Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Indian Contract Act, 1872

541 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act — showing 1–200.

M/S. B.S.N. JOSHI AND SONS LTD.versusNAIR COAL SERVICES LTD. AND ORS.

2006 INSC 75031 October 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Maharashtra State Power General Co. (MAHAGENCO) issued a notice inviting tenders for coal liaison services. Four firms submitted bids; the Board accepted the bid of M/s B.S.N. Joshi & Sons Ltd. (the appellant) despite objections from three other bidders that the appellant failed to meet essential conditions – experienc

SHANTI VIJAY & CO. ETC.versusPRINCESS FATIMA FOUZIA & ORS. ETC.

1979 INSC 16531 August 1979Dismissed

The Nizam's Jewellery Trust, created by the late Nizam of Hyderabad, authorized its trustees to sell jewellery at their discretion after a three‑year period. In 1978 the Board of Trustees resolved to sell 37 items, but only four of the five trustees opened the tenders and purportedly accepted bids without the Chairman’

MAHABIR KISHORE & ORS.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

1989 INSC 21631 July 1989Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, liquor contractors, were required to pay an additional 7.5% mahua and fuel cess on contracts awarded by the Madhya Pradesh Government. The High Court declared the levy illegal in Surajdin (1960) and Doongaji (1962), but the Government continued to collect it, resulting in the appellants paying Rs.54,606

SHIN SATELLITE PUBLIC CO. LTD.versusM/S JAIN STUDIOS LTD.

2006 INSC 5531 January 2006Case Allowed

Shin Satellite Public Co. Ltd., a Thai satellite service provider, entered into a contract with Jain Studios Ltd. that contained an arbitration clause (Clause 23) requiring disputes to be referred to arbitration in Delhi under UNCITRAL rules, with the award deemed final and binding and a waiver of any right of appeal.

PLACIDO FRANCISCO PINTO (D) BY LRS. & ANRversusJOSE FRANCISCO PINTO & ANR.

2021 INSC 58130 September 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an elder brother, purchased the southern half of a family property from his younger brother by a registered sale deed that recorded a nominal consideration of Rs 3,000, after paying Rs 12,000 to discharge the brother’s debts and avert a court‑ordered auction. The brother and his wife later claimed the de

THE COMMITTEE-GFILversusLIBRA BUILDTECH PRIVATE LTD. & ORS.

2015 INSC 71830 September 2015Case Allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether Libra Buildtech Private Ltd. and other bidders, who had paid Rs.6.22 crore as stamp duty for sale deeds of properties of a liquidated company, could claim a refund after the sale was cancelled and the sale consideration was returned. The Court held that the cancellation of the contrac

NIRMALA ANANDversusADVENT CORPORATION (P) LTD. AND ORS.

2002 INSC 41430 September 2002Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Nirmala Anand, entered into a 1966 agreement to purchase a flat for Rs.60,000, paying Rs.35,000 before the seller's lease was cancelled, leaving the building incomplete. She sued for specific performance, but the High Court denied it and awarded damages; the Division Bench affirmed. On appeal, the Suprem

ZONAL MANAGER, CENTRAL BANK OF INDIAversusM/S. DEVI ISPAT LTD. & ORS.

2010 INSC 46230 July 2010Dismissed

M/s Devi Ispat Ltd. had obtained various credit facilities from Central Bank of India. After alleged fraud, the bank asked the company to shift its accounts and later to close them. The company settled its dues by receiving a Rs 15 crore cheque from State Bank of India and requested the return of title deeds and issuan

THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE PORT OF BOMBAY AND ORSversusM/S SRIYANESH KNITTERS

1999 INSC 29830 July 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The Board of Trustees of the Port of Bombay detained a consignment of acrylic fibre belonging to Mis Sriyanesh Knitters, demanding payment of wharfage and demurrage arising from earlier imports of woollen rags. The respondents challenged the Board’s circular, alleging it was ultra‑violet of the Major Port Trusts Act, 1

R. JANAKIAMMALversusS.K. KUMARASAMY(DECEASED) THROUGH LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES AND OTHERS

2021 INSC 31630 June 2021Case Partly allowed

The case involved a joint Hindu family of three brothers who executed a partition deed on 07‑11‑1960 but continued to live and conduct business together, later executing a compromise decree on 06‑08‑1984 to settle disputes. The plaintiff challenged the decree, alleging fraud, misrepresentation and lack of free consent,

RAM KARAN (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. & ORS.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

2014 INSC 43330 June 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ram Karan (deceased) through legal representatives, purchased agricultural land in 1962 from a Scheduled Caste vendor and obtained mutation in 1966. The State of Rajasthan, via a Tehsildar, filed a suit under Section 175 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act in 1993 seeking ejectment, alleging the sale violated t

GAYATRI BALASAMYversusM/S ISG NOVASOFT TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED

2025 INSC 60530 April 2025Disposed off

The Supreme Court was asked to resolve a long‑standing controversy over whether courts exercising jurisdiction under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 can modify an arbitral award. The issue arose from the earlier decision in Project Director, NHAI v. M. Hakeem, where the Court held that

SUKHBIRversusAJIT SINGH

2021 INSC 27930 April 2021Case Partly allowed

The plaintiff paid Rs.31.5 lakh of the Rs.32 lakh purchase price for land but the defendant failed to execute the sale deed. The plaintiff sued for specific performance, and the trial court ordered the defendant to execute the deed and receive the balance Rs.50,000. Before the decree was final, the land was acquired by

STATE BANK OF INDIAversusINDEXPORT REGISTERED AND ORS.

