion list after an annual list had been prepared, despite no vacancies existing on the prescribed date, when new posts were later created due to administrative reorganisation. It held that the Rules do not strip the Governme…
PREM NATH KAPUR AND ANOTHER ETC.versusNATIONAL FERTILIZERS CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED AND OTHERS
1995 INSC 80629 November 1995Dismissed
The appellants sought compensation for land acquired by the State under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. After a notification in 1973, the Collector awarded Rs 10,080 per acre in 1975, which was later enhanced by the District Judge and the High Court to Rs 24,000 per acre. The High Court also awarded solatium, interest …
MELEPURATH SANKUNNI EZHUTHASSANversusTHEKITTIL GOPALANKUTTY NAIR
1985 INSC 24529 November 1985Dismissed
M.S. Ezhlitassan filed a suit for defamation which was dismissed, appealed and obtained a decree for damages. The respondent appealed, the High Court reversed the decree and dismissed the suit. While the appeal before the Supreme Court was pending, the appellant died. His grandchildren filed petitions to be substituted…
POONAMversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.
2015 INSC 81329 October 2015Dismissed
The appellant, a visually‑handicapped allottee of a fair‑price shop, challenged an appellate order that restored the original allottee's licence and cancelled her own allotment. The High Court dismissed her writ petition on the ground that she was not a necessary party. The Supreme Court examined whether a subsequent a…
INBASEGARAM AND ANOTHERversusS. NATARAJAN (DEAD) THR. LRS.
2014 INSC 74829 October 2014Disposed off
The plaintiff (Inbasegaran) filed two suits against the defendant (S. Natarajan) – one for a permanent injunction to prevent forcible dispossession of a constructed building, and a later suit for specific performance of a sale agreement. The defendant contended that the second suit was barred by Order 2, Rule 2 of the …
RATHNAVATHI & ANOTHERversusKAVITA GANASHAMDAS
2014 INSC 75129 October 2014Disposed off
The plaintiff entered into a 1989 agreement to purchase a house from defendant No.2, paid the full consideration, but the seller failed to execute the sale deed. The plaintiff filed two suits: one for permanent injunction to prevent dispossession by defendant No.1 and No.2, and another for specific performance of the s…
ZARINA SIDDIQUIversusA. RAMALINGAMALIAS R.AMARNATHAN
2014 INSC 75229 October 2014Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiff sought specific performance of a 1979 agreement whereby the first defendant, owner of a one‑third undivided share in a Bangalore property, through his brother (the second defendant) who held a registered power of attorney, agreed to sell the share for Rs 40,000. The plaintiff paid the full consideration b…
MIS. AVK TRADERSversusKERALA STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LTD.
2013 INSC 73329 October 2013Appeal(s) allowed
M/s AVK Traders, a registered partnership of two partners, filed a suit for recovery of dues against Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation. During the pendency of the suit, the appellant's father, the other partner, died, causing the partnership to dissolve under its deed. The surviving partner applied to continue th…
STATE OF PUNJABversusDARSHAN SINGH
2003 INSC 57529 October 2003Case Partly allowed
The respondent, a former senior compositor, was removed from service in 1977 and later reappointed as a junior compositor on a temporary basis. He filed a declaratory suit challenging the removal and seeking pay adjustments, which was dismissed by the trial court. The First Appellate Court reversed the dismissal and, b…
RAM PRASAD SARMAversusMANI KUMAR SUBBA AND ORS.
2002 INSC 44629 October 2002Disposed off
Ram Prasad Sarma, who lost the 1999 Lok Sabha election for Tezpur to Mani Kumar Subba, filed an election petition alleging booth‑capturing and rigging. The respondent moved to dismiss the petition under Section 86(1) on three grounds: the petition was filed beyond the 45‑day limitation, a candidate (Abu Khayer) was not…
EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, DHANKANAL MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION, ORISSAversusN.C. BUDHIRAJ (DEAD) BY LRS. ETC.
1999 INSC 50129 October 1999
The Supreme Court examined whether an arbitrator can award interest for the period before a reference (pre‑reference period) under the Interest Act, 1839 when the arbitration agreement is silent on interest. The Court noted earlier decisions—Executive Engineer v. Jena, State of Orissa v. G.C. Roy, and State of Orissa v…
NAHAR SINGHversusHARNAK SINGH AND ORS.
