Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Indian Contract Act

31 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

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

THE VICE CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR, CITY AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF MAHARASHTRA LTD.& ANR.versusSHISHIR REALTY PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS. ETC

2021 INSC 79729 November 2021Dismissed

The City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra (CIDCO) invited a tender for leasing land for hotel development and allotted the plot to the highest bidder, Metropolis Hotels, which later changed the land use and subdivided the plot, assigning part to Shishir Realty. Complaints of irregularities led to a

MAHARASHTRA CHESS ASSOCIATIONversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2019 INSC 82329 July 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The Maharashtra Chess Association, a society affiliated to the All India Chess Federation, was disaffiliated by the Federation and filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court under Article 226 challenging the action. The Federation invoked Clause 21 of its Constitution and Bye‑laws, which stipulated that any suit ag

UNION OF INDIAversusJ. K. GAS PLANT

1980 INSC 9829 April 1980Dismissed

The Union of India supplied steel to J.K. Gas Plant Manufacturing Co. for a gas plant; surplus steel was directed by the Kanpur Controller to be delivered to Govan Brothers Ltd. The price for the surplus steel remained unpaid, prompting the plaintiff to sue the Union for the price plus interest. The trial court held th

M/S. SUMITOMO HEAVY INDUSTRIES LIMITEDversusOIL & NATURAL GAS COMPANY

2010 INSC 44428 July 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Sumitomo Heavy Industries, entered into a turn‑key offshore platform contract with the respondent, ONGC, which contained a clause (17.3) obligating the respondent to compensate the contractor for any necessary and reasonable extra cost caused by a change in Indian law after the bid closing date. After th

CHARAN SINGH ETCversusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. ETC.

1996 INSC 139427 November 1996Disposed off

Charan Singh, a Scheduled Caste member, was granted a ten‑year lease of uncultivable waste land under the Nazool Land Rules, 1956, which he reclaimed, cultivated and equipped with a tube‑well. After the lease expired in 1972 he remained in possession, but the Government initiated eviction proceedings which were upheld

MATHUNNI MATHAIversusM/S. HINDUSTAN ORGANIC CHEMICALS LTD. AND ANR.

1995 INSC 29725 April 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned a land‑acquisition award where the High Court enhanced the market value, solatium and interest under the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984. The Supreme Court stayed the collection of the enhanced portion, after which the respondent deposited the amount that was not stayed on 9 January 1988. Afte

OM SHANKAR BIYANIversusBOARD OF TRUSTEES, PORT OF CALCUTTA AND ORS.

2002 INSC 9722 February 2002Disposed off

The appellant imported a consignment of bearings and, after customs seized the goods, sought to clear them without paying the port charges and demurrage claimed by the Board of Trustees of the Port of Calcutta. The High Court allowed removal of the goods without payment, but the Board exercised its statutory lien under

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX BOMBAY CITY-III, BOMBAYversusSHANTILAL PRIVATE LIMITED BOMBAY

1983 INSC 8021 July 1983Reference answered

Shantilal Private Ltd entered into a contract to sell folic acid but could not deliver due to a sharp price rise. The dispute was referred to arbitration, which awarded the buyer Rs 1,50,000 as compensation for breach of contract. The assessee claimed this payment as a business loss, but the Income‑Tax Officer treated

ESSAR STEEL LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2016 INSC 32519 April 2016Dismissed

Essar Steel Ltd. and other off‑takers had long‑term contracts to purchase regasified LNG (RLNG) at a fixed price. In 2007 the Union Government issued a policy directive to pool RLNG prices and apply a uniform, non‑discriminatory price to all long‑term contracts, which raised the price for the appellants. The appellants

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

2022 INSC 20718 February 2022Appeal(s) allowed

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

GHAZIABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusBALBIR SINGH

2004 INSC 18217 March 2004

The Supreme Court examined a batch of appeals arising from orders of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) that uniformly awarded interest at 18% per annum in cases of deficiency of service by development authorities. The Court held that the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 has a wide reach and cover

KU. SONIA BHATIAversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

1981 INSC 6917 March 1981Dismissed

The appellant, Sonia Bhatia, claimed ownership of 80 bighas of land gifted to her by her grandfather on 28 January 1972, after the statutory cut‑off date of 24 January 1971 under the Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960. The Prescribed Authority ignored the gift under Section 5(6), treating it

M/S. SSPPL AND M/S. AIL WASversusSALMA DAM JOINT VENTURE & ANR.

2019 INSC 124914 November 2019Appeal(s) allowed

WAPCOS Ltd entered into a contract with Salma Dam Joint Venture (SDJV), a 95%-5% joint venture of SSPPL and AIL, for the reconstruction of the Salma Dam. After the original contract’s arbitration clause, the parties executed an Amendment of Agreement (AoA) on 9 June 2015, which expressly stated that no further claims w

TULSI CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY, HYDERABAD ETC.versusSTATE OF A.P. AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

1999 INSC 39514 September 1999Disposed off

The Tulsi Co‑operative Housing Society had agreed to buy 24 acres of land but the State of Andhra Pradesh, under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, acquired 18.03 acres for a HUDCO housing project, invoking the urgency clause and dispensing with a Section 5A enquiry. The Society and the landowner challenged the acquisitio

SMT. SHRISHT DHAWANversusSHAW BROTHERS

1991 INSC 34013 December 1991Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Smt. Dhawan, applied to the Delhi Rent Controller under Section 21 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, seeking permission to let her premises for a three‑year residential tenancy, stating she would need the house thereafter. The Rent Controller granted the permission, but the tenant, Shaw Brothers, late

BRITISH INDIA STEAM NAVIGATION CO., LTD.versusSHANMUGHA VILAS CASHEW INDUSTRIES AND ORS.

