AYAN CHATTERJEEversusFUTURE TECHNOLOGY FOUNDATION INC. & ORS.
2017 INSC 35818 April 2017Disposed off
The plaintiff filed a civil suit seeking declaration of tenancy and a permanent injunction, and during the suit applied for a temporary injunction under Order 39 of the CPC. The trial court granted the injunction, directing a status‑quo and finding the plaintiff prima facie in possession. On appeal, the High Court modi…
DAGADABAI (DEAD) BY L.RS.versusABBAS @ GULAB RUSTUM PINJARI
2017 INSC 36018 April 2017Appeal(s) allowed
Dagadabai, the heir of the deceased Muslim landowner Rustum, filed a suit for possession of agricultural land against Abbas who claimed to be Rustum's adopted son and also pleaded adverse possession. The trial court and the first appellate court held that adoption is not recognized under Mohammedan law and that the def…
M/S UNICHEM LABORATORIES LTD.versusRANI DEVI & ANR.
2017 INSC 36118 April 2017Appeal(s) allowed
Mis Unichem Laboratories Ltd., a company that provided housing to its industrial workers under the Uttar Pradesh Industrial Housing Act, 1955, sought eviction of Rani Devi and others who continued to occupy a quarter after the original allottee, Dharam Dev Yadav, retired and later died. The company filed a civil suit f…
MASHYAK GRIHNIRMAN SAHAKARI SANSTHA MARYADITversusUSMAN HABIB DHUKA & ORS.
2013 INSC 26618 April 2013Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, a co‑operative housing society, entered into a development agreement and later amalgamated two of its plots. The plaintiffs, members of the society, sued to restrain construction on the amalgamated plot but did not challenge a conveyance deed dated 8 February 1989 at the time of filing. They later sought…
S. MALLA REDDYversusM/S. FUTURE BUILDERS CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY & ORS.
2013 INSC 27218 April 2013Dismissed
The plaintiff, a co‑operative housing society, sued the defendants for a declaration of title and a perpetual injunction. The defendants filed a written statement admitting the plaintiff's claim and asked for a decree. Later they sought to strike out that written statement (Order VI Rule 16 CPC) and to file a detailed …
J.S. YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.
2011 INSC 31118 April 2011Case Partly allowed
J.S. Yadav, a District Judge, was appointed a Member of the Uttar Pradesh State Human Rights Commission for a five‑year term in 2006 under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993. After the 2006 amendment to the Act introduced a seven‑year experience requirement for District Judges, the State Government issued a notif…
USHA BALASAHEB SWAMI AND ORS.versusKIRAN APPASO SWAMI AND ORS.
2007 INSC 43618 April 2007Appeal(s) allowed
The suit concerned partition of ancestral property where the plaintiff claimed a half‑share. The defendants, in their written statement, admitted the plaintiff’s entitlement but later sought to amend the statement to allege that the plaintiff and certain co‑defendants were illegitimate children and therefore ineligible…
GURDEV KAUR AND ORS.versusKAKI AND ORS
2006 INSC 23118 April 2006Appeal(s) allowed
The case concerned a dispute over the validity of a will executed by the deceased, Chanan Singh, in favour of his second wife, Bhagwan Kaur, which disinherited the daughters of his first wife. The trial court and the first appellate court upheld the will as a natural document executed by a sound mind. The High Court, o…
VIJA Y KUMAR MADAN AND ORS.versusR.N. GUPTA TECHINCAL EDUCATION SOCIETY AND ORS.
2002 INSC 21318 April 2002Disposed off
The plaintiffs, owners of a leasehold premises in Gurgaon, sued the defendants for recovery of rent arrears and ejectment. The defendants failed to appear on the scheduled date, leading the trial court to proceed ex-parte and later set aside the ex-parte order under Order 9 Rule 7, imposing a condition that the defenda…
M/S. ANGILE INSULATIONSversusM/S. DAVY ASHMORE INDIA LTD. AND ANR.
1995 INSC 27318 April 1995Dismissed
M/s Angile Insulations filed a suit in the Sub‑Judge Court, Dhanbad, to recover sums due under a contract with Davy Ashmore India Ltd. The respondent invoked clause 21 of the contract, which stipulated that any legal proceedings would be subject to the jurisdiction of the High Court of Bangalore. The trial court return…
GANESH PRASAD SAH KESARI & ANR.versusLAKSHMI NARAYAN GUPTA
1985 INSC 9518 April 1985Appeal(s) allowed
In a suit for eviction under the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1947, the landlord sought to have the tenant's defence struck off for failing to deposit rent as ordered under Section 11A. The trial judge refused to strike off the defence, but the High Court reversed that decision, holding that …
JAIPUR VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD. & ORS.versusADANI POWER RAJASTHAN LTD. & ANR.
2024 INSC 21318 March 2024Dismissed
Adani Power Rajasthan Ltd. filed a miscellaneous application seeking a direction that the Rajasthan distribution companies pay a late payment surcharge of Rs.1376.35 crore, alleging that the Supreme Court's earlier judgment on the matter was incomplete. The application was filed after the main appeals (Civil Appeals No…
SHANTILAL GULABCHAND MUTHAversusTATA ENGINEERING & LOCOMOTIVE CO. LTD. & ANR.
[2013] 2 S.C.R. 43218 March 2013Disposed off
The appellant purchased five Tata diesel vehicles and paid the price through eight bills of exchange drawn on his banker. The respondent sued for the balance amount, but the appellant, believing the debt settled, failed to file a written statement. The trial court passed a decree under Order VIII Rule 10 of the CPC wit…
SHANTILAL GULABCHAND MUTHAversusTATA ENGINEERING & LOCOMOTIVE CO. LTD. & ANR.
2013 INSC 17218 March 2013Disposed off
Shantilal purchased five Tata diesel vehicles and paid the price through a series of bills of exchange. Tata Engineering filed a suit for recovery of Rs.5,66,000 plus interest, but Shantilal did not file a written statement, believing the amount had been paid. The trial court passed an ex parte decree under Order VIII …
MRS. RUBI (CHANDRA) DUTTAversusM/S. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.
2011 INSC 22418 March 2011Case Partly allowed
The appellant, owner of a bus insured with the respondent insurer, claimed Rs.5,33,782 for damages after a 2003 accident, asserting that the driver held a valid licence. The insurer contested the claim, alleging the driver lacked a valid licence and that the claim amount was excessive. The District Forum and State Comm…
RAMESHWAR DAYAL MANGALA @ RAMESH CHANDversusHARISH CHAND & ANR.
2009 INSC 36218 March 2009
The plaintiff filed a suit for mandatory injunction which was decreed in his favour by the trial court. The decree was appealed first to an Additional District Judge, who allowed the appeal, and subsequently a second appeal was filed under Section 100 of the CPC before the Punjab & Haryana High Court. The High Court en…
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusSCIENTIFIC WORKERS ASSOCIATION (REGD.) KANPUR AND ORS.
1994 INSC 12318 March 1994Appeal(s) allowed
The Board of Arbitration under the Joint Consultative Machinery (JCM) Scheme awarded a higher pay scale to Senior Scientific Assistants effective 22 September 1982. The Government of India, without invoking the procedure in Clause 21 of the JCM Scheme, decided to implement the award from 1 January 1988, prompting the C…
B. SIVANANDAversusTHE ANDHRA BANK LTD. AND ANR.
1994 INSC 12518 March 1994Disposed off
The respondent Andhra Bank filed a suit for a preliminary decree for sale of mortgaged properties and a personal decree for a loan amount with future interest. The trial court, after hearing applications, dismissed the bank’s claim for interest, holding that the decree did not specify liability for future interest. On …
CHIRANJILAL SHRILAL GOENKA(DECEASED) THROUGH LRversusJAGJIT SINGH AND ORS.
1993 INSC 10218 March 1993Disposed off
The deceased Chiranjilal Shrilal Goenka left a will appointing his younger daughter as executrix, which was contested by Radhey Shyam, who claimed to be an adopted son. The parties, along with another claimant, were brought before a Supreme Court order that appointed a retired Chief Justice as arbitrator to resolve the…
DR. POORNIMA ADVANI & ANRversusGOVERNMENT OF NCT & ANR.
2025 INSC 26218 February 2025Disposed off
The appellants purchased an e‑stamp paper for a property transaction which was subsequently lost, prompting them to seek a refund of the stamp duty of Rs 28,10,000. The Delhi High Court ordered a refund of the principal amount but declined interest, leading the appellants to file a Letters Patent Appeal, which was dism…
PRAGATI MAHILA MANDAL, NANDEDversusMUNICIPAL COUNCIL, NANDED AND ORS.
2011 INSC 14018 February 2011Appeal(s) allowed
Pragati Mahila Mandal, a charitable trust, was allotted a 60‑year lease of a plot by Nanded Municipal Council to start a school for girls. Unable to fund the school, it instead operated a hostel for girls and working women on a no‑profit basis. A public‑interest writ petition filed by Anil Tryambakarao Kokil challenged…
P.K. SINGHversusM/S. S.N. KANUNGO AND OTHERS
2010 INSC 11018 February 2010Disposed off
The case arose from an arbitration award directing the Andaman and Nicobar Administration to pay a contractor a sum with interest. The Executive Engineer (appellant) wrote letters to the contractor seeking to adjust the award by having the contractor accept only the principal amount and waive interest, invoking Order X…
M/S. RAMPUR FERTILISER LTD.versusM/S. VIGYAN CHEMICALS INDUSTRIES
2009 INSC 20718 February 2009Disposed off
MIS. Rampur Fertiliser Ltd. sued M/s. Vigyan Chemicals Industries for unpaid bills and claimed interest at 18% per annum. During the pendency of the suit, the Interest on Delayed Payments to Small Scale and Ancillary Industrial Undertakings Act, 1993 came into force (23‑Sept‑1992) and the plaintiff amended the plaint t…
N. SRINIVASAversusM/S KUTTUKARAN MACHINE TOOLS LTD.
2009 INSC 21618 February 2009Case Partly allowed
The appellant, N. Srinivasa, entered into an agreement to purchase a plot of land from M/s Kuttukaran Machine Tools Ltd. After paying a large advance, the respondent failed to execute the sale deed, sought a higher price, and attempted to sell the property to a third party. The appellant filed an application under Sect…
BRIJ NARAIN SINGHversusADYA PRASAD (DEAD) AND ORS.