1992 INSC 14630 April 1992Appeal(s) allowed

The State Bank of India (SBI) granted a packing credit to a partnership and secured it by an equitable mortgage of a shop and a personal guarantee. SBI obtained a composite decree comprising a money decree against all defendants, including the guarantor, and a mortgage decree for sale of the shop. The guarantor objecte

SMT. CHANDRAKANTABEN ETC.versusVADILAL BAPALAL MODI & OTHERS.

1989 INSC 11030 March 1989Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute concerned the ownership of a 7‑acre Naroda Chawl, claimed by the plaintiff Vadilal Modi as part of a partition suit against his siblings and their heirs. Defendant Chandrakantaben (Def. No.6) asserted that the property had been gifted to her in 1946 and that she had acquired title by adverse possession, rel

B.S.N.LversusRELIANCE COMMUNICATION LTD.

2010 INSC 82729 November 2010Appeal(s) allowed

BSNL alleged that Reliance Communications had routed international calls as local calls, thereby evading higher Interconnect Usage Charges (IUC) and Access Deficit Charges (ADC). BSNL invoked clause 6.4.6 of their inter‑connect agreement to levy a large sum as a "penalty". The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate

KARNATAKA PAWN BROKERS ASSON. AND ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.

1998 INSC 40629 October 1998Dismissed

The appellants, Karnataka Pawnbrokers Association, challenged the liability to pay sales tax on the sale of unredeemed pledged goods disposed of through public auction. The issue was whether a pawnbroker, by virtue of statutory authority to sell defaulted pledges, qualifies as a "dealer" and carries on "business" withi

PANDURANG JIVAJIversusRAMCHANDRA GANGADHAR ASHTEKAR (DEAD) BY LRS. & ORS.

1981 INSC 18529 October 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Pandurang Jivajirao Apte, was the garnishee of property attached before judgment in a suit filed by the deceased R. G. Ashtakar for recovery of dues. Apte sold the attached property to Madhusudan Vasudeo Bavdekar under Section 176 of the Indian Contract Act after giving notice, but the sale proceeds were

BEED DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 68229 September 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Bank, a co‑operative society, had a gratuity scheme offering 26 days' wages per year of service with a ceiling of Rs 2.5 million. Under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (as amended), the statutory rate is 15 days' wages with a ceiling of Rs 3.5 million. After retirement, the employees claimed the benefit of both t

MADHYA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATIONversusMANOJ KUMAR & ANR.

2016 INSC 62529 August 2016Disposed off

The Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (MPSRTC) introduced a Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) on 1 July 2005, open for applications until 1 August 2005, with a clause stating that once an employee opted, the option could not be withdrawn. Several employees applied within the period but later sought to wit

L.S. SIKANDAR (D) BY LRS. & ORS.versusK. SUBRAMANI & ORS.

2013 INSC 57729 August 2013

The plaintiff sought specific performance of a 1983 agreement of sale and a permanent injunction, but the agreement had been terminated by a notice on 28‑03‑1985 after the plaintiff failed to pay the balance consideration and obtain required permissions within the stipulated five‑month period (extendable by two months)

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusKENNETH BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS LTD. & ORS.

2016 INSC 45829 June 2016Dismissed

The Delhi Development Authority (DDA) auctioned a 14.3‑hectare parcel of land for residential development on an "as is where is" basis, and Kenneth Builders & Developers Ltd. (the builder) paid the full bid amount and obtained possession. The development agreement required the builder to secure all statutory clearances

RUTU MIHIR PANCHAL & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2025 INSC 59329 April 2025Disposed off

The petitioners challenged the constitutionality of sections 34(1), 47(1)(a)(i) and 58(1)(a)(i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, which base the pecuniary jurisdiction of district, state and national consumer commissions on the value of consideration paid rather than the compensation claimed. The challenge arose fr

GOVT. OF A.P. AND ORS.versusK. BRAHMANANDAM AND ORS.

2008 INSC 54629 April 2008Case Partly allowed

Seven teachers were appointed in a private‑management school without complying with the Andhra Pradesh Educational Institutions Rules, 1993 – no prior permission, no advertisement, and no approval of appointments. Their services were not approved and they received no salary, prompting writ petitions that the High Court

SECRETARY-CUM-CHIEF ENGINEER, CHANDIGARHversusHARI OM SHARMA AND ORS.

1998 INSC 20729 April 1998Dismissed

The case concerned the promotion of Har! Om Sharma, a senior non‑diploma line‑man, to the post of Junior Engineer‑I in 1990. Although promotion quotas were fixed for three feeder cadres, the department used an integrated seniority list, ignoring the quota for non‑diploma holders. Sharma was placed in the higher post on

NANAKRAM ETC.versusKUNDALRAI ETC.

1986 INSC 9629 April 1986Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court considered two civil appeals where landlords sought to declare leases void because they were entered into without complying with clause 22 of the Central Provinces and Berar Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949. The Court held that such a lease, although inconsistent with the statutory proce

SMT. ZUBEDA BEGUM ETC.versusSYED SHAH KHURSHEED AHMAD HASHMI AND ORS. ETC.

1996 INSC 141128 November 1996Dismissed

Nawab Sir Mohammad Yusuf executed a wakfnama on 5 April 1956, dedicating his properties as a waqf and appointing himself as Mutawalli, with his nephew Syed Shah Hashmi as successor. After his death, his widow Smt. Zubeda Begum sued for cancellation of the wakfnama and possession of the properties, claiming a one‑fourth

H.R. BASAVARAJ (DEAD) BY HIS L. R. S & ANR.versusCANARA BANK & ORS.