1990 INSC 8513 March 1990Appeal(s) allowed

British India Steam Navigation Co., Ltd. chartered the vessel Steliosm to ship 4,445 bags of cashew nuts for Shanmughavilas Cashew Industries, but only 3,712 bags were delivered. The respondent sued the appellant in the Cochin Sub‑ordinate Court for the shortage; the trial court decreed in favour of the respondent and

DEDDAPPA & ORS.versusTHE BRANCH MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.

2007 INSC 126912 December 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant's daughter was killed when a tempo, owned and driven by Respondent No.2, ran over her. The vehicle was insured with National Insurance Co., but the insurer claimed the policy was cancelled because the premium cheque was dishonoured, invoking Section 64‑VB of the Insurance Act, 1938. The Motor Accidents Cl

RAMESHWAR SWARUP (DEAD) BY LRS.versusSMT. SAROJ TYAGI AND ORS.

1998 INSC 39412 October 1998Appeal(s) allowed

The vendors sold a bungalow in the Meerut cantonment to the vendee, with the agreement stipulating that the vendee must obtain permission from the Military Estate Officer (MEO) for the transfer. Clause 5 provided that if such permission were not granted, the vendee could be released from the contract and recover the ea

RAMESHWAR & OTHERSversusSTATE OF HARYANA & OTHERS

2018 INSC 22712 March 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The Haryana Government issued a notification under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to acquire land for an industrial township, after which many landholders sold their land to private builders at inflated prices. The State later dropped the acquisition on 24 August 2007 and again on 29 January 2010, allegedly to benefit

MANIK CHAND AND ANR.versusRAMACHANDRA SON OF CHAWRIRAJ

1980 INSC 1148 May 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiffs, two minors, entered into an agreement through their mother and natural guardian to purchase a house for Rs 11,000, paying Rs 1,000 as earnest money. The seller failed to perform, and the minors sued for specific performance. The trial court decreed in their favour, but the High Court dismissed the suit

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusM/S PUNA HINDA

2021 INSC 4486 September 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India and others entered into a road‑construction contract with M/s Puna Hinda, which contained an arbitration clause for dispute resolution. After completing the work, the contractor submitted a final bill of Rs 23.68 crore, claiming payment for certain bills that the government alleged were already settl

SMT. MAYAWANTIversusSMT. KAUSHALYA DEVI

1990 INSC 1266 April 1990Dismissed

Mayawanti sued Kaushalya Devi for specific performance of a 1971 agreement to sell a factory, machinery and related assets for Rs 50,000, having paid Rs 5,000 as earnest money. The dispute centered on whether the document recorded in the petition writer's register (Exhibit PW‑11/A) proved a valid, certain contract and

V.K. ASHOKANversusASSTT. EXCISE COMMNR. & ORS.

2009 INSC 3235 March 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, who were granted toddy‑shop licences for one financial year, were found to have mixed diazepam in toddy, an offence under the Kerala Abkari Act, leading to cancellation of their licences under Rule 6(30) of the Kerala Abkari Shops (Disposal in Auction) Rules, 1974. The State then sought forfeiture of th

AMRIT BANASPATI CO. LTD. AND ANR.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR.

1992 INSC 635 March 1992Dismissed

The Punjab Government issued a brochure promising a refund of sales tax as an incentive for setting up large‑scale industries in focal points. Amrit Banaspati Co. relied on assurances from the Director and Secretary of Industries, purchased land and machinery, and later sought a refund of sales tax paid. The High Court

GAYA PRASADversusSURENDRA BAHADUR SINGH, (DEAD) BY L.RS. & ORS.

1987 INSC 715 March 1987Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Gaya Prasad, sued for specific performance of a 1958 agreement to sell a house that had been exempted from sale under Section 24 of the U.P. Encumbered Estates Act, 1934. The respondent‑landlord had earlier obtained an exemption for the house and a mortgage on the property had been extinguished by a mone

WORKMEN OF M/S HINDUSTAN LEVER LTD. & ORS.versusMANAGEMENT OF M/S HINDUSTAN LEVER LTD.

1984 INSC 55 January 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose when two salesmen, who were also union office‑bearers, were disciplined and terminated by Hindustan Lever Ltd. The union claimed the dismissals were illegal and that the employer was retaliating for trade‑union activity. The employer argued that the salesmen were not "workmen" under the Industrial Disput

YOGESH MEHTAversusCUSTODIAN APPOINTED UNDER THE SPECIAL COURT & ORS.

2007 INSC 64 January 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the auction of residential properties of the late Harshad Mehta, where Yogesh Mehta was the highest bidder. The Special Court provisionally accepted his bid but, pending a Supreme Court stay, the sale was not finalized. The Special Court later ordered forfeiture of Mehta's earnest money for f

UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA ETC. ETC

1991 INSC 2503 October 1991Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the court‑assisted settlement of the Bhopal gas‑leak disaster claims, where Union Carbide Corporation (UCC) agreed to pay $470 million and all civil and criminal proceedings were to be terminated. The Court held that under Article 142 of the Constitution it had jurisdiction to withdraw the ma

HARDEV SINGHversusGURMAIL SINGH (DEAD) BY LRS.

2007 INSC 932 February 2007Dismissed

Harcharan Singh transferred property to his wife Udham Kaur for maintenance. Udham Kaur claimed absolute ownership, which was upheld by the appellate court. During the pendency of her suit, Harcharan Singh sold the land to Gurmail Singh, who took possession. After Udham Kaur's death, Gurmail Singh sought ownership unde

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search