1996 INSC 124529 October 1996Dismissed
The appellant entered into an agreement of sale for immovable land that was described only in vague terms, lacking exact area, boundaries, and khasra numbers. The trial court granted specific performance without examining the identifiability of the property. On appeal, the lower appellate court held that the agreement …
M/S. C.S. COMPANY AND ORS.versusKERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD
1996 INSC 124629 October 1996Dismissed
The petitioners filed a suit for settlement of accounts and a declaration that they were entitled to recover damages under a contract dated May 12, 1983. They later applied, under Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC, to amend the plaint to convert the suit into a damages suit by quantifying the claimed amount. The trial court …
M/S. MOTORS AND INVESTMENTS LTD.versusTHE NEW BANK OF INDIA AND ORS.
1996 INSC 124829 October 1996Disposed off
Mis Motors and Investments Ltd. had purchased 44 acres of land at a court auction for Rs 77,500 after no other bids were received. The land belonged to insolvent respondents whose interest vested in the official assignee, who was directed to sell the property. On appeal, other respondents offered substantially higher s…
SURINDER SINGHversusHARDIAL SINGH AND ORS.
1984 INSC 20229 October 1984Appeal(s) allowed
In the 1980 Punjab Legislative Assembly election, Surinder Singh was elected but his victory was challenged on two grounds of corrupt practice under the Representation of the People Act, 1951: (1) alleged "undue influence" for disturbing an Akali Party meeting with firearms, and (2) alleged "bribery" for promising to h…
PANDURANG JIVAJIversusRAMCHANDRA GANGADHAR ASHTEKAR (DEAD) BY LRS. & ORS.
1981 INSC 18529 October 1981Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, Pandurang Jivajirao Apte, was the garnishee of property attached before judgment in a suit filed by the deceased R. G. Ashtakar for recovery of dues. Apte sold the attached property to Madhusudan Vasudeo Bavdekar under Section 176 of the Indian Contract Act after giving notice, but the sale proceeds were…
SUKHBIRI DEVI & ORSversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.
2022 INSC 103729 September 2022Dismissed
The appellants filed a declaratory suit challenging a relinquishment deed and were dismissed by the trial court on a preliminary issue of limitation, a decision affirmed by the first appellate court and the Delhi High Court. They contended that the limitation period should be extended to twelve years under Article 136 …
M/S PRIME PROPERTIESversusSANA LAKSHMI DEVI (DIED) THROUGH HER LRS. & ORS.
2022 INSC 104129 September 2022Disposed off
The case involved a series of civil suits filed in 2001 that had been repeatedly amended and impleaded, leading to a long pendency. The plaintiff sought to file a rejoinder after the defendants had filed written statements, but the trial court initially rejected the application, later allowing it on review. The High Co…
AVTAR SINGH & ORS.versusBIMLA DEVI & ORS.
2021 INSC 56929 September 2021Appeal(s) allowed
The dispute concerned a property on GT Road, Shahabad Markanda, where the plaintiffs alleged that the defendants had illegally broken the lintel of the first‑floor roof and constructed a staircase to take possession of their house. The trial court and the first appellate court, after considering the evidence including …
VISHWABANDHUversusSRI KRISHNA AND ANR.
2021 INSC 57029 September 2021Appeal(s) allowed
Respondent No.2 sued Respondent No.1 for refund of part sale consideration. Summons sent by registered post were returned with a "refusal" endorsement, which under Order V Rule 9(5) and Section 27 of the General Clauses Act is deemed to have been served. An ex‑parte decree was passed in favour of Respondent No.2, and t…
THE CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL BHALKI, BY ITS CHIEF OFFICERversusGURAPPA (D) BY LRS. & ANR.
2015 INSC 70829 September 2015Dismissed
The deceased respondent Gurappa filed a suit in 1984 (O.S. No. 255) for declaration of title which was dismissed for lack of proper parties and proof of possession. He later filed another suit in 1993 (O.S. No. 39) seeking declaration of title, possession, injunction and correction of revenue records. The Municipal Cou…
RAM KUMAR AND ANR.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.