2009 INSC 120528 October 2009Appeal(s) allowed

Lokashikshana Trust (LST), a public trust engaged in publishing, incurred several loans to fund its operations, with the loans secured by hypothecation of trust property and a guarantee executed by the deceased surety, H.R. Basavaraj. After prolonged litigation, the trust's assets were taken over by a government‑appoin

DELHI ELECTRIC SUPPLY UNDERTAKINGversusBASANTI DEVI AND ANR.

1999 INSC 44428 September 1999Disposed off

The Life Insurance Corporation (LIC) offered a Salary Savings Scheme under which Delhi Electric Supply Undertaking (DESU) deducted insurance premiums from its employees' salaries and remitted them to LIC. DESU failed to remit premiums for two months, after which an employee died and his widow claimed the policy benefit

NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIAversusM/S. GANGA ENTERPRISES AND ANR.

2003 INSC 43428 August 2003Appeal(s) allowed

The National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) issued a tender for toll collection requiring a bid security of Rs 50 lakh in the form of an on‑demand bank guarantee, which could be forfeited if the bidder withdrew his bid within the 120‑day validity period. Ganga Enterprises submitted the bid, became the highest bidde

CHAIRMAN, LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION AND ORS.versusRAJIV KUMAR BHASKER

2005 INSC 32028 July 2005Disposed off

The Life Insurance Corporation (LIC) had introduced a Salary Savings Scheme under which employers were required to deduct insurance premiums from employees' salaries and remit them to LIC. When an employer failed to make the deductions, the employee’s policy lapsed and the claimant sought the assured sum after the empl

JAYAMMAversusMARIA BAI DEAD BY PROPOSED LRS. AND ANR.

2004 INSC 40728 July 2004Dismissed

Jayamma, the holder of a Will dated 20 February 1984 executed by the deceased tenant‑occupier Anthony Rebello, applied under Section 276 of the Indian Succession Act for letters of administration. The wife and children of the deceased contested the Will, alleging it was invalid. The trial court held the Will valid, but

P. D'SOUZAversusSHONDRILO NAIDU

2004 INSC 40828 July 2004Dismissed

The plaintiff, P. D'Souza, sued Shondrilo Naidu for specific performance of a sale agreement in which the parties were to exchange a building for a fixed price by 5‑Dec‑1978. The defendant had mortgaged the property, failed to produce original title documents and did not redeem the mortgage, thereby preventing executio

GOPAL PRASADversusBIHAR SCHOOL EXAMINATION BOARD AND OTHERS

2020 INSC 40828 May 2020Matter referred to larger bench

Gopal Prasad, appointed as Calligraphist‑cum‑Assistant of the Bihar School Examination Board in May 1970 at the age of 15½, was retired in May 2012 on the ground that he had completed 42 years of qualifying service, despite the statutory retirement age being 60 years. The Board had earlier resolved in 2004 to treat the

SWISS TIMING LIMITEDversusORGANISING COMMITTEE, COMMONWEALTH GAMES 2010 DELHI

2013 INSC 36228 May 2013Case Allowed

Swiss Timing Ltd., a Swiss company, entered into a contract with the Commonwealth Games 2010 Organising Committee to provide timing and scoring services. The Committee failed to pay the agreed fees, prompting Swiss Timing to invoke the arbitration clause in the agreement. The Committee objected, claiming the contract w

CONSOLIDATED CONSTRUCTION CONSORTIUM LIMITEDversusSOFTWARE TECHNOLOGY PARKS OF INDIA

2025 INSC 57428 April 2025Dismissed

The appellant, Consolidated Construction Consortium Ltd., was contracted by the respondent, Software Technology Parks of India, to construct a building. The contract stipulated liquidated damages for delay, but the respondent granted several extensions of time before finally deducting Rs. 82,43,499 as liquidated damage

CENTRAL BANK OF INDIAversusC. L. VIMLA & ORS.

2015 INSC 36328 April 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The Central Bank of India had mortgaged a residential property to recover a loan taken by the borrowers and obtained a settlement award from a Lok Adalat, which was signed by the borrowers and one of the guarantor's sons but not by the guarantor herself, C.L. Vimla. Vimla filed multiple writ petitions challenging the a

SNOW WHITE INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION, MADRASversusCOLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MADRAS

1989 INSC 15028 April 1989Dismissed

Snow White Industrial Corporation, a Madras partnership manufacturing paint, entered into a written agreement with Gillanders Arbuthnot & Co., a Calcutta firm, designating Gillanders as the "sole selling agents" for its product across India. The agreement contained clauses for return of unsold stock after two years, re

M. G. BROTHERS LORRY SERVICEversusPRASAD TEXTILES

1983 INSC 5128 April 1983Dismissed

M.G. Brothers Lorry Service, a common carrier, failed to deliver a consignment of yarn entrusted by Prasad Textiles. The Way Bill governing the carriage contained Condition 15, which required any claim to be made in writing within 30 days of booking or arrival. Prasad Textiles gave notice of claim on June 20, 1969, aft

AVAS VIKAS SANSTHAN AND ANR.versusAVAS VIKAS SANSTHAN ENGINEERS ASSN. AND ORS.