2008 INSC 21018 February 2008Dismissed
The case involved four separate suits (nos. 97‑100) concerning lands in four villages, all filed under Section 49 of the U.P. Tenancy Act, 1939. A common judgment was delivered, after which the judgment in suit no. 98 attained finality, while appeals against the common judgment in suits 99 and 100 were allowed, resulti…
CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS GOVT. OF A.P.versusTHE COLLECTORS AND ORS.
2003 INSC 10418 February 2003Dismissed
The Chief Conservator of Forests of Andhra Pradesh filed a writ petition challenging an order of the Commissioner of Survey, Settlement and Land Record concerning title to certain lands, without joining the State as a party. The same issue was pursued in a civil appeal after a suit by the pattedars (private landholders…
KADIYALA RAMA RAOversusGUTALA KAHNA RAO (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ORS.
2000 INSC 8918 February 2000
The appellant purchased a house at a court auction in execution of a mortgage decree. The respondents, who were judgment‑debtors, filed an application under Order 21 Rule 90 of the CPC seeking to set aside the sale on the ground that the property was not saleable for 15 years due to a lease restriction. The District Mu…
BHARAT BARREL AND DRUM MANUFACTURING CO.versusAMIN CHAND PEYARELAL
1999 INSC 6918 February 1999Appeal(s) allowed
Bharat Barrel and Drum Manufacturing Co. sued Amin Chand Peyarelal for recovery of a Rs. 6,20,000 promissory note dated 11 October 1961. The defendant claimed the note was executed as collateral security for an import contract and that no consideration was received, while the plaintiff asserted it was a loan. The High …
SAVITRI DEVIversusDISTRICT JUDGE, GORAKHPUR AND ORS.
1999 INSC 6818 February 1999Dismissed
Savitri Devi filed a civil suit against her four sons for maintenance and a charge over ancestral property, and the court issued an interim injunction restraining any alienation of the suit property. The first son subsequently sold one‑fourth shares of three parcels to three third‑party purchasers (respondents 3‑5). Th…
B. L. KASHYAP AND SONS LTDversusM/S JMS STEELS AND POWER CORPORATION & ANR.
2022 INSC 6018 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed
B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., a steel supplier, filed a summary suit under Order XXXVII of the CPC against a real‑estate firm (defendant No.1) and its contractor JMS Steels & Power Corp. (defendant No.2) for non‑payment of Rs 89,50,244. The trial court denied both defendants leave to defend, holding that no triable issues …
MAMTAZ & ORS.versusGULSUMA ALIAS KULUSUMA
2022 INSC 5818 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed
The appellants filed a suit for declaration and possession, which the trial court decided ex parte. The respondent appealed to the First Appellate Court after a delay of 2 years and 7 months, filed but later withdrew an application for condonation of delay, and the appeal was dismissed on the ground of limitation under…
J.C. BUDHRAJAversusCHAIRMAN, ORISSA MINING CORPN. LTD. & ANR.
2008 INSC 6418 January 2008Case Partly allowed
The contractor (N.C. Budhraja) completed excavation work for Orissa Mining Corp. Ltd. (OMC) and later claimed extra payment for work beyond the contract. OMC acknowledged pending claims in a letter dated 28‑Oct‑1978 and paid Rs.3,50,000 on 4‑Mar‑1980, after which the contractor invoked arbitration on 4‑Jun‑1980. The le…
OM PRAKASH GUPTAversusRANBIR B. GOYAL
2002 INSC 3518 January 2002Dismissed
The appellant, a tenant, was evicted by decree for non-payment of rent. He sought relief on the ground that a subsequent event – the Haryana Urban Development Authority's (HUDA) resumption proceedings against the landlord – had been set aside, claiming that this extinguished the landlord's title and amounted to evictio…
RADHIKA DEVIversusBAJRANGI SINGH AND ORS.
1996 INSC 9818 January 1996Dismissed
The appellant filed a partition suit in 1988, after which the respondents claimed ownership of the property by virtue of a gift deed executed and registered in 1978. In 1992 the appellant sought to amend the plaint under Order 6 Rule 17 of the CPC to obtain a declaration that the gift deed was fraudulent and therefore …
MIRZA MAJID HUSSAINversusSTATE OF M.P. AND ANR .
1995 INSC 5418 January 1995Dismissed
The appellant's land was acquired for the Garna Dam project and a compensation award was made in 1969. The Collector rejected the reference to the award in 1975, prompting the appellant to file a revision before the District Judge in 1982, which was dismissed. After a further delay, a writ petition was filed in the Hig…
BRIGADE ENTERPRISES LIMITEDversusANIL KUMAR VIRMANI & ORS.
2021 INSC 91817 December 2021Appeal(s) allowed
The builder, Brigade Enterprises Ltd., appealed against the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission’s order permitting 91 purchasers of 51 apartments to file a consumer complaint under Section 35(1)(c) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 on behalf of all 1,134 buyers in the residential project. The Supreme Cou…
NGAITLANG DHARversusPANNA PRAGATI INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS.
2021 INSC 92317 December 2021Appeal(s) allowed
The Supreme Court examined a dispute arising from the corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP) of Meghalaya Infratech Ltd., where four resolution applicants submitted bids and Ngaitlang Dhar emerged as the highest bidder (H‑1). The losing bidder, Panna Pragati Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (PPIPL), sought additional t…
UNIVERSITY OF DELHIversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.
2019 INSC 138917 December 2019Dismissed
The University of Delhi challenged the conversion of land acquired for the Delhi Metro project into a residential housing scheme, filing a writ petition that was dismissed for delay and laches. The University later filed a Letters Patent Appeal (LPA) 916 days after the writ petition’s disposal, seeking condonation of t…
SAKETA VAKSANA LLP & ANR.versusKAUKUTLA SARALA & ORS.
2019 INSC 139017 December 2019Dismissed
The developer and landowners entered into an unregistered agreement of sale for 54 acres of agricultural land, with a clause stating that physical possession of the entire land was handed over to the developer at execution. Disputes arose over whether the developer actually possessed the 17.31‑acre suit portion and whe…
INTERNATIONAL AMUSEMENT LIMITEDversusINDIA TRADE PROMOTION ORGANISATION &ANR.
2014 INSC 87717 December 2014Dismissed
International Amusement Ltd (operator of "Appu Ghar") held a licence from the India Trade Promotion Organisation (ITPO) to occupy land in Pragati Maidan. Clause 28 of the licence agreement provided that any dispute would be referred to arbitration by the Chairman of ITPO or his nominee. After the licence expired, ITPO …
DWARIKA PRASADversusRAMESHWAR DAYAL KHANDELWAL AND ORS.
2009 INSC 131617 December 2009Dismissed
Respondent No.1 filed a suit (Suit No. 35‑A of 2006) to declare a sale deed invalid and to obtain an injunction. The appellant first moved the trial court under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC to have the plaint dismissed for lack of cause of action; the application was rejected. After the Supreme Court stayed the suit, the appell…
DWARIKA PRASADversusNIRMALA AND ORS.
2009 INSC 131717 December 2009Dismissed
The father of the respondent filed a partition suit in 1955 which was decreed, but after a series of appeals the suit was dismissed as withdrawn through applications that were later alleged to be forged. After the father's death, the daughter, as his legal representative, sought restoration of the suit, claiming that t…
U.R. VIRUPAKSHAIAHversusSARVAMMA & ANR.
2008 INSC 146317 December 2008Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiff, U.R. Virupakshaiah, filed a partition suit alleging that the disputed lands were joint family property. The High Court, hearing a second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, framed an additional substantial question of law concerning the existence of a joint Hindu family while dictati…
BHANU KUMAR JAINversusARCHANA KUMAR AND ANR.
2004 INSC 72317 December 2004Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiff filed a partition suit in 1976; the defendants repeatedly failed to appear, leading the trial court to post the case ex‑parte and pass a preliminary decree. The defendants filed applications under Order 9 Rule 7 and Rule 13 to set aside the ex‑parte order, both of which were dismissed, and they also appea…
CELLULAR OPERATORS ASSOCIATION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
2002 INSC 54217 December 2002Appeal(s) allowed
The Cellular Operators Association of India (appellants) challenged the Government's decision to permit Fixed Service Providers to offer Wireless in Local Loop (WLL) with limited mobility, arguing that the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) failed to consider the level‑playing‑field issue, viola…
S. AMARJIT SINGH KALRA (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ORS.versusSMT. PRAMOD GUPTA (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ORS.
2002 INSC 54117 December 2002Appeal(s) allowed
The Supreme Court examined appeals arising from a land acquisition award where 63 proprietors and other parties sought compensation for distinct shares of land. During the pendency of the appeals, five appellants died and their legal representatives were not brought on record, leading the Delhi High Court to dismiss al…
SALEEM BHAI AND ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.
2002 INSC 55417 December 2002Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiffs filed suits seeking a declaration that several earlier decrees and orders were illegal, null and void. The defendants moved to reject the plaints under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, alleging no cause of action and that the suits were barred by res judicata. The trial court, without de…
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHIversusPRAMOD KUMAR GUPTA
1990 INSC 38817 December 1990Dismissed
The Municipal Corporation of Delhi appealed against a High Court order that held only stamp duty, and not the surcharge under section 147 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, was payable on a sale certificate issued by a civil court under Order XXI, Rule 94 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The respondent had bought a…
THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATORversusPARTHASARATHI SINHA & OTHERS
1982 INSC 10417 December 1982Appeal(s) allowed
The Official Liquidator instituted misfeasance proceedings under Section 543 of the Companies Act, 1956 against the directors of a company in liquidation, including Dr. S.N. Sinha. Dr. Sinha died intestate during the pendency of the suit, and his heirs and legal representatives were substituted in his place. The Calcut…
ACQUA BOREWELL PVT. LTD.versusSWAYAM PRABHA & OTHERS
2021 INSC 74217 November 2021Appeal(s) allowed
The Supreme Court heard appeals by third‑party defendants (Acqua Borewell Pvt Ltd and others) challenging a Karnataka High Court order that modified an interim injunction to restrain alienation of one‑seventh share in a large schedule of properties. The original suit sought declaration of a one‑seventh share in the pro…
SHIV CHARAN SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.