2008 INSC 109929 September 2008Case Partly allowed
The appellants, Ram Kumar and others, were allotted land in lieu of land acquired from their father, but the District Collector later revoked the order and directed that the land be handed over to the District Education Officer. The appellants served a notice under Section 80 of the CPC on the State Government through …
KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LTD.versusOFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA
2006 INSC 67829 September 2006Dismissed
Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd., a government company, advanced a loan to Mis Concert Capital Ltd. and its sister concern, which defaulted. The appellant initiated recovery proceedings under the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, 1968, resulting in attachment of the debtor's assets. While the debtor was undergoing vo…
TULSANversusPYARE LAL AND ORS.
2006 INSC 67929 September 2006Appeal(s) allowed
The parties, who were co‑sharers, filed a suit for permanent injunction which was settled by a consent decree under Order 23, Rule 1 of the CPC allocating shares in the disputed property. The respondents sought mutation of their names in the revenue records based on that decree, but the revenue authorities refused, sta…
RAM BHUALversusAMBIKA SINGH
2005 INSC 45529 September 2005Dismissed
In the 2002 Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly election, Ram Bhual was declared elected. Defeated candidate Ambika Singh filed an election petition under Section 100(1)(c) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, alleging that the Returning Officer had wrongly rejected the nomination of independent candidate Sita…
FEDERAL BANK LTD.versusV.M. JOG ENGINEERING LTD. AND ORS.
2000 INSC 47229 September 2000Appeal(s) allowed
The buyer entered into a contract for steel bars and opened a Letter of Credit (LC) with the Issuing Bank. The seller presented documents, including forged delivery challans, to the Negotiating Bank (Federal Bank), which, after obtaining certification from the Issuing Bank that the documents appeared to comply with the…
JOGINDER PALversusINDIAN RED CROSS SOCIETY AND ORS.
2000 INSC 47029 September 2000Dismissed
Ms. Raj Mohini executed a 1985 will in favour of the Indian Red Cross Society and a later 1987 will revoking the former and bequeathing her assets to Joginder Pal. After her death, the Red Cross Society applied for a succession certificate, but the court dismissed the application and granted a certificate to Joginder P…
SUDERSHAN DEVI AND ANR.versusSUSHILA DEVI AND ANR.
1999 INSC 44829 September 1999Dismissed
The landlord Sushila Devi filed an eviction suit under Section 20(4) of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972, alleging that the tenant had defaulted in rent for 33 months. The summons fixed the first hearing for 22‑Feb‑1990, but the tenant, who died in 1991, deposited t…
GURU NANAK FOUNDATIONversusRATTAN SINGH & SONS
1981 INSC 17529 September 1981Case Allowed
The parties entered into a building contract containing an arbitration clause. After a series of applications and a change of arbitrator, the Supreme Court appointed the final arbitrator and gave directions for the conduct of the arbitration. The arbitrator made an award on 11 November 1977 and, on advice of a court of…
SUDAM KISAN GAVANE (D) THR. LRS. & ORS.versusMANIK ANANTA SHIKKETOD (D) BY LRS. & ORS.
2019 INSC 97729 August 2019Appeal(s) allowed
The appellants filed a second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, challenging a decree. The High Court admitted the appeal but did not frame any substantial question of law before hearing, and only mentioned such questions in the judgment. The Supreme Court held that this procedure violates t…
ASHRAF KOKKURversusK.V. ABDUL KHADER ETC.
2014 INSC 57529 August 2014Appeal(s) allowed
The respondent, K.V. Abdul Khader, was Chairperson of the Kerala State Wakf Board and was elected to the Kerala Legislative Assembly. The appellant, Ashraf Kokkurr, filed an election petition alleging that the respondent was disqualified under Article 191(1)(a) of the Constitution because he held an office of profit. T…
K. VILASINI & ORS.versusEDWIN PERIERA & ORS.
2008 INSC 99429 August 2008Dismissed
The appellants (mortgagees) challenged a High Court order that had extended time for the mortgagor to deposit the amount representing the value of improvements on mortgaged property. The trial court had repeatedly extended the deadline under Order XXXIV Rule 5 of the CPC, and the mortgagor eventually deposited the sum.…
BHARAT SEWA SANSTHANversusU.P. ELECTRONICS CORPORATION LTD.
2007 INSC 87529 August 2007
Bharat Sewa Sansthan, a charitable society, leased premises to U.P. Electronics Corporation Ltd. under a lease that contained an arbitration clause. The society sued for recovery of rent arrears, water and sewerage taxes, and interest, while the corporation moved for reference of the dispute to arbitration under Sectio…
JINDAL VIJAYANAGAR STEEL (JSW STEEL LTD.)versusJINDAL PRAXAIR OXYGEN COMPANY LTD.