2006 INSC 18528 March 2006Disposed off

The Rajasthan Government dissolved Avas Vikas Sansthan (AVS) after it incurred heavy losses and offered its 604 employees alternative employment in various local bodies, conditional on affidavits that they would not claim continuity of service or pay protection. The employees accepted the scheme, but the Rajasthan High

M/S. RASIKLAL KANTILAL & CO.versusBOARD OF TRUSTEE OF PORT OF BOMBAY & OTHERS

2017 INSC 18928 February 2017Case Partly allowed

The appellant purchased 78 consignments of zinc and copper that had been stored at the Port of Bombay after the original consignees failed to lift them. The Board of Trustees of the Port of Bombay levied demurrage charges of Rs.2,81,67,333 and granted only partial remission, which the appellant challenged. The Supreme

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION CHANDIGARH AND ORS. ETC.versusM/S SHANTIKUNJ INVESTMENT PVT. LTD.

2006 INSC 12928 February 2006Disposed off

Allottees of residential and commercial plots in Chandigarh were required to pay the balance of the premium in instalments, together with interest, penalty and ground rent, after an initial payment. They contended that the State could not demand these payments until basic amenities such as roads, water supply and drain

AMAR NATH (DEAD) THROUGH L.R.versusGIAN CHAND AND ORS.

2022 INSC 10628 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff, Amar Nath, executed a special power of attorney (PoA) on 28‑01‑1987 in favour of the second defendant to sell his land for Rs.55,000. When the first defendant could not pay, the second defendant allegedly returned the PoA on 02‑02‑1987 and the plaintiff claimed it was cancelled, yet no formal notice or r

VIJAY A. MITTAL & ORS.versusKULWANT RAI (DEAD) THR. LRS. & ANR.

2019 INSC 9628 January 2019Disposed off

The plaintiffs filed a suit for specific performance of a 1979 agreement to purchase a property from defendant Amar Nath, alleging they had paid earnest money and were ready to perform, but Amar Nath sold the property to other defendants at a higher price. The trial court dismissed the suit on the ground that Amar Nath

M/S. UTTARAKHAND PURV SAINIK KALYAN NIGAM LIMITEDversusNORTHERN COAL FIELD LIMITED

2019 INSC 129227 November 2019Disposed off

The parties entered into a contract on 21‑12‑2010 that contained an arbitration clause. A dispute over payment and security deductions arose, and the contractor served a notice of arbitration on 09‑03‑2016, which the respondent ignored. The contractor then filed an application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Co

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.versusSWANSTONE MULTIPLEX CINEMA (P) LTD

2009 INSC 94827 July 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Maharashtra appealed a High Court order that quashed demand notices issued to Swanstone Multiplex Cinema Ltd. for entertainment duty collected during a period of statutory exemption. The multiplex had collected the full 45% duty from patrons even though the Act provided a three‑year full exemption and a tw

K.S. SATYANARAYANAversusV.R. NARAYANA RAO

1999 INSC 29427 July 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff paid Rs.1 lakh each to the property owner (defendant 1) and his agent (defendant 2) based on a written authorisation allowing the agent to sell the ground floor. The sale fell through; the agent returned Rs.50,000 but the owner refused to refund his share, denying any contractual relationship with the pla

BANK OF INDIA & ANR.versusK. MOHANDAS & ORS.

2009 INSC 41727 March 2009Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered whether employees of several public sector banks who had completed twenty years of service and retired under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme 2000 (VRS 2000) were entitled to the five‑year notional service addition provided by Regulation 29(5) of the Pension Regulations, 1995. The banks argu

NATH BROS. EXIM INTERNATIONAL LTD.versusBEST ROADWAYS LTD.

2000 INSC 15227 March 2000Appeal(s) allowed

Nath Bros. Exim International Ltd. booked 77 packages of silk garments with Best Roadways Ltd. for carriage from Noida to Bombay, the contract stating the goods were carried "at Owner's Risk". The consignment was diverted to a warehouse in Bhiwandi on alleged instructions of the consignee and was completely destroyed b

M.S. ANANTHAMURTHY & ANR.versusJ. MANJULA

2025 INSC 27327 February 2025Dismissed

The case involved a dispute over a plot of land originally owned by Muniyappa, who executed a General Power of Attorney (GPA) and an agreement to sell in favour of A. Saraswathi in 1986. After Muniyappa's death in 1997, Saraswathi, as GPA holder, executed a registered sale deed in 1998 transferring the property to her

MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAM LTD.versusTATA COMMUNICATIONS LTD.

2019 INSC 28627 February 2019Dismissed

Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. (MTNL) entered into a purchase order with Tata Communications Ltd. for last‑mile connectivity, the contract stipulating that liquidated damages for delay could not exceed 12% of the contract value. Tata billed MTNL Rs 2,15,25,512 for services rendered, but MTNL unilaterally deducted a lar

ELECTROSTEEL CASTINGS LIMITEDversusUV ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED & ORS.

2021 INSC 79426 November 2021Dismissed

Electrosteel Castings Ltd., a guarantor, filed a civil suit seeking a declaration that an assignment deed executed by the financial creditor in favour of UV Asset Reconstruction Co. was fraudulent and that the assignee was not a secured creditor. The suit was dismissed by the High Court on the ground that Section 34 of

SATYA PAL ANANDversusSTATE OF M.P. & ORS.

2016 INSC 98826 October 2016Dismissed

The appellant, Satya Pal Anand, claimed inheritance of a plot allotted to his mother by a housing cooperative society, which after her death unilaterally executed and registered an Extinguishment Deed cancelling the allotment. He entered into a compromise deed receiving Rs.6.5 lakh, but also filed a dispute under the M

HARSHAD CHIMAN LAL MODIversusD.L.F., UNIVERSAL LTD. AND ANR.