2006 INSC 86117 November 2006Dismissed
Shiv Charan Singh appealed to the Supreme Court under Article 136, challenging the Punjab and Haryana High Court's order dismissing his review application against a writ order that had been rejected on the ground of his alleged habitual absenteeism. The High Court had found the petitioner absent for about three years a…
DR. MANJU VARMAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.
2004 INSC 65317 November 2004Appeal(s) allowed
Dr. Manju Varma filed a writ petition in the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court seeking promotion based on seniority. Respondent No.6 (Dr. Gauri Ganguli) applied to the Chief Justice for transfer of the petition to the Allahabad Bench under paragraph 14 of the United Provinces High Courts (Amalgamation) Order, 1…
AA. HAJA MUNIUDDINversusINDIAN RAILWAYS
1992 INSC 31817 November 1992Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant dispatched marble slabs by rail, which were damaged in an accident, and filed a claim for Rs.1,05,000 before the Railway Claims Tribunal. The Tribunal required a filing fee of Rs.2,055 under Section 16(2) of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, but the appellant could not pay and requested to be treated…
BHAVNAGAR MUNICIPALITYversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.
1989 INSC 35417 November 1989Dismissed
The Bhavnagar Municipality filed a suit for a declaration of title and possession of two parcels of land – the Parade Ground and the Rasala (Lancers) Lines – asserting that Resolutions No. 37 (19‑Jan‑1948) and No. 77 (29‑Feb‑1948) of the former Bhavnagar State vested the land in the municipality. The Union of India and…
SRI DADU DAYAL MAHASABHAversusSUKHDEV ARYA AND ANOTHER
1989 INSC 35517 November 1989Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, a registered society, filed a suit through its then‑Secretary. After the suit was instituted, a person claiming to be the newly elected Secretary withdrew the suit, and the trial court allowed the withdrawal. The society later elected a different Secretary who sought to recall the withdrawal order, but t…
BHAGWAN DASS CHOPRAversusUNITED BANK OF INDIA & ORS.
1987 INSC 33717 November 1987Appeal(s) allowed
Bhagwan Dass Chopra, a former clerk of Narang Bank of India Ltd., was terminated in February 1975 and raised an industrial dispute before the Central Government Industrial Tribunal. While the case was pending, Narang Bank merged into United Bank of India (UBI) on 1 August 1976, and UBI was impleaded as the successor in…
M. HARIHARASUDHANversusR. KARMEGAM AND ORS.
2019 INSC 116217 October 2019Appeal(s) allowed
Mr. M. Hariharasudhan, who runs a hotel, sued the respondents for damages after they damaged his property and stole cash. The trial court decreed damages, but the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court set aside the decree, holding that the Tamil Nadu Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act, 1992 implicitly barred…
MAJ. GEN. KAPIL MEHRA & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.
2014 INSC 73417 October 2014Dismissed
The appellants, Maj. Gen. Kapil Mehra and others, challenged the compensation awarded by the Delhi Development Authority for land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The High Court had fixed the market value at Rs.14,974 per square yard by averaging four perpetual lease deeds, adding 20% for free‑hold conver…
PRADEEP KUMAR MASKARA AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS
2014 INSC 73317 October 2014Appeal(s) allowed
The appellants owned agricultural land that was transferred from Bihar to West Bengal under the Bihar and West Bengal (Transferred Territories) Act, 1956, and the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 was extended to the transferred territories. The Calcutta High Court, in a 1984 writ petition, quashed the vesting of the …
THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HORTICULTURE, CHANDIGARH & ANR.versusRAGHU RAJ
2008 INSC 117017 October 2008Appeal(s) allowed
The Secretary, Department of Horticulture, Chandigarh filed a second appeal under Section 100 of the CPC against a decree reinstating workman Raghu Raj, which had been admitted in 1980 and remained pending for decades. In 2006 the Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed the appeal on its merits despite the appellant’s …
ROHIT SINGH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR (NOW STATE OF JHARKHAND) AND ORS.
2006 INSC 70617 October 2006Disposed off
The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration of title and possession of land against the Divisional Forest Officer and the State of Bihar. After the suit proceeded to trial, several third parties (defendants 3‑17) intervened, later amended their written statements and were treated by the trial court as having filed a cou…
SALIM D. AGBOATWALA AND ORS.versusSHAMALJI ODDHAVJI THAKKAR AND ORS.
2021 INSC 48617 September 2021Appeal(s) allowed
A group of heirs filed a suit in 1987 to set aside a 1963 Agricultural Lands Tribunal order and a 1954 sale certificate concerning land that had been placed under the control of a court‑appointed receiver after the death of the original owner in 1946. The defendants moved to reject the plaint under Order VII Rule 11(d)…
SATYA PRAKASH DWIVEDIversusMUNNA ALIAS CHANDRABHAN YADAV AND OTHERS
2021 INSC 49117 September 2021Case Allowed
The appellant, Satya Prakash Dwivedi, suffered grievous injuries in a road accident and claimed compensation before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, which awarded Rs.5,42,633 with a 50% permanent disability assessment. The insurance company appealed, and the High Court, exercising power under Order XLI Rule 33 of th…
PUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LTD. PATIALA & ORS.versusATMA SINGH GREWAL
2013 INSC 62717 September 2013Dismissed
The Punjab State Electricity Board (PSEB) appealed a High Court order that quashed a charge sheet served on a retired employee, Atma Singh Grewal, on the ground that the departmental proceeding was barred by the Punjab Civil Service Rules. The Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the appeal as frivolous and order…
BIBI ZAFIRA KHATOON AND OTHERSversusMOHAMMED HUSSAIN AND ANOTHER
2009 INSC 114517 September 2009Appeal(s) allowed
The appellants, Bibi Zafira Khatoon and her late husband, obtained an eviction decree against respondent No.2 (Mohammed Manzurool Haque) on grounds of bonafide need and rent default. Respondent No.1 (Mohammed Hussain), who was a buyer under a disputed sale agreement, was impleaded as an intervenor and had filed a title…
BOODIREDDY CHANDRAIAH AND ORS.versusARIGELA LAXMI AND ANR.
2007 INSC 93217 September 2007Appeal(s) allowed
The appellants challenged a second appeal allowed by the Andhra Pradesh High Court under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, alleging that the High Court failed to formulate a substantial question of law as required by the amended provision. The Supreme Court examined whether a second appeal can be entertained …
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., CHANDIGARHversusNICOLLETTA ROHTAGI AND ORS.
2002 INSC 38917 September 2002Disposed off
The Supreme Court examined whether a motor insurer can appeal a Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal award under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 when the insured has not filed an appeal. It held that an insurer’s right of appeal is limited to the statutory defences listed in Section 149(2) and cannot be used to …
DESH BANDHU GUPTAversusN L. ANAND AND RAJINDER SINGH
1993 INSC 30117 September 1993Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, a tenant, had deposited rent exceeding the decretal amount before execution proceedings were initiated. The execution court, without serving any notice to the judgment debtor, sold his 550‑sq‑yard plot to the second respondent for Rs 1,05,000, despite the decree debt being only Rs 7,780.33 and the proper…
GHAN SHYAM DAS GUPTA AND ANR.versus. ANANT KUMAR SINHA AND ORS.
1991 INSC 23817 September 1991Appeal(s) allowed
The landlords (appellants) obtained an eviction decree against their tenant, Respondent No.7, but the tenant's relatives (Respondents 1‑5) claimed they were also tenants in their own right and filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The High Court entertained the writ, holding that the decree did n…
RAMATHAL AND ORS.versusK. RAJAMANI (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. AND ANR.
2023 INSC 73717 August 2023Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiffs, illiterate landowners, executed a limited Power of Attorney (PoA) with the defendant to develop their land, but the defendant surreptitiously added clauses allowing him to sell the property and executed sale deeds on the day of registration. The trial court dismissed the suit, accepting the PoA as genui…
M/S. PATIL AUTOMATION PRIVATE LIMITED AND ORS.versusRAKHEJA ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED
2022 INSC 84117 August 2022Disposed off
The plaintiff, RAKHEJA ENGINEERS, filed a commercial suit for recovery of money without seeking urgent interim relief. The defendant, M/S. PATIL AUTOMATION, moved to reject the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC, arguing that the suit violated Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, which mandates pre‑in…
SATYENDER AND ORS.versusSAROJ AND ORS
2022 INSC 83917 August 2022Disposed off
The plaintiffs (respondents) sued for declaration and possession of agricultural land, alleging the defendants were tenants who sub‑let the property. The defendants denied tenancy and filed a counter‑claim for two other plots. The trial court dismissed the suit but allowed the counter‑claim; the first appeal upheld thi…
NARAYAN DEORAO JAVLE (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS.versusKRISHNA & ORS.
2021 INSC 40717 August 2021Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant purchased a mortgaged land in 1964 from the original mortgagors, who had earlier mortgaged the property to the defendant mortgagee. The mortgagee filed a suit for foreclosure in 1965 without impleading the appellant, obtained a decree, and later took possession of the land from the appellant. The appellan…
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.
2011 INSC 58317 August 2011Disposed off
The State of Madhya Pradesh filed an original suit under Article 131 of the Constitution challenging the Central Government's notifications issued under sections 58(3) and 58(4) of the Madhya Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2000, which dissolved the M.P. Electricity Board and apportioned its assets. In 2009, the State soug…
U.P. STATE ELECTRICITY BOARDversusBANARAS ELECTRIC LIGHT AND POWER CO. LTD.
2001 INSC 37617 August 2001Dismissed
The Uttar Pradesh State Electricity Board purchased the undertaking of Banaras Electric Light and Power Co. Ltd. under the Indian Electricity (U.P.) Amendment Act, 1975, causing the undertaking to vest in the Board on 5‑6 February 1975. Uncollected electricity dues owed to the company for consumption before that date w…
M.V. AL. QUAMARversusTSAVLIRIS SALVAGE (INTERNATIONAL) LTD. AND ORS.