2006 INSC 56429 August 2006Dismissed
The appellant, JSW Steel, was setting up a steel plant in Bellary, Karnataka and entered into a pipeline supply agreement with the respondent, Jindal Praxair, which contained an arbitration clause specifying Bombay as the seat of arbitration. A dispute arose and the respondent filed a petition under Section 9 of the Ar…
POPAT AND KOTECHA PROPERTYversusSTATE BANK OF INDIA STAFF ASSOCIATION
2005 INSC 38729 August 2005Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant and the respondent entered into a 1983 agreement for the appellant to develop the respondent's property, with the respondent to execute a lease deed after construction, which was never done. The appellant filed a suit in 1990 seeking declaration of title, specific performance, damages and other reliefs. T…
BHARAT COKING COAL LTD.versusM/S. ANNAPURNA CONSTRUCTIONS
2003 INSC 43529 August 2003Case Partly allowed
The parties entered into a contract for constructing 140 temporary hutments which contained an arbitration clause. After delays, the arbitrator awarded the contractor a sum with 18% interest, but the subordinate court, in making the award a rule of court, did not grant interest under Section 29 of the Arbitration Act, …
RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD.versusPRAVINBHAI JASBHAI PATEL AND ORS.
1997 INSC 62929 August 1997Appeal(s) allowed
The Supreme Court considered an appeal by Reliance Industries Ltd. against the Gujarat High Court’s dismissal of its review petition challenging a writ order passed under Article 226 that directed polluting industries to install effluent treatment. The division bench of the High Court had differed on the merits, and di…
MADAN LALversusMST. GOPI & ANR.
1980 INSC 16829 August 1980Dismissed
The dispute concerned a deed of adoption executed by Mansaram in 1944, which the appellant Madan Lal sought to enforce. The trial and district courts dismissed the suit, but the Rajasthan High Court set aside those judgments, holding that Mansaram was not of sound mind when he executed the deed. The Supreme Court exami…
M/S BHAGWANDAS B. RAMCHANDANIversusBRITISH AIRWAYS
2022 INSC 76829 July 2022Dismissed
The appellant, a cargo importer, claimed damages from British Airways for loss of perishable goods shipped from Mumbai to Canada, filing suit in 2012. The trial court held the claim was not time‑barred, but the Bombay High Court dismissed it, holding that the two‑year limitation under Rule 30 of the Carriage by Air Act…
RUPA ROYversusTHE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD. & ANR.
2019 INSC 82429 July 2019Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, Rupa Roy, and her 10‑year‑old son were injured when a high‑speed van collided with their rickshaw van, leaving the son with a medically certified 70% permanent disability. She filed a claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded a compensation of …
SHAMSHER SINGH & ANR.versusLT. COL. NAHAR SINGH (D) THR. LRS. & ORS.
2019 INSC 82029 July 2019Appeal(s) allowed
The decree‑holders obtained possession of a suit property under a decree of specific performance. Respondent No.1 (Shamsher Singh) claimed he had acquired title by adverse possession and filed an application under Order XXI Rules 98‑100 of the CPC seeking to be put back into possession. The executing court rejected the…
RANJANA PRAKASH AND ORS.versusDIVISIONAL MANAGER AND ANR.
2011 INSC 52729 July 2011Appeal(s) allowed
The deceased, a 46‑year‑old bank manager earning Rs.23,134 per month, died in a motor accident. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.24,12,936 with interest. The insurer appealed, and the High Court reduced the award by 30% on the ground of income‑tax deduction, bringing it down to Rs.16,89,055…
NAHAR INDUSTRIAL ENTERPRISES LTD.versusHONG KONG & SHANGHAI BANKING CORPORATION
2009 INSC 96629 July 2009Disposed off
Nahar Industrial Enterprises Ltd entered into ISDA derivative contracts with Hong Kong & Shanghai Banking Corp. When disputes arose, Nahar filed a civil suit in Ludhiana seeking a declaration that the contracts were void and an injunction, while the bank filed an application before the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) for …
NUNE PRASAD AND ORS.versusNUNE RAMAKRISHNA
2008 INSC 87529 July 2008Disposed off
The appellant-plaintiffs Nune Prasad & Ors filed a suit asserting ownership of a property. The trial court and the first appellate court upheld their claim. The defendant filed a second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure before the High Court, which set aside the lower judgments without formulating…
DEENA (DEAD) THROUGH L.RS.versusBHARAT SINGH (DEAD) THROUGH L.RS. AND ORS.