2005 INSC 44426 September 2005Dismissed

Harshad Chiman Lal Modi entered into a plot‑buyer agreement with DLF Universal Ltd for a residential plot situated in Gurgaon, while the agreement was executed and payments made in Delhi. He sued the defendants in the Delhi High Court for declaration, specific performance, possession and a permanent injunction. The sui

THE TRUSTEES OF THE PORT OF BOMBAYversusTHE PREMIER AUTOMOBILES LTD.

1980 INSC 16526 August 1980Appeal(s) allowed

Premier Automobiles imported a heavy grinding machine that was taken into the custody of the Bombay Port Trust Board upon landing. While the Board's employees were moving the case on a trolley, it fell and the machinery was severely damaged. Premier sued the Board for damages, alleging negligence, misfeasance and non‑f

O.N.G.C. AND ANR.versusASSN. OF NATURAL GAS CONSUMING INDS. AND ORS.

2001 INSC 32126 July 2001Case Allowed

The Oil and Natural Gas Commission (ONGC) supplied natural gas to several industrial respondents under contracts that expired on 31 March 1979. The respondents challenged ONGC's attempt to renew the contracts at higher rates, and the Gujarat High Court, by interim order, directed ONGC to continue supply at the existing

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, HASSAN CO-OPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS SOCIETY UNION LIMITEDversusTHE ASSISTANT REGIONAL DIRECTOR EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION

2010 INSC 24326 April 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether two cooperative milk producer societies were liable to pay Employees' State Insurance (ESI) contributions for workers employed by contractors to transport milk. The societies argued that the contractors' workers were neither directly employed by them nor worked on their premises or un

STATE BANK OF SAURASHTRAversusP. N. B.

2001 INSC 23026 April 2001Disposed off

State Bank of Saurashtra sold UTI units to P.N.B. and received payment of about Rs 102.65 crore, but failed to deliver the units. P.N.B. sued for specific performance and damages. The Special Court ordered the bank to purchase the units from the open market and deliver them. On appeal, the Supreme Court held that where

LAXMI PAT SURANAversusUNION BANK OF INDIA & ANR.

2021 INSC 22026 March 2021Disposed off

Union Bank of India extended a term loan to Mahaveer Construction, a proprietorship firm, and obtained a guarantee from Surana Metals Ltd, a corporate entity. After the loan was declared a non‑performing asset on 30‑01‑2010, the bank filed an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) in Fe

SYNDICATE BANKversusMR. PRABHA D. NAIK AND ANR. ETC.

2001 INSC 17126 March 2001Dismissed

Syndicate Bank filed a suit in Goa to recover a loan advanced to Mr. Prabha D. Naik and others, alleging default on a promissory note. The trial court and the High Court dismissed the suit as barred by limitation, holding that the Portuguese Civil Code's Article 535 governed limitation in Goa. The Bank appealed, conten

ASHA JOHN DIVIANATHANversusVIKRAM MALHOTRA & ORS.

2021 INSC 12126 February 2021Appeal(s) allowed

Mrs. F.L. Raitt, a foreign national, sold a portion of her Indian immovable property to the predecessor of the appellant after obtaining prior RBI permission, but gifted another portion to respondent No.1 without such permission. The appellant and respondent No.4 sued to declare the gift deeds void; the trial court dis

JAGDISH SINGHversusNATTHU SINGH

1991 INSC 31525 November 1991Modified

Jagdish Singh appealed a High Court decree that ordered specific performance of a reconveyance agreement with Natthu Singh. The Supreme Court examined whether the High Court could re‑appraise evidence in a second appeal, whether unserved notices were deemed served, and whether compensation could replace specific perfor

SURESH KUMAR WADHWAversusSTATE OF M.P. & ORS.

2017 INSC 105225 October 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant participated in a public auction of four nazul plots and deposited a Rs.3 lakh security as required by the public notice. After his bid was accepted, the State officer sent a letter imposing four "special terms and conditions" which the appellant had not been informed of earlier, and he refused to accept

GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LIMITEDversusESSAR POWER LIMITED AND ANOTHER

2025 INSC 116025 September 2025Disposed off

Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd (GUVNL), successor to Gujarat Electricity Board, entered into a power purchase agreement (PPA) with Essar Power Ltd (EPL) for 300 MW of a 515 MW plant, while EPL had a separate PPA with its sister company Essar Steel Ltd (ESL) for the remaining 215 MW. EPL repeatedly supplied electricity to

SMT. SWARNAM RAMACHANDRAN AND ANR.versusARAVACODE CHAKUNGAL JAYAPALAN

2004 INSC 47625 August 2004Dismissed

The vendors (appellants) entered into a sale agreement for land with a bungalow, requiring payment of the purchase price in instalments. The purchaser (respondent) paid part of the consideration but missed the stipulated deadline for a later instalment. The vendors claimed that time was of the essence, extended the dea

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ANR.versusT. SURYACHANDRA RAO

2005 INSC 31125 July 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, T. Suryachandra Rao, submitted a declaration under the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973, surrendered land deemed excess, and the surrender was accepted by the authorities. It later emerged that the surrendered land had already been acquired by the State under the

NAWAL KISHORE TULARAversusDINESH CHAND GUPTA AND ORS.