2000 INSC 40217 August 2000Dismissed
The Supreme Court considered an execution petition filed in the Andhra Pradesh High Court under Section 44‑A of the Civil Procedure Code to enforce a money decree passed by the English Admiralty Court against the owner of the vessel M.V. Al Quamar. The appellant argued that Section 44‑A could not be invoked because Sec…
P.A. AHAMMED IBRAHIMversusTHE FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA
1999 INSC 33517 August 1999Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, P.A. Ahmed Ibrahim, contracted with the Food Corporation of India (FCI) for loading, unloading and transport of foodgrains from 1973 to 1975, the agreement containing an arbitration clause. In 1978 the appellant sued FCI for recovery of pending dues, while FCI filed a petition under Section 20 of the Arb…
RAMCHANDRA GANPAT SHINDE AND ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.
1993 INSC 26717 August 1993Appeal(s) allowed
The dispute concerned the election of the managing committee of Shri Vathal Sakhar Sehakari Karkhana Ltd., a specified cooperative society whose term expired on 3 December 1991. The final list of voters was published on 17 December 1991, but the State Government postponed the election to 30 September 1992. Two members …
HIS HIGHNESS MAHARAJA PRATAP SINGHversusHER HIGHNESS MAHARANI SAROJINI DEVI AND ORS.
1993 INSC 26817 August 1993Appeal(s) allowed
The Supreme Court examined two disputes concerning properties bought by the former ruler of Nabha, R.S., benami in the names of others. The first involved the Simla property (Sterling Castle) and the second the Delhi property (34 Alipur Road). The Court held that the rule of primogeniture, which applies to the rulershi…
M/S SONALI POWER EQUIPMENTS PVT. LTD.versusCHAIRMAN, MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, MUMBAI & ORS.
2025 INSC 86417 July 2025Case Partly allowed
The appellant, Sonali Power Equipments, supplied transformers to the Maharashtra State Electricity Board between 1993 and 2004 and faced delayed payments. It referred the dispute to the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council under Section 18 of the MSMED Act, obtaining an award in 2010, which the respondents …
V. KALYANASWAMY (D) BY LRS. & ANR.versusL. BAKTHAVATSALAM (D) BY LRS. & ORS.
2020 INSC 45517 July 2020Dismissed
The case involves a property dispute between the branch of Lakshmiah Naidu (respondents) and legatees under a Will (appellants) of Rangaswami Naidu, who died on 01.06.1955 before the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The appellants claimed that Rangaswami Naidu had severed the joint family status through a newspaper notice a…
GURMIT SINGH BHATIAversusKIRAN KANT ROBINSON AND OTHERS
2019 INSC 77017 July 2019Disposed off
The original plaintiffs filed a suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell against the vendor. During the pendency of the suit, the vendor, despite an injunction, sold the property to the appellant, who then applied under Order 1 Rule 10 of the CPC to be impleaded as a defendant. The trial court allowed the …
UNION OF INDIAversusIBRAHIM UDDIN & ANR.
2012 INSC 28817 July 2012Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiff filed a suit seeking a declaration of title over agricultural land, alleging ancestral grant from the Maratha Government and a partition in 1819, while the Union of India contested the title. The trial court dismissed the suit, but the first appellate court reversed the decision by admitting a Will as add…
P.A. OOMMENversusMORAN MAR BASELIUS MARTHOMA
1992 INSC 17517 July 1992Dismissed
The appellant, a plaintiff in a suit that was tried together with another suit and dismissed by a common judgment, filed an appeal in the High Court accompanied by a printed copy of the judgment but not a certified copy. He argued that the time taken by the other plaintiffs to obtain a certified copy of the judgment sh…
JAYASINGH DNYANU MHOPREKAR & ANR.versusKRISHNA BABAJI PATIL & ANR.
1985 INSC 15817 July 1985Dismissed
The plaintiffs, permanent Mirasi tenants, mortgaged their half‑share of Paragana Watan lands to the defendants in 1947. After the Bombay Paragana and Kulkarni Watans (Abolition) Act, 1950 abolished the watans, the defendants (or their heirs) paid the occupancy price and obtained a grant of the entire land from the Pran…
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, LAND AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT & ANOTHERversusM/S K.L. RATHI STEELS LIMITED AND OTHERS
2024 INSC 45417 May 2024
The Government of NCT of Delhi and the Delhi Development Authority filed a batch of review petitions challenging Supreme Court judgments that had dismissed civil appeals and special leave petitions which held land‑acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act to be deemed lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, relyin…
SUDHIR RANJAN PATRA (DEAD) THR. LRS. & ANR.versusHIMANSU SEKHAR SRICHANDAN & ORS.
2022 INSC 57917 May 2022Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration and injunction, but defendants 2 and 3 failed to file a written statement and were held ex-parte. They later filed a petition under Order IX Rule 13 of the CPC seeking condonation of delay, setting aside the ex-parte decree, and permission to file a written statement. The tria…
BHARATHA MATHA & ANR.versusR. VIJAYA RENGANATHAN & ORS.
2010 INSC 32817 May 2010Appeal(s) allowed
The predecessor‑in‑interest of Bharatha Matha filed a suit for a share in the property of her brother Muthu Reddiar, who died intestate and allegedly unmarried. Defendant No.1, Rengammal, claimed she was lawfully married to Alagarsami Reddiar (who was alive) and also asserted a live‑in relationship with Muthu Reddiar, …
GANNMANI ANASUYA AND ORS.versusPARVATINI AMARENDRA CHOWDHARY AND ORS.
2007 INSC 61717 May 2007Case Partly allowed
The plaintiffs, sons of the family Karta, sued the appellants for partition of two properties and for a decree directing the appellants to render accounts of a poultry‑tube manufacturing joint venture, claiming a 2/3 share in one property and a 4/9 share in the other. The appellants contended that the business was thei…
JHABBAR SINGH (DECEASED) THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS & ORS.versusJAGTAR SINGH S/O DARSHAN SINGH
2023 INSC 37317 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiff Jagtar Singh claimed a right of pre-emption as a co‑sharer in a joint khewat when the owners Jhabbar Singh sold portions of the land without giving notice. While the trial court and the first appellate court held that a partition order dated 31‑July‑1982 by the Assistant Collector severed the joint status…
POWER MACHINES INDIA LIMITEDversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.
2017 INSC 35517 April 2017Dismissed
Power Machines India Ltd obtained an arbitral award under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 directing it to pay a sum to Lakshmi Engineering Industries. The State of Madhya Pradesh, invoking Rule 5 of the Madhya Pradesh MSME Facilitation Council Rules, 2006, sought recovery of the award amou…
STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD.versusDESIGNATED AUTHORITY, DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF ANTI-DUMPING & ALLIED DUTIES & ORS.
2017 INSC 35617 April 2017Dismissed
The Steel Authority of India, a public sector steel manufacturer, imported graphite electrodes from China and challenged a notification imposing anti‑dumping duty on such imports. The challenge was dismissed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) which upheld the Designated Authority's metho…
VIPULBHAI MANSINGBHAI CHAUDHARYversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ANOTHER
2017 INSC 35417 April 2017Disposed off
Vipulbhai Mansingbhai Chaudhary, who continued as Chairman of a district cooperative milk union beyond his three‑year term, was served a show‑cause notice under s.76B(1) and (2) of the Gujarat Co‑operative Societies Act, 1961. The Registrar removed him and disqualified him for three years; a later order extended the di…
JAIPUR SHAHAR HINDU VIKAS SAMITIversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.
2014 INSC 28817 April 2014Dismissed
The Jaipur Shahar Hindu Vikas Samiti filed public interest litigations seeking a declaration that the Galta Peeth/Thikana properties are public trust assets, clarification of succession, and a direction for the State to take over its management. The Rajasthan High Court, noting that the same questions were pending befo…
V.RAMASWAMYversusRAMACHANDRAN & ANR
2009 INSC 55317 April 2009Disposed off
The Madras High Court allowed a second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure without formulating any substantial question of law, which the appellant challenged. The Supreme Court examined whether the High Court was justified in disposing of the appeal without such formulation, as mandated by Section …
SHIV SHAKTI COOP. HOUSING SOCIETY, NAGPURversusM/S. SWARAJ DEVELOPERS AND ORS.
2003 INSC 24417 April 2003Dismissed
Shiv Shakti Coop. Housing Society filed revision petitions under Section 115 of the CPC against interim orders of a subordinate court. The High Courts dismissed the petitions, holding that the 1999 amendment to Section 115 made such interim orders non‑maintainable for revision. The Society appealed, arguing that the am…
V.K. PALANIAPPA CHETTIAR (DEAD) BY LRS.versusRAMASAMI GOUNDER AND ANR.
2001 INSC 21317 April 2001Dismissed
The appellant, the estate of V.K. Palaniappa Chettiar, had mortgaged property that was later auctioned and purchased by the respondent. The sale was confirmed under Order 21 Rule 92 of the CPC, and the appellant's application under Order 21 Rule 90 to set aside the sale was dismissed. The appellant appealed that dismis…
POSTGRADUATE INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, CHANDIGARHversusFACULTY ASSOCIATION AND ORS.
1998 INSC 18417 April 1998Disposed off
The Supreme Court reviewed a 1997 decision that allowed reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes in a single‑post cadre by means of a rotating roster. The Court examined whether such reservation, either directly or via roster rotation, is constitutionally permissible under Articles …
BUTA SINGH (DEAD) BY L.RS.versusUNION OF INDIA
1995 INSC 26717 April 1995Dismissed
The case involved land‑acquisition proceedings where compensation was successively enhanced by the Additional District Judge, a High Court Single Judge and a Division Bench. The claimants filed appeals under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act but paid court fee only on the lower amount originally claimed. After the…
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI THROUGH THE SECRETARY, LAND AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT & ANOTHERversusM/S. K.L. RATHI STEELS LIMITED AND OTHERS
2023 INSC 25917 March 2023Matter referred to larger bench
The Government of NCT of Delhi and the Delhi Development Authority sought review of several civil appeals that had been dismissed on the basis of the Supreme Court’s decision in Pune Municipal Corporation v. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki, which interpreted Section 24(2) of the 2013 Land Acquisition Act. After the Consti…
AMAN LOHIAversusKIRAN LOHIA
2021 INSC 19017 March 2021Disposed off
The father (Aman Lohia) filed a guardianship petition under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 and the Family Courts Act, 1984 seeking declaration as guardian of his two‑year‑old daughter. The mother (Kiran Lohia) did not file a written statement but filed several applications under CPC, including a Section 151 applicat…
AARIFABEN YUNUSBHAI PATEL & ORS.versusMUKUL THAKOREBHAI AMIN & ORS.