2002 INSC 31229 July 2002Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant (defendant) challenged the High Court’s decision that the plaintiffs were entitled to exclusion of the period between the withdrawal of an earlier suit and the filing of a fresh suit under Section 14 of the Limitation Act. The earlier suit had been withdrawn with the court’s permission under Order XXIII R…
GOPI AQUA FARMS AND ORS. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA
1997 INSC 57929 July 1997Dismissed
Gopi Aqua Farms and others filed a writ petition under Article 32 challenging a 19‑Feb‑1991 notification issued under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, after the Supreme Court had delivered its judgment in Jagannath v. Union of India. The petitioners argued that they were not parties to the earlier case, that the…
BHAICHAND RATANSHIversusLAXMISHANKER TRIBHOYAN
1981 INSC 13329 July 1981Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiff, a merchant displaced from Uganda, filed a suit under section 13(1)(g) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 seeking eviction of the defendant who had licensed another person to occupy the shop as a godown. The defendant argued that eviction would cause him greater hardship …
HARYANA STATE & ANR.versusGRAM PANCHAYAT VILLAGE KALEHRI
2016 INSC 45129 June 2016Appeal(s) allowed
The State of Haryana filed a second appeal against a judgment that declared a Gram Panchayat the owner of a 36-kanal piece of land. The High Court dismissed the appeal in limine, holding that it did not raise a substantial question of law under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The Supreme Court held that the…
UNION OF INDIAversusK.V. LAKSHMAN & ORS.
2016 INSC 44329 June 2016Remitted to Lower Court
The Union of India filed a title suit claiming ownership of a plot of land, which the trial court dismissed on limitation and lack of evidence. The Union appealed under Section 96 of the CPC, also seeking to file additional evidence via Order 41 Rule 27, but the High Court dismissed the appeal in limine and rejected th…
M/S UMESH GOELversusHIMACHAL PRADESH COOPERATIVE GROUP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD.
2016 INSC 45729 June 2016Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, an unregistered partnership firm, entered into a construction contract with the respondent and later contested the respondent's claim in arbitration. The respondent argued that Section 69(3) of the Partnership Act, 1932 barred the firm from participating in arbitral proceedings because "other proceedings…
P. KUMARAKURUBARANversusP. NARAYANAN & ORS.
2025 INSC 59829 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, P. Kumarakurubaran, was assigned a vacant site in 1974 and executed a power of attorney in 1978 for construction. His father later sold the property in 1988 to the defendant without authority, which the appellant discovered in 2011 and filed a land‑grabbing complaint. In 2014 he instituted a suit seeking…
K. VALARMATHI & ORS.versusKUMARESAN
2025 INSC 60629 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed
The appellants, legal heirs of the deceased Kathiresan, filed suits seeking declaration of title and injunction over a suit land purchased by Kathiresan. The respondent, a relative, invoked Article 227 of the Constitution before the Madras High Court, seeking rejection of the plaints on the ground that they were barred…
SAMEER KAPOOR AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE THROUGH SUB-DIVISION MAGISTRATE SOUTH, NEW DELHI AND OTHERS
2019 INSC 58529 April 2019Dismissed
The appeal concerned an application for letters of administration under Section 228 of the Indian Succession Act filed by the respondent after a probate was granted in England. The appellants argued that the application was barred by the three‑year limitation period under Article 137 of the Limitation Act, contending t…
JAGMOHAN SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.
2008 INSC 54029 April 2008Disposed off
Jagmohan Singh applied for a free‑hold residential plot under PUDA's scheme, deposited the required earnest money and was allotted a plot. The letter of intent required him to pay 15% of the price within 60 days, extendable by 30 days, failing which the earnest money would be forfeited. He sought extensions (granted up…
SHRI RAM CHANDRA MISSION & ANR.versusP. RAJAGOPALACHARI & ORS.