2001 INSC 31025 July 2001Disposed off

Ram Sahay filed a suit for declaration of ownership and possession of a shop. The defendant, Nawal Kishore, claimed an agreement to sell the shop existed, but the plaintiff objected to its exhibition on the grounds that it was unregistered and insufficiently stamped. The trial court upheld the objection, holding the do

MR.C.GUPTAversusGLAXOSMITHKLIN PHARMACEUTICAL LIMITED

2007 INSC 66625 May 2007Dismissed

C. Gupta was appointed as an Industrial Relations Executive (management staff) of Glaxo‑SmithKline Pharmaceuticals and was terminated on 15 September 1982 under a clause allowing dismissal with three months' notice or salary in lieu. He claimed to be a "workman" under Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 a

M/S. BHAGWATI PRASAD PAWAN KUMARversusUNION OF INDIA

2006 INSC 36625 May 2006Dismissed

The appellant claimed full compensation for two consignments of salt that were not delivered. The Railways admitted liability only partially and sent two cheques with a letter stating that if the offer was not acceptable, the cheques should be returned, otherwise their retention or encashment would constitute full and

M/S N. N. GLOBAL MERCANTILE PRIVATE LIMITEDversusM/S INDO UNIQUE FLAME LTD. & ORS.

2023 INSC 42325 April 2023Reference answered

The case concerns a sub-contract (Work Order) containing an arbitration clause, which was unstamped. The appellant argued that the arbitration agreement was unenforceable due to non-payment of stamp duty under the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. The Supreme Court, by a 3:2 majority, held that an arbitration agreement contained

SRI SRINIVASAIAHversusH. R. CHANNABASAPPA (SINCE DEAD) BY HIS LRS. AND ORS.

2017 INSC 39625 April 2017Disposed off

The original plaintiff, M.N. Channavasavaiah, borrowed Rs.1,500 from B.M. Narayan Shetty and executed a deed of conditional sale on 28 July 1969, delivering possession of the land to the lender for five years with a condition that repayment would void the sale and reconvey the property. The lender later sold the land t

MATHAI MATHAIversusJOSEPH MARY @ MARYKKUTIY JOSEPH & ORS.

2014 INSC 32625 April 2014Dismissed

The appellant claimed to be a deemed tenant under Section 4A of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963, relying on a mortgage deed executed in 1909‑1910 in favour of his mother as collateral for a dowry. The Supreme Court held that the mortgagee (the appellant's mother) was a minor of 15 years at the time of execution and w

SRI RAM BUILDERSversusSTATE OF M.P. & ORS.

2014 INSC 34325 April 2014Dismissed

Sri Ram Builders entered into a BOT agreement with the Madhya Pradesh Road Transport Corporation (MPRTC) to construct a bus‑stand‑cum‑commercial complex on land leased by the Indore Development Authority (IDA). The High Court ordered MPRTC to hand over possession of the land and directed specific performance, but the o

UCO BANKversusHEM CHANDRA SARKAR

1990 INSC 16025 April 1990Dismissed

The plaintiff, a textile dealer, maintained a current account with UCO Bank and alleged an oral agreement that the bank would receive, store and deliver his goods, acting as his trustee or agent. He paid for the goods but the bank failed to deliver them, leading to a suit for damages and delivery. The trial court and H

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.versusRAGHUVIR SINGH NARANG & ANR.

2010 INSC 12225 February 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether Development Officers of New India Assurance who exercised the Special Voluntary Retirement Package (SVRP) under the 2003 Amendment Scheme could withdraw their option before the employer’s acceptance. The Court held that the SVRP is part of a statutory scheme framed under Section 17A o

B.B. PATEL & ORSversusDLF UNIVERSAL LTD

2022 INSC 9125 January 2022Disposed off

The appellants, buyers of apartments from DLF Universal Ltd., entered into an Apartment Buyer Agreement in 1993 promising possession within 2½‑3 years. Possession was delayed and the builder imposed extra charges, leading the buyers to allege unfair trade practice under the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices (M

SAURABH PRAKASHversusDLF UNIVERSAL LTD.

2006 INSC 91224 November 2006Disposed off

The appellant purchased a flat from DLF Universal Ltd. and paid earnest money and instalments, but later could not continue payments and sought a refund of the amounts paid, proposing a swap for a smaller property. DLF refused to adjust the earnest money and the appellant filed an application before the Monopolies and

RAMZANversusSMT. HUSSAINI

1989 INSC 36224 November 1989Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, sister of the appellant, entered into an agreement on 23 June 1965 whereby she would redeem a mortgaged house and, upon redemption, the appellant would execute a sale deed in her favour. She redeemed the mortgage in 1970 but the appellant failed to execute the deed despite repeated demands. The responde

CHANDRAKANT MANILAL SHAH AND ANR.versusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BOMBAY-II

1991 INSC 27124 October 1991Appeal(s) allowed

The Karta of a Hindu undivided family (HUF) converted the family cloth business into a partnership with his son, who contributed only his skill and labour and no cash. The Income‑Tax Officer refused to register the firm, a decision upheld by the Appellate Tribunal and the Bombay High Court. The Supreme Court examined w

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.versusM/S. HARCHAND RAI CHANDAN LAL

2004 INSC 54724 September 2004Leave Granted & Allowed

The insured, M/s Harchand Raj Chandan Lal, purchased a burglary insurance policy from United India Insurance Co. Ltd. that defined "burglary" as theft involving forcible and violent entry. During the policy period, bags of grain were stolen from the insured's godown without any force or violence, and the insurer denied

SASAN POWER LIMITEDversusNORTH AMERICAN COAL CORPORATION INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

2016 INSC 119624 August 2016Dismissed

Sasan Power Ltd entered into Agreement‑I with the American company NAC, which contained an arbitration clause governed by English law and seated in London. Two years later the parties executed Agreement‑II, a tripartite deed involving Sasan Power, NACC India (a subsidiary of NAC) and NAC, which transferred NAC's rights

RAM KISHUN AND ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

2012 INSC 24724 May 2012Dismissed

The appellants, heirs of a guarantor, challenged the recovery of a bank loan by arguing that the liability should not fall solely on them, that the auction of their land was irregular, and that excess proceeds should be returned. The Supreme Court held that under Section 128 of the Contract Act a guarantor’s liability

K.NARENDRAversusRIVIERA APARTMENTS (P) LTD.

1999 INSC 26524 May 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, K. Narendra, entered into a 1972 agreement to sell a 4,000 sq m plot to Riviera Apartments (P) Ltd for Rs 8,97,740, contingent on the buyer obtaining various governmental sanctions for a multi‑storey project. The buyer failed to secure the required approvals, part of the land was later declared excess un

FIRM RAJASTHAN UDYOG & ORS.versusHINDUSTAN ENGINEERING & INDUSTRIES LTD.

2020 INSC 36224 April 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant partnership firm owned 249.60 bighas of land that was slated for acquisition by the State of Rajasthan for the benefit of the respondent company. An agreement dated 01.02.1980 provided that about 145 bighas would be sold to the respondent, with the price to be fixed by arbitration. The sole arbitrator fix

RELIANCE LIFE INSURANCE CO LTD & ANR.versusREKHABEN NARESHBHAI RATHOD

2019 INSC 56524 April 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Reliance Life Insurance issued a term life policy to the deceased after he had taken a separate policy from another insurer, but he failed to disclose the earlier cover in the proposal form. After the insured's death, Reliance repudiated the claim, invoking Section 45 of the Insurance Act, 1932, on the gr

NATIONAL TEXTILE CORPORATION (M.P.) LTD.versusM.R. JHADAV

2008 INSC 51724 April 2008Case Allowed

The National Textile Corporation (M.P.) Ltd. issued a Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) effective 31 July 2000. M.R. Jadhav applied for the scheme on 16 May 2000 and obtained administrative clearance, but the corporation never communicated a final decision or acceptance, citing lack of funds. Jadhav continued in servic

LALIT KUMAR JAIN AND ANR.versusJAIPUR TRADERS CORPORATION PVT. LTD.

2002 INSC 22924 April 2002Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff, Jaipur Traders Corp. Pvt. Ltd., executed a sale deed for an oil mill and received an initial payment, but the balance consideration was withheld pending income‑tax clearance. The parties entered into a written settlement with a director that deferred the balance payment until all formalities were complet

KERALA SAMSTHANA CHETHU THOZHILALI UNIONversusSTATE OF KERALA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 17824 March 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Kerala, after banning the sale of arrack in 1996, enacted the Kerala Abkari Shops Disposal Rules, 2002 which required that each toddy shop employ one former arrack worker. The rules (specifically Rules 4(2) and 9(10)(b)) were challenged by a federation of toddy‑tappers and toddy‑shop workers on the ground

PUNJAB STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORP. LTD.versusSIKANDER SINGH

2006 INSC 12624 February 2006Dismissed

The Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation (the appellant, a State) sued two of its employees, an inspector and a field officer/supervisor, for loss of wheat allegedly caused by their negligence and misappropriation. Both employees had been dismissed in departmental proceedings; the inspector was reinstated after depo

STATE BANK OF PATIALAversusROMESH CHANDER KANOJI AND ORS.

2004 INSC 12424 February 2004Appeal(s) allowed

The State Bank of Patiala issued a Voluntary Retirement Scheme (SBPVRS) that was open from 15 February to 1 March 2001. Clause 5 set the application period, clause 8 dealt with the bank's discretion and mode of acceptance, and clause 9(i) stated that applications could not be withdrawn. Three employees applied but late

STATE OF KARNATAKA ETC.versusSHRI RAMESHWARA RICE MILLS THIRTHAHALLI ETC.

1987 INSC 5924 February 1987

The State of Karnataka entered into agreements with private contractors that contained Clause 12, which stipulated that any damages for breach of conditions would be assessed by the State and could be recovered as arrears of land revenue under the Revenue Recovery Act. After a contractor was found to have short‑deliver

WORLD SPORT GROUP (MAURITIUS) LTD.versusMSM SATELLITE (SINGAPORE) PTE. LTD.

2014 INSC 5024 January 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute arose from a Facilitation Deed containing an arbitration clause (Clause 9) that required disputes to be referred to ICC arbitration in Singapore. The respondent rescinded the deed alleging fraud and sought a temporary injunction restraining the arbitration. The Bombay High Court granted the injunction, hold

UNION OF INDIAversusCOL. L.S.N. MURTHY & ANR.

2011 INSC 81823 November 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India invited tenders for fresh fruit supply to its troops and accepted the tender of Col. L.S.N. Murthy (respondent No.2). After the respondent stopped supply in June 2000, the Union rescinded the contract, forfeited the security deposit and claimed expenses, leading to arbitration. The arbitrator held th

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusM/S. THE BRITANNIA BISCUITS CO. LTD.

1994 INSC 54423 November 1994Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Maharashtra appealed against The Britannia Biscuits Co. Ltd., which sold biscuits in tins and collected a refundable deposit for the tins, refunding it only if the tins were returned within three months. The Assessing Authority treated the amount written off from unreturned tin deposits (Rs 84,013) as part

UNION OF INDIAversusTATA TELESERVICES (MAHARASHTRA) LTD.

2007 INSC 85723 August 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India invited tenders for a telecom licence and, after receiving a tender, issued a Letter of Intent to Tata Teleservices, which later failed to fulfil its obligations. The Union claimed damages of Rs 50 crore and set‑off the amount, while Tata claimed Rs 654.25 crore for breach of contract. The Telecom Di

PAPAIAHversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 94123 August 1996Dismissed

The appellant, Papaiah, purchased five acres of agricultural land that had been assigned to Scheduled Caste persons under Mysore Land Revenue Code Rule 43(8) in 1940. The sale deed was executed in 1958, but the Karnataka Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 declares a

VISHU VARDHAN @ VISHNU PRADHANversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2025 INSC 88423 July 2025Disposed off

The dispute concerned ownership of a 2‑18‑10 bigha parcel of land in NOIDA, jointly purchased in 1997 by Reddy, Sudhakar and Vishnu. Reddy later sought to establish sole ownership by filing separate suits and a writ petition, suppressing the earlier joint‑ownership litigation, and obtained a High Court order declaring

BRS VENTURES INVESTMENTS LTD.versusSREI INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCE LTD. & ANR.

2024 INSC 54823 July 2024Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered a dispute where a financial creditor had obtained a loan of Rs 100 crore from a corporate debtor (Gujarat Hydrocarbon and Power SEZ Ltd.) secured by a corporate guarantee furnished by its holding company, ACIL. After the corporate debtor defaulted, the creditor initiated insolvency proceedi

SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD. & ORS.versusM/S. S. KUMAR’S ASSOCIATES AKM (JV)

2021 INSC 35023 July 2021Dismissed

South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. (SECL) floated a tender for hiring excavation equipment and awarded the contract to M/s S. Kumar’s Associates AKM (JV) through a Letter of Intent (LoI). The LoI required the successful bidder to deposit a performance security of 5% of the contract value within 28 days and to sign an Integr

METRO EXPORTERS PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHERversusSTATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS.

2014 INSC 96423 April 2014Appeal(s) allowed

Metro Exporters exported steel coils and, based on a SWIFT message, received a credit of US$199,959.74 in its EEFC account in November 2006. The credit was later discovered to be a mistake, as the funds were intended for the Bank of India and had been recalled by Bank of America, with the amount never actually belongin

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusM/S. BHARAT ENTERPRISE

2023 INSC 27723 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India and others entered into a contract with M/s. Bharat Enterprise for repair work, which required the contractor to submit a final bill and a No Claims Certificate. The contractor submitted the final bill on 13‑02‑2002, but payment was delayed for over a year, after which the contractor raised additiona

BELLACHI (DEAD) BY LRversusPAKEERAN

2009 INSC 38823 March 2009Dismissed

Bellachi, a deceased woman represented by her legal heir, filed a suit challenging a sale deed executed in favour of her younger brother, alleging misrepresentation, undue influence, fraud and collusion. The trial court dismissed the suit for lack of specific pleadings under Order VI Rule 4 CPC and for finding no evide

S.K. JAIN.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

2009 INSC 23323 February 2009Dismissed

The appellant, a contractor, entered into a contract with the State of Haryana to construct an office building, which contained an arbitration clause and a sub‑clause requiring the contractor to deposit a security of 7% of the claim amount before arbitration could commence. A dispute arose, the contractor filed a claim

M/S. POPCORN ENTERTAINMENT AND ANR.versusCITY INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPN. AND ANR.

2007 INSC 19923 February 2007Disposed off

Popcorn Entertainment applied to CIDCO for a plot to build a multiplex; CIDCO allotted the plot, the appellant paid the full price and a lease agreement and commencement certificate were issued. CIDCO later cancelled the allotment, invoking Section 23 of the Indian Contract Act (public policy) and the lack of a tender.

KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LIMITEDversusJSW ENERGY LIMITED (EARLIER KNOWN AS JINDAL THERMAL POWER COMPANY LIMITED & JINDAL TRACTABEL POWER COMPANY LIMITED) & ORS.

2022 INSC 121922 November 2022Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) between Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Ltd (KPTCL) and JSW Energy Ltd (formerly Jindal Thermal Power Co Ltd) was a "concluded contract" under the proviso to Section 27(2) of the Karnataka Electricity Reforms Act, 1999, which would exempt it f

M/S. RELIANCE SALT LTD.versusM/S. COSMOS ENTERPRISES AND ANR.

2006 INSC 88022 November 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Reliance Salt Ltd (appellant) entered into a consignment agreement with Cosmos Enterprises (respondent No.1) which required the latter to furnish a Rs 5 lakh bank guarantee from Bank of India (respondent No.2). The consignment agent failed to settle the appellant's bills within the stipulated 30‑day period, prompting t

MARYversusSTATE OF KERALA AND ORS,

2013 INSC 71022 October 2013Dismissed

Mary, the successful bidder in an auction for the privilege to vend arrack in two shops in Kalady, deposited 30% of the bid amount and executed a temporary agreement under the Kerala Abkari Shops (Disposal in Auction) Rules, 1974. Due to mass local resistance, she could not open the shops and sought a refund of her dep

INDIAN BANKversusK. NATARAJA PILLAI AND ANR.

1992 INSC 29422 October 1992Appeal(s) allowed

Indian Bank sued K. Nataraja Pillai, his wife and son to recover Rs.1,21,006.98 secured by a promissory note, hypothecation deeds and an equitable mortgage. The defendants denied execution of the note and guarantee agreement, alleging fraud, undue influence and, in the son’s case, minority. The trial court held the not

MAITREYA DOSHIversusANAND RATHI GLOBAL FINANCE LTD. AND ANR.

2022 INSC 100422 September 2022Dismissed

The Financial Creditor advanced a Rs 6 crore loan to Premier