2020 INSC 29717 March 2020Appeal(s) allowed
The cooperative bank (R‑2) obtained a decree for repayment of a loan from respondents R‑1 and R‑3 and obtained a court order to sell the mortgaged flats. The sale was conducted and the appellants were the highest bidders. R‑1 later filed a writ petition and, after its dismissal, filed an application under Order XXI Rul…
BANK OF BARODAversusKOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD.
2020 INSC 29917 March 2020Dismissed
The Bank of Baroda sought to enforce a London decree against Kotak Mahindra Bank under Section 44A of the CPC, filing the execution petition 14 years after the decree. The trial court dismissed the petition as time‑barred, applying the 12‑year period of Article 136 of the Limitation Act. On appeal, the Supreme Court ex…
MANICKA POOSALI (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ORS.versusANJALI AMMAL AND ANR.
2005 INSC 15517 March 2005Appeal(s) allowed
The case concerned a dispute over certain properties alleged to be part of a joint Hindu family estate. The trial court and first appellate court held that items 22‑26 and 29 were self‑acquired by Mottaya Poosali and that the settlement deed and will in his favour were valid. The Madras High Court, hearing a second app…
VIDYADHARversusMANIKRAO AND ANR.
1999 INSC 11217 March 1999Appeal(s) allowed
Vidyadhar, the plaintiff, bought land from Defendant No.2 who had earlier executed a document styled "Kararkharedi" in favour of Defendant No.1, claiming it to be a mortgage by conditional sale. The plaintiff sued for redemption of that mortgage or specific performance, while Defendant No.1 contended that the document …
K LEELAVATHY BAI AND ORS.versusP.V. GANGADHARAN AND ORS.
1999 INSC 11317 March 1999Dismissed
The testator S.P. Sadanandan bequeathed specific property to his two sons and appointed his wife, elder son and a chartered accountant as executors. After the chartered accountant relinquished, the widow and elder son remained as joint executors and obtained probate. The elder son executed a possessory mortgage of the …
SMT. SATI RANI SENversusM/S. INDIAN STANDARD CASTING CO. AND ANR.
1997 INSC 28517 March 1997Disposed off
The case involved parallel suits concerning Premises No. 31, Raja Santosh Road, Alipore, where the landlord (Indian Standard Casting Co.) obtained an ex parte decree in a suit against the principal tenant and executed possession, despite a pending suit in another court that had granted a status‑quo order and an ad inte…
UNITED SALT WORKS AND INDUSTRIES LTD.versusNATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD AND ORS.
1993 INSC 10017 March 1993Disposed off
Bihar Supply Syndicate bought salt from United Salt Works and arranged its shipment from Kandla to Calcutta via a chartered vessel. The cargo was insured for Rs 9.5 lakh under a marine policy with Institute Cargo Clauses (FPA) covering warehouse‑to‑warehouse risks. The vessel suffered engine trouble, was towed to Visha…
THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR GENERALversusM.C. SUBRAMANIAM AND ORS.
2021 INSC 9817 February 2021Dismissed
The Supreme Court considered two Special Leave Petitions filed by the High Court of Madras challenging its own order that granted a refund of court fees to M.C. Subramaniam, who had withdrawn appeal suits after reaching a private out‑of‑court settlement. The key issue was whether Section 69‑A of the Tamil Nadu Court Fe…
NARAYAN SITARAMJI BADWAIK (DEAD) THROUGH LRSversusBISARAM AND OTHERS
2021 INSC 9417 February 2021Disposed off
The appellant, Narayan Sitaramji Badwaik (deceased), filed a suit for possession of a property based on a sale deed dated 26‑09‑1978, which the respondents claimed was only a collateral security for a loan. The trial court dismissed the suit, the District Judge reversed the decision, and the High Court, on a second app…
COMPACK ENTERPRISES INDIA (P) LTD.versusBEANT SINGH
2021 INSC 9717 February 2021Disposed off
The dispute concerned a suit for possession and mesne profits of a Delhi industrial property. The High Court had earlier settled that the petitioner was in possession of the entire 5,472 sq ft. and issued a consent decree directing hand‑over of possession and payment of mesne profits, but erroneously recorded a 10% ann…
ADANI GAS LIMITEDversusPETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS REGULATORY BOARD AND ORS.
2020 INSC 19917 February 2020Dismissed
The Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board (PNGRB) conducted the ninth round of bidding for city or local natural gas distribution networks (CGD) in 2018. After opening technical bids, the Board introduced an internal note on 23 July 2018 that suggested a 2%–100% range of total households (based on the 2011 Census)…
PETROMARINE PRODUCTS LTD.versusOCEAN MARINE SERVICES COMPANY LTD. & ORS.
2015 INSC 12417 February 2015Dismissed
Petromarine Products Ltd. filed an admiralty suit in the Bombay High Court seeking a decree and attachment of sale proceeds of the vessel MV Eleni, which was already arrested and placed under the jurisdiction of the Madras High Court where a suit by another creditor had been filed. The Madras Court, exercising exclusiv…
SESHAMBAL (DEAD) THROUGH L.RS.versusM/S. CHELUR CORPORATION CHELUR BUILDING AND ORS.
2010 INSC 10817 February 2010Disposed off
The owners of a commercial premises in Cochin filed an eviction petition under Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, claiming bonafide personal requirement. The Rent Controller and the Appellate Authority dismissed the petition, finding no such requirement, and the High Court affirme…
SNEH GUPTAversusDEVI SARUP & ORS.
2009 INSC 20117 February 2009Dismissed
The appellant, Sneh Gupta, an heir of Munni Devi, challenged a compromise decree that had been entered into by the original plaintiff Veena Nirwani and certain defendants during the pendency of two suits concerning land mutation and alleged fraud. The compromise resulted in the withdrawal of both suits, but Gupta and o…
MADAN MOHAN MISHRAversusCHANRIKA PANDEY (DEAD) BY LRS.
2009 INSC 20217 February 2009Dismissed
The appellant, Madan Mohan Mishra, filed a suit in 1994 seeking to set aside a deed of gift concerning agricultural lands, alleging the deed was void. Earlier, a suit filed in 1969 concerning the same lands was abated by an order dated 17 July 1973 under the Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953, and the ap…
BALAKRISHNANversusMALAIYANDI KONAR
2006 INSC 9417 February 2006Dismissed
Balakrishnan, the decree holder, purchased the judgment debtor's property in a court auction in 1981 and the sale was confirmed in 1983. He later filed an application for delivery of possession, which the trial court ordered in his favour. The respondent challenged the order, arguing that the application was filed beyo…
BANARSI AND ORS.versusRAM PHAL
2003 INSC 9417 February 2003Appeal(s) allowed
The respondent Ram Phal sued for specific performance of a land sale agreement, while the appellants Banarsi et al. sued to cancel the agreement claiming it was a loan. The trial court denied specific performance, granting only a money decree and a conditional order for specific performance if the appellants failed to …
MONOTOSH KUMAR MITRA (DEAD) BY LRS.versusAMRENDRANATH SHAW (DEAD) AND ORS.
2000 INSC 8617 February 2000
In a mortgage suit, a preliminary decree dated 18 November 1968 ordered the defendants to pay Rs.24,000 in four annual instalments, with the first instalment due on 31 March 1969. The decree allowed the plaintiff to apply for a final decree for sale of the mortgaged property upon any default, subject to Section 34 of t…
THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS.versusA. GURUSAMY
1997 INSC 14717 February 1997Appeal(s) allowed
The respondent, A. Gurusamy, obtained a certificate in 1971 claiming Scheduled Tribe (Kattunaicken) status, which was later cancelled after an enquiry revealed he belonged to a Scheduled Caste (Thotti). He filed a civil suit seeking a declaration that he is a Scheduled Tribe; the trial court and appellate court granted…
BHUDEV MALLICK ALIAS BHUDEB MALLICK & ANR.versusRANAJIT GHOSHAL & ORS.
2025 INSC 17517 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed
The appellants, heirs of the original defendants in a 1965 title suit, were restrained by a permanent injunction that barred them from disturbing the respondents' possession of the suit property. After four decades, the respondents filed an execution application in 2017 alleging breach of the injunction, leading the tr…
BALBIR SINGH & ANR. ETC.versusBALDEV SINGH (D) THROUGH HIS LRS. & ORS. ETC.
2025 INSC 8117 January 2025Dismissed
The plaintiffs obtained decrees for specific performance of a sale agreement, directing them to deposit the balance consideration within 20 days and the defendants to execute sale deeds. The trial court decrees were set aside by a first appellate court, but the High Court later restored them in regular second appeals, …
SEETHAKATHI TRUST MADRASversusKRISHNAVENI
2022 INSC 4817 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed
The dispute concerned a 0.08‑cent portion of a 120‑acre land parcel in Chengalpattu, where the appellant Seethakathi Trust claimed title based on a series of registered sale deeds dating back to 1963, while the respondent Krishnaveni sought specific performance of an earlier agreement and claimed possession of the same…
A.V.M. SALES CORPORATIONversusM/S. ANURADHA CHEMICALS PVT. LTD.
2012 INSC 3517 January 2012Case Allowed
The parties entered into a supply agreement at Calcutta (place 'C') and a mutual understanding that any dispute would be litigated exclusively in Calcutta courts. When a dispute arose, the petitioner filed a suit in Calcutta, but the respondent filed a separate suit in Vijayawada (place 'V'), which was decreed in the r…
USHA DEVIversusRIJWAN AHAMD & ORS.
2008 INSC 6017 January 2008Case Allowed
Usha Devi filed a suit for a permanent injunction over a parcel of land described in the plaint. The defendants objected to the description, and during a related miscellaneous proceeding the plaintiff’s husband affirmed the description. Two years later the plaintiff sought to amend the plaint to correct the description…
BHAG MAL (ALIAS) RAM BUX AND ORS.versusMUNSHI (D) BY LRS. AND ORS.