2008 INSC 55129 April 2008Disposed off
The dispute concerned the spiritual heirship and control of the Shri Ram Chandra Mission, a religious society, after the death of its founder. Members of the society filed a suit seeking an ex‑parte injunction restraining P. Rajagopalachari from acting as President, which was later set aside by the High Court and the s…
MANAGEMENT OF THE GOODWILL GIRLS HIGH SCHOOL AND ANR.versusSMT. J. MARY SUSHEELA AND ORS.
2003 INSC 26529 April 2003Case Partly allowed
Smt. J. Mary Susheela, a teacher, filed a suit seeking a mandatory injunction to be assigned teaching work as per an alleged appointment. The trial court framed six issues but decided only the first, finding she was not entitled to the injunction and dismissed the suit. The Karnataka High Court on appeal expanded the s…
ARUMUGHAM (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ORS.versusSUNDARAMBAL AND ANR.
1999 INSC 21329 April 1999Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiff, represented by his legal heirs, sued for a declaration of title and a permanent injunction, claiming to be the son of the late Haritheertham and Mariyayee. The trial court dismissed the suit, finding the plaintiff had not proved his lineage or possession of the property. The first appellate court reverse…
SHREE CHAMUNDI MOPEDS LTD.versusCHURCH OF SOUTH INDIA TRUST ASSN. CSI CINOD SECRETARIAT, MADRAS
1992 INSC 13829 April 1992Dismissed
Shree Chamundi Mopeds Ltd., a tenant of the Church of South India Trust, defaulted on rent and faced eviction under the Karnataka Rent Control Act. The company was also declared a sick industrial company by the Board of Industrial and Financial Reconstruction under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act…
PREM KISHORE & ORS.versusBRAHM PRAKASH & ORS
2023 INSC 31729 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed
The original landlord filed an eviction petition under the Delhi Rent Control Act, but after the tenant denied the landlord‑tenant relationship, the landlord failed to produce evidence and the Rent Controller dismissed the petition without a finding on merits. After the landlord's death, his successors filed a fresh ev…
PRASANTA KUMAR SAHOO & ORS.versusCHARULATA SAHU & ORS.
2023 INSC 31929 March 2023Dismissed
The case involved a partition suit concerning the ancestral and self‑acquired properties of the late Kumar Sahoo, claimed by his daughter Charulata Sahu and contested by the heirs of his son Prafulla Sahoo. The trial court issued a preliminary decree allocating a one‑sixth share to the daughter in ancestral lands and o…
SHIVSHANKARA & ANRversusH.P. VEDAVYASA CHAR
2023 INSC 31829 March 2023Dismissed
The appeal concerned a suit for injunction and possession of a house, filed by the plaintiff under a claim of prior possession. During the suit one defendant died, and the remaining defendants, who were also his legal representatives, continued to defend the suit. The appellants argued that the suit should abate for no…
MEKHA RAM AND OTHERS ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS ETC. ETC.
2022 INSC 36029 March 2022Disposed off
The appellants, employees of the Rajasthan Medical & Health Subordinate Service, applied for a three‑year General Nursing Training as in‑service candidates and sought to have their study leave treated as deputation. A Single Judge of the Rajasthan High Court allowed the petitions, directing the State to grant deputatio…
S. RAJESWARIversusS.N. KULASEKARAN AND ORS.
2006 INSC 18829 March 2006Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant obstructed delivery of possession of land that the respondent had obtained by decree. The respondent filed an application under Section 151 CPC before the executing court, which recorded evidence and adjudicated the matter, effectively treating it as an application under Order XXI Rule 97. The executing c…
SHREE SUBHLAXMI FABRICS PVT. LTD.versusCHAND MAL BARADIA AND ORS.
2005 INSC 16129 March 2005Appeal(s) allowed
Shree Subhlaxmi Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. initiated arbitration against Chand Mal Baradia under a clause in their contract. Baradia filed a suit in the Calcutta Civil Court seeking an injunction to restrain the arbitration, claiming that no arbitration agreement existed and that the contract’s jurisdiction clause limited dispu…
T. VENKATA NARAYANA AND ORS,versusSMT. VENKATA SUBBAMMA (DEAD) AND ORS.
1996 INSC 46129 March 1996Appeal(s) allowed
In a suit for perpetual injunction, the appellants sought to restrain Smt. Venkata Subbamma (deceased) from alienating property granted to her under a 1969 compromise decree in a partition suit. After her death, the respondents, as legal representatives, claimed that Subbamma had executed a will in their favour, but th…