2007 INSC 6017 January 2007Appeal(s) allowed
The appellants, sons of Sher Singh, inherited land sold by their father to Bansi. They challenged the sale in a suit that was dismissed, but on appeal a declaratory decree was obtained in their favour. While the decree was pending, both Sher Singh and Bansi died, and the appeal was abated on 14‑Oct‑1977 because Bansi's…
MOST. ETWARI DEVI AND ORS.versusMOST. PARVATI DEVI
2006 INSC 3017 January 2006Appeal(s) allowed
The husband of appellant No.1 (Nunu Mahto) filed a suit for specific performance against the respondent for failure to return sale deeds, claiming he was ready to pay the consideration. After his death, his heirs substituted as plaintiffs. The trial court decreed specific performance, which was affirmed by the first ap…
RAJKOT MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONversusMANJULBEN JAYANTILAL NAKUM AND ORS.
1997 INSC 3417 January 1997Appeal(s) allowed
The deceased Jayantilal was killed when a roadside tree, planted by the Rajkot Municipal Corporation, fell on him while he was walking on a footpath. His widow and children sued the corporation for damages, alleging negligence in failing to maintain the tree in a safe condition. The trial court and the Gujarat High Cou…
PADANATHIL RUGMINI AMMAversusP.K. ABDULLA
1996 INSC 8717 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed
The dispute arose from a leasehold property originally owned by a Tarwad, which was taken by an ex parte decree in 1942 and sold at a court auction to the decree‑holder Mohammed Haji. The decree‑holder subsequently leased the land to Raghavan Nair, whose rights were later assigned to P.K. Abdulla, the respondent. The e…
CHINNAMMAL & 4 ORS.versusP. ARUMUGHAM & ANR.
1990 INSC 1217 January 1990Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, a judgment debtor, obtained a money decree against him which was not stayed and his property was sold at a court auction. The properties were bought by a stranger auction purchaser who was a relative of the decree holder. The High Court later set aside the decree, and the appellant sought to set aside th…
IL AND FS ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTIONS COMPANY LTD.versusM/S. BHARGAVARAMA CONSTRUCTIONS & ORS.
2021 INSC 90416 December 2021Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiff, IL & FS Engineering and Constructions Co. Ltd., obtained a decree for recovery of Rs.47,90,088 from defendants Bhargavaram Constructions and others. The defendants appealed the decree and, in the appellate proceedings, filed a miscellaneous application seeking to implead A.P. Transco as a party to the ap…
P. SATYANARAYANAversusNANDYALA RAMA KRISHNA REDDY
2021 INSC 90816 December 2021Dismissed
The respondent-plaintiff filed a suit seeking a declaration of ownership of agricultural land and an interim injunction against the petitioner. The trial court dismissed the interim injunction, but the High Court reversed that order, granting the injunction based on a certificate issued under Section 38‑E of the Andhra…
G H DSGversusAKG
2019 INSC 137616 December 2019Disposed off
The mother, alleged to suffer from paranoid schizophrenia, filed a guardianship petition seeking custody of her minor daughter, while the father sought custody on grounds of the mother’s mental illness and alleged cruelty. The mother counter‑alleged that the father sexually abused the child. Three counsellors reported …
D.N. JEEVARAJU & ANR.versusD. SUDHAKAR & ORS. ETC.
2010 INSC 89316 December 2010Dismissed
Five independent MLAs who had supported the BJP government in Karnataka withdrew their support and were disqualified under paragraph 2(2) of the Tenth Schedule. They filed writ petitions challenging the disqualification and sought to amend paragraph 9 of their petitions, which mistakenly stated that they had not left t…
BHAG SINGHversusJASKIRAT SINGH & ORS.
2009 INSC 131316 December 2009Case Partly allowed
Natha Singh executed two wills, one in 1979 bequeathing his Punjab house to his son Shag Singh and another in 1986 bequeathing his Haryana house to his second son Jaskirat Singh. After Natha Singh's death, Jaskirat filed a suit for possession of the Haryana house, while Shag Singh's brothers filed a suit claiming owner…
DEEPA BHARGAVA & ANR.versusMAHESH BHARGAVA & ORS.
2008 INSC 144316 December 2008Appeal(s) allowed
The parties, siblings, entered into a compromise concerning ancestral property, which the court incorporated into a decree ordering the respondents to pay Rs.10 lakh each and, on default, interest at 18% per annum. The respondents failed to pay, and the appellants sought execution. The executing court, and later the Hi…
LAJPAT RAI MEHTAversusSECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB, DEPARTMENT OF IRRIGATION & POWER
2008 INSC 144516 December 2008Dismissed
Lajpat Rai Mehta, a draftsman in the Punjab Irrigation & Power Department, was on unauthorized leave from 30 April 1981 until his superannuation on 30 September 1994. He sued for a declaration that he was entitled to pension and other retiral benefits. The trial court dismissed the suit, but the first appellate court r…
WADA ARUN ASBESTOS (P) LTD.versusGUJARAT WATER SUPPLY & SEWERAGE BOARD
2008 INSC 144816 December 2008Dismissed
Wada Arun Asbestos (P) Ltd. supplied AC pressure pipes to Gujarat Water Supply & Sewerage Board, which failed to pay the amount due. The plaintiff filed a summary suit under Order 37 of the CPC; the defendant was granted conditional leave to defend on the condition of depositing 50% security, which it failed to do, lea…
MAHESH YADAV & ANR.versusRAJESHWAR SINGH & ORS.
2008 INSC 145116 December 2008Appeal(s) allowed
In a suit for declaration of title and possession of land, six defendants were impleaded. Defendants 2 and 5 entered into a compromise with the plaintiff, while an ex‑parte decree was passed against defendants 1 and 6. The latter filed an application under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure to set aside th…
MANTOO SARKARversusORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND OTHERS
2008 INSC 145316 December 2008Appeal(s) allowed
Mantoo Sarkar, a migrant agricultural labourer originally from Pilibhit, was residing and working in Nainital when he was injured in a bus‑truck collision that occurred in Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh. The truck was insured by Oriental Insurance Company, which maintained a branch at Nainital. Sarkar filed a claim petition b…
HARKIRAT SINGHversusAMARINDER SINGH
2005 INSC 62116 December 2005Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, an elector from Patiala Town, filed an election petition under Section 81 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, alleging that the respondent, Amarinder Singh, committed corrupt practices by using a Class‑I gazetted officer and a police superintendent to further his election campaign. The Punjab …
N.K. RAJGARHIAversusM/S. MAHAVIR PLANTATION LTD. AND ORS.
2005 INSC 62616 December 2005Dismissed
N.K. Rajgarhia sued Mahavir Plantation Ltd. for recovery of Rs. 75 lakh. The parties compromised, and a consent decree for Rs. 41,69,110 was passed, with a clause that dishonour of any cheque would make the whole balance payable and executable. The respondent defaulted, leading to execution proceedings and a further se…
SMT. V. RAJESHWARIversusT.C. SARAVANABAVA
2003 INSC 72316 December 2003Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration of title and possession of a property measuring 1,817 sq. ft. after purchasing it. The defendant denied the plaintiff's title and pleaded adverse possession, but did not raise a defence of res judicata in the trial court or first appeal. The High Court, on a second appeal, hel…
HINDALCO INDUSTRLES LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
1993 INSC 39116 December 1993Dismissed
Hindalco Industries Ltd. complained that the Indian Railways continued to levy freight charges based on an inflated distance of 714 km even after a new line reduced the actual distance to 568 km. The company filed a complaint under Section 36(b) of the Railways Act, 1989 seeking a declaration that the rates were unreas…
RUKMINI AMMA SARADAMMAversusKALL YANI SULOCHANA AND ORS.
1992 INSC 34416 December 1992Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, a landlady, sought eviction of the tenant on grounds of rent arrears and a claim to demolish the shed. After the Rent Controller ordered eviction only on rent default, the landlady obtained a reversal of the bona fide need finding on appeal, prompting the tenant to file revisions under Section 20 of the …
DALPAT KUMAR AND ANR.versusPRAHLAD SINGH AND ORS.
1991 INSC 34116 December 1991Appeal(s) allowed
The first appellant, Dalpat Kumar, entered into a contract to purchase a house and obtained a decree for specific performance, after which the sale deed was executed by the court. The respondent's family repeatedly sought temporary injunctions to prevent the appellant from taking possession, which were denied by the tr…
STATE OF PUNJABversusJAGDEV SINGH TALWANDI
1983 INSC 19916 December 1983Appeal(s) allowed
The Supreme Court examined the detention of J.S. Talwandi under Section 3 of the National Security Act, 1980. The respondent argued that the detaining authority failed to provide sufficient particulars of the first ground of detention, violating Article 22(5) of the Constitution, and that the District Magistrate’s fail…
BHAGYODAY COOPERATIVE BANK LTD.versusRAVINDRA BALKRISHNA PATEL DECEASED THROUGH HIS LRS & ORS
2022 INSC 121016 November 2022Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant bank granted a loan to a partnership firm which defaulted, leading to a Lavad suit under the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961. An award was passed in 1988 and a certificate under Section 103 was issued in 1995, creating a deemed decree. The bank filed an execution petition in 1995, which was withd…
KIRPA RAM (DECEASED) THROUGH LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES & ORS.versusSURENDRA DEO GAUR & ORS.
2020 INSC 64016 November 2020Dismissed
The respondents filed a suit for permanent injunction claiming ownership of Khasra No. 238 in Village Basai Darapur, Delhi, while the appellant (Kirpa Ram) contended that the land was Khasra No. 79 in Village Shakarpur and that the dispute was a boundary issue barred under Section 28 of the Delhi Land Revenue Act, 1954…
VIJAY PULLARWAR & ORS.versusSHRI HANUMAN DEOSTHAN,A PUBLIC TRUST THROUGH ITS TRUSTEES
2018 INSC 106616 November 2018Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiff, Shri Hanuman Deosthan, a public trust registered under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950, sued the defendants for possession of House No.878 in Circle No.3, claiming it was trust property. The trial court decreed possession in favour of the trust, but the first appellate court reversed, finding the…
HARI MOHAN SHARMA & ANR.versusCHARANJEET SINGH REKHI & ORS. ETC.
2018 INSC 106716 November 2018Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiff filed two suits for specific performance against Charanjeet Singh Rekhi (deceased) and his wife Manjit Kaur, claiming they were parties to a sale agreement. Two other individuals, also named Charanjeet Singh Rekhi from Moradabad and Uttarakhand, filed Interlocutory Applications asserting that they were th…
KORES (INDIA) LTD.versusBANK OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.
2006 INSC 86016 November 2006Case Partly allowed
Kores (India) Ltd., the lessee of an industrial undertaking, appealed a High Court order that required it to pay a royalty on plant and machinery in addition to lease rent. The High Court had appointed a receiver who fixed the royalty at 10% of the written‑down value, amounting to Rs 70,000 per month. The appellant arg…
SMT. MEERA BHANJAversusSMT. NIRMALA KUMARI CHOUDHARY
1994 INSC 52216 November 1994Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiff filed a title suit seeking partition and separate possession of two plots, 73 and 74. The trial court granted partition of plot 73 and a declaration of title for plot 74; the High Court later allowed partition of plot 74 as well. The defendant filed a review petition under Order 47, Rule 1 of the CPC, cla…
JOHN D’ SOUZAversusKARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
2019 INSC 114716 October 2019Case Partly allowed
John D’ Souza, a former bus conductor, was dismissed by Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation after a domestic enquiry that found him guilty of absenteeism. While an industrial dispute concerning his dismissal was pending before the Labour Court, the corporation sought permission to effectuate the dismissal under …
STATE OF GUJARATversusM/S KOTHARI AND ASSOCIATES
2015 INSC 78816 October 2015Appeal(s) allowed
The State of Gujarat awarded a contract to M/s Kothari & Associates for canal lining, but repeatedly delayed handing over the site, forcing the contractor to seek four extensions of time. Each time the contractor claimed compensation for the delay, the State denied it, and the work was eventually completed in 1980. The…
SANT RAMversusDHAN KAUR & ORS.
2015 INSC 79116 October 2015Appeal(s) allowed
The petitioner sought clarification of a Supreme Court order dated 21‑04‑2009, which recorded his statement that he would not press the prayer for mesne profits. The lower courts had awarded mesne profits of Rs.30 per month (with 10% increase every three years) and interest, while the petitioner had given up his claim …
SHAILESH DHAIRYAWANversusMOHAN BALKRISHNA LULLA
2015 INSC 79616 October 2015Dismissed
The appeal arose from a dispute where the parties, after settling most issues in a suit, referred two remaining differences to arbitration before a retired Supreme Court judge. The arbitrator resigned, and the respondent sought a substitute arbitrator. The High Court appointed a retired judge as a substitute under Sect…
BABULAL KHANDELWAL & ORS.versusBALKRISHAN D. SANGHVI & ORS.
2008 INSC 116416 October 2008Dismissed
Respondent No.1 filed an administration suit to administer the intestate estate of his deceased parents. During the suit he sought to amend the plaint to implead the appellants, alleging that two properties had been alienated to a company and to the appellants during the parents' lifetimes. The Bombay High Court allowe…
M. ANASUYDEVI AND ANR.versusM. MANIK REDDY AND ORS.
2003 INSC 55416 October 2003Appeal(s) allowed
The parties, members of a joint Hindu family, referred a dispute over partition of family property to an arbitral tribunal, which delivered an award on 31 May 1998 (corrected on 10 June 1998). The respondents filed petitions under Section 34(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking to set aside the awar…
NARAYAN GOVIND HEGDEversusKAMALAKARA SHIVARAMA HEGDE AND ANR.
2001 INSC 51116 October 2001Appeal(s) allowed
The widow Smt. Yenki borrowed Rs. 650 for family necessity after her husband's death and executed a promissory note. An award under the Bombay Agricultural Debtors Relief Act, 1947 created a charge on her property, which was later auctioned; the appellant purchased the land. The son (applicant) claimed he was the sole …
DEVA RAM AND ANR.versusISHWAR CHAND AND ANR.
1995 INSC 62716 October 1995
The plaintiff Deva Ram sued Ishwar Chand for Rs 6,300 as sale price of a land, but the trial court held the document was only an agreement for sale and that the defendants were tenants, dismissing the suit. The plaintiff then filed a second suit for possession of the same land; the trial court dismissed it as barred by…
DIVISIONAL PERSONNEL OFFICER, WESTERN RAILWAY, KOTAversusSUNDAR DASS
1981 INSC 18016 October 1981Appeal(s) allowed
Sundar Dass, a former railway clerk, was suspended on 17 February 1949 after it was discovered that he had concealed a prior discharge from railway service in 1944. He was dismissed on 14 May 1949, but the Rajasthan High Court later set aside that dismissal on grounds of natural justice, directing fresh disciplinary pr…
STATE OF PUNJABversusLABOUR COURT, JULLUNDUR & ORS
1979 INSC 21016 October 1979Appeal(s) allowed
The Supreme Court examined whether the Hydel Upper Bari Doab Construction Project, undertaken by the Punjab Hydel Department, qualified as an "establishment" under Section 1(3)(b) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, and whether the retrenchment of its workers entitled them to gratuity. It held that the project fell w…
SRIHARI (DEAD) THROUGH LR. SMT. CH. NIVEDITHA REDDYversusSYED MAQDOOM SHAH & ORS.
2014 INSC 63116 September 2014Dismissed
The appellant, Srihari (deceased) through his legal representatives, challenged a High Court order that amended a preliminary decree in a partition suit to allocate specific shares among co‑heirs. The amendment was made under Section 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which permits correction of clerical or acci…
GOVT. OF KARNATAKA AND ANRversusK.C.SUBRAMANYA AND ORS
2013 INSC 62316 September 2013Dismissed
The Government of Karnataka appealed a decree granting possession of disputed land to the respondents, seeking to introduce a road map as additional evidence at the appellate stage under Order XU Rule 27(1)(aa) of the CPC. The Supreme Court examined whether such evidence could be admitted when it could have been produc…
BAJAJ AUTO LIMITEDversusTVS MOTOR COMPANY LTD.
2009 INSC 114016 September 2009Disposed off
Bajaj Auto Ltd filed a suit in the Madras High Court alleging infringement of its Patent No. 195904 against TVS Motor Company Ltd. The trial judge granted an interim injunction, which was later set aside by the Division Bench on appeal. The suit remained pending without a written statement from the defendant. The Supre…
DEVA SAHAYAM (D) BY LRS.versusP. SAVITHRAMMA AND ORS.
2005 INSC 42416 September 2005Case Partly allowed
The appellant, a tenant, entered into an oral agreement of sale with the respondents (landlords) and later sued for specific performance. The respondents alienated the property to third parties and filed a counter‑claim for possession, alleging the tenant had denied the landlord's title. The trial court entertained the…
RAJGOPAL (DEAD) BY LRS.versusKISHAN GOPAL AND ANR.
2003 INSC 48116 September 2003Appeal(s) allowed
The suit filed by the heirs of Rajgopal sought declaration of title and possession of joint family property, contending that the adoption of Goverdhan Das was in the 'Dwyamushyayana' form, which would preserve his inheritance rights in his natural father's estate. The trial court dismissed the suit on limitation and he…
SHIROMANI GURDWARA PRABANDHAK COMMITTEEversusMAHANT HARNAM SINGH C. (DEAD), M.N. SINGH AND ORS.
2003 INSC 48316 September 2003Dismissed
The case concerned a dispute over whether the institution known as Gurdwara Guru Granth Sahib at Jhandawala, Bhatinda, could be declared a Sikh Gurdwara under the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925. Petitioners, represented by the Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee, claimed the place satisfied the statutory criteria, while …
MITHAILAL DALSANGAR SINGH AND ORS.versusANNABAI DEVRAM KINI AND ORS.
2003 INSC 48416 September 2003Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiffs, three co‑plaintiffs, filed a suit for specific performance of a sale agreement. One plaintiff died, and his legal representatives applied for condonation of delay, setting aside the abatement of the suit and to be brought on record. The Single Judge of the High Court allowed the application, finding suf…
Y. P. LELEversusMAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LTD. & ORS.
2023 INSC 73216 August 2023Appeal(s) allowed
The Maharashtra State Electricity Board filed a Special Civil Suit for recovery of money against Miraj Electric Supply Co. and its directors. During the plaintiff's evidence, the defendants' counsel withdrew his vakalatnama, and the trial court proceeded under Order XVII Rule 2 CPC, ultimately decreeing the suit ex par…
DHARMIN BAI KASHYAPversusBABLI SAHU & OTHERS
2023 INSC 71216 August 2023Dismissed
The petitioner challenged the election of a Gram Panchayat Sarpanch on the ground of insufficient lighting at three polling booths and filed an election petition before the Sub‑Divisional Officer (SDO) seeking only a recount of votes. The SDO ordered a recount, after which the petitioner was declared elected, but the d…
THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.versusMODERN TENT HOUSE & ANR.
2017 INSC 74716 August 2017Appeal(s) allowed
The State of Bihar filed a money suit seeking Rs 41,59,418 against Modern Tent House and others. The defendants denied the claim in their written statement and later applied under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to amend the statement by adding two paragraphs that merely elaborated facts already pl…
LEKH RAJ (DEAD) THROUGH L.RS. & ORS.versusRANJIT SINGH & ORS.
2017 INSC 74616 August 2017Dismissed
The appellants filed a suit in 1962 seeking a declaration of customary rights over agricultural land under the Punjab Custom (Power to Contest) Act, 1920. The trial court dismissed the suit, but the appellate court in 1965 decreed in favour of the respondents, and the decree became final as no second appeal was filed. …
TERAPALLI DYVASAHATA KUMARversusS.M. KANTHA RAJU (DEAD) THR. LRS. & ANR.
2017 INSC 74816 August 2017Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, Terapalli Dyvasahata Kumar, filed a petition under Section 23 of the Andhra Pradesh Societies Registration Act, 2001, seeking declarations and injunctions concerning the management of a society. The District Court allowed the petition, holding that "District Court concerned" should be interpreted using t…
M/S MISRA AND CO.versusDAMODAR VALLEY CORPORATION
2017 INSC 75116 August 2017Hearing Adjourned
MIS Misra & Co. was awarded Rs.5,78,873 by an arbitrator in 1988 for a construction contract with Damodar Valley Corporation (DVC). The Civil Court made the award a decree on 16 March 1991, but DVC neither paid nor appealed, and due to repeated objections the formal decree was only prepared on 21 February 2003. Misra f…
RAJU JHURANIversusM/S GERMINDA PVT. LTD.
2012 INSC 33516 August 2012Case Partly allowed
The landlord, Raju Jhurni, obtained an eviction decree against the tenant company under the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956, but the decree did not determine the arrears of rent. He then filed a winding‑up petition before the Company Court under Sections 433, 434 and 439 of the Companies Act, 1956, seeking recov…
RANI KUSUMversusKANCHAN DEVI AND ORS.
2005 INSC 36216 August 2005Dismissed
The appellant challenged the trial court’s acceptance of the respondent’s written statement, which was filed on 10 July 2004, well beyond the 30‑day normal period and the 90‑day maximum period prescribed under Order VIII, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) as amended by the 2002 Amendment Act. The appellant ar…
GANESHPRASAD BADRINARAYAN LAHOTI (D) BY LRS.versusSANJEEVPRASAD JAMNAPRASAD CHOURASIYA AND ANR.
2004 INSC 45216 August 2004Leave Granted & Allowed
The landlord sued the tenant for possession of a property on the ground of unauthorised sub‑letting and obtained a decree. The tenant appealed, but died while the appeal was pending. His heirs, unaware of the appeal, learned of it only when the advocate wrote a letter and promptly filed an application under Order 22 Ru…
SHRI VISHIN N. KHANCHANDANI AND ANR.versusVIDYA LACHMANDAS KHANCHANDANI AND ANR.
2000 INSC 40016 August 2000Appeal(s) allowed
The deceased holder of several National Savings Certificates (NSC) died, and his widow and daughter sought a succession certificate under s.370 of the Indian Succession Act for the debts and securities, including the NSCs where the deceased had nominated his brother and step‑brother as nominees. The trial court exclude…
J. JERMONSversusALIAMMAL AND ORS.
1999 INSC 33316 August 1999Appeal(s) allowed
The tenant J. Jermons stopped paying rent to his landlord after a Tax Recovery Officer issued a prohibitory order under the Income Tax Act, directing him to pay the rent to the tax authority instead. He later complied with a notice under Section 226(3) of the Income Tax Act and paid the rent for the entire period to th…
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BOMBAYversusT.P. KUMARAN
1996 INSC 89416 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed
The respondent, an Income‑Tax Officer, was dismissed from service and filed a suit challenging his dismissal. The suit was decreed, resulting in his reinstatement, but the arrears of salary were not paid, prompting a writ petition in the High Court which ordered payment of all arrears. After the arrears were paid, the …
MAULVI ISSA QURESHIversusDISTRICT JUDGE, DEORIA AND ORS.
1996 INSC 89516 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed
Ram Nihore filed a suit on April 25, 1988, impleading Mansari as co‑plaintiff for a perpetual injunction restraining the appellant from possession and enjoyment of the schedule property. The suit was dismissed for default on May 27, 1988. The appellant objected that Ram Nihore had died on September 4, 1979, rendering t…
THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF WORKS AND HOUSING, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA AND ORS.versusSH. MOHINDER SINGH JAGDEV AND ORS.
1996 INSC 89616 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed
Sh. Mohinder Singh Jagdev was appointed as a Section Officer in the Central Public Works Department in 1956 but was found to have obtained the appointment using false certificates. He was suspended and later terminated on 10 September 1957 under Rule 5 of the Central Government (Temporary) Service Rules, 1949, while cr…
MOOL CHAND AND ORSversusDY. DIRECTOR, CONSOLIDATION AND ORS
1995 INSC 46616 August 1995
The Supreme Court considered two civil appeals arising from partition suits that were pending when a village was notified for consolidation under the Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1967. The appellants argued that the notification and the resulting abatement under Section 5(2) of the Act nullified both th…
P V. SANAKARA KURUPversusLEELAVATHY NAMBIAR
1994 INSC 32016 August 1994Dismissed
The petition challenged a Kerala High Court judgment that had set aside earlier findings that the petitioner, P.V. Sankara Kurup, was merely an agent and holder of a power of attorney for the respondent, Leelavathy Nambiar, and had purchased a Thavazhy property in his own name using the respondent’s funds. The central …
STATE OF RAJASTHANversusR.S. SHARMA & CO.
1988 INSC 22416 August 1988Disposed off
The State of Rajasthan and R.S. Sharma & Co. entered into a construction contract that later led to a dispute. While litigation was pending, the parties agreed to arbitrate, and the arbitrators awarded Rs.75,41,755 to the respondent without providing reasons. The appellant challenged the award on grounds of lack of rea…
S. B. NORONAHversusPREM KUMAR! KHANNA
1979 INSC 15116 August 1979Dismissed
A landlady repeatedly let her premises to a tenant for residential purposes under Section 21 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, obtaining the Controller's sanction each time. When the lease expired, she sought summary eviction via an execution petition, which the Controller rejected on the ground that the petition om…
K. P. NATARAJAN & ANR.versusMUTHALAMMAL & ORS.
2021 INSC 33716 July 2021Dismissed
The petitioners filed a suit for specific performance of a sale deed, naming a minor as the third defendant and seeking the appointment of a guardian under Order XXXII, Rule 3 of the CPC. The trial court passed an ex‑parte decree and allowed execution without properly appointing a guardian, later dismissing the respond…
STATE OF M.P. & ANR.versusDUNGAJI (D) BY LRS. & ANR.
2019 INSC 75816 July 2019Appeal(s) allowed
The State of Madhya Pradesh challenged a decree of the High Court that had set aside an order of the Competent Authority under the Madhya Pradesh Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1960, which had treated land inherited by the plaintiff's wife as part of the family holding and declared surplus. The plaintiff, Dungaj…
SHRI BADRU (SINCE DECEASED) THROUGH L.R.HARI RAM ETC.versusNTPC LIMITED (FORMERLY NATIONAL THERMAL POWER CORPORATION LIMITED) & ORS.
2019 INSC 76716 July 2019Appeal(s) allowed
The landowners' property was acquired by the State for NTPC's benefit, and the Land Acquisition Officer initially offered Rs.3,87,383 per bigha as compensation. The owners sought a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, and the Reference Court enhanced the compensation to Rs.5,00,000 per bigha. The Sta…
ARATHI SANDIversusBANDI JAGADRAKSHAKA RAO AND ORS.
2013 INSC 47316 July 2013Dismissed
Arathi Sandi and Sandi Jagadrakshaka Rao, a married couple residing in the United States, fought a divorce and child‑custody dispute. The US Superior Court initially granted primary custody of their US‑citizen son to the mother, later modifying the order to make the father the custodial parent and issuing a writ of hab…
M/S. HOTEL QUEEN ROAD PVT. LTD. & ORS.versusMR. RAM PARSHOTAM MITTAL & ORS.
2013 INSC 46816 July 2013Dismissed
The Delhi High Court, after substantially hearing an appeal, allowed the appellants to withdraw the appeal and extended the interim relief granted earlier until 10 May 2010. The appellants contended that the High Court, having become functus officio upon permitting withdrawal, could not lawfully extend interim relief o…
CENTRAL BANK OF INDIAversusVRAJLAL KAPURCHAND GANDHI AND ANR.
2003 INSC 31616 July 2003Appeal(s) allowed
The Central Bank of India, a tenant, faced eviction proceedings initiated by the landlords under the Bombay Rents Act, which were initially dismissed in its favour. After the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 came into force, the landlords invoked Section 3(1)(b) to terminate the tenancy, leading to a suit in the Smal…
RAM KHILONA AND ORS.versusSARDAR AND ORS.
2002 INSC 30316 July 2002Appeal(s) allowed
The appellants (Ram Khilona et al.) had entered into an agreement of sale with the respondents (Sardar et al.) but the sale deed was never executed. After execution, the covenantors allegedly altered the agreement by inserting two independent marginal witnesses to lend authenticity. The respondents sought specific perf…
BHARAT BHUSHAN GUPTAversusPRATAP NARAIN VERMA & ANR
2022 INSC 64916 June 2022Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiff filed a suit for mandatory and prohibitory injunction, together with damages, to evict licensees from his plot. The defendant challenged the suit's pecuniary jurisdiction, arguing that the valuation should be based on the market value of the property (Rs. 1.8 crore) rather than the nominal amounts claimed…
THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERSversusKAMAL SENGUPTA AND ANOTHER
2008 INSC 75916 June 2008Case Allowed
The State of West Bengal appealed against a West Bengal Administrative Tribunal order that granted higher pay scales to two officers, Kamal Sengupta and another, after a review application was allowed. The respondents contended that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to review its own order on the basis of a later decisi…
LEHNA SINGH (D) BY LRS.versusGURNAM SINGH (D) BY LRS. & ORS.
2024 INSC 42916 May 2024
The case arose from a suit for perpetual injunction where the plaintiff claimed ownership of land by natural succession, while the defendants relied on a Will that the trial court held to be suspicious and invalid. The trial court's decree in favour of the plaintiff was set aside by the first appellate court, which gra…
JINI DHANRAJGIR & ANRversusSHIBU MATHEW & ANR. ETC.
2023 INSC 54416 May 2023Dismissed
The original plaintiff, Mrs. Cherian, sued the Mathew family for title and possession of a 2.81‑acre land parcel. The trial court dismissed the suit, but the High Court later restored it and the decree of possession was finally passed in 2000, with a later modification requiring the defendants to pay compensation. Afte…
VINUBHAI RANCHHODBHAI PATELversusRAJIVBHAI DUDABHAI PATEL & OTHERS
2018 INSC 52116 May 2018Disposed off
The case concerned an attack in which three persons were killed and five injured, allegedly committed by a group of seventeen accused. The Sessions Court convicted four accused and acquitted the rest, but the charges were found to be improperly framed under CrPC sections 211‑213, lacking specific allegations for each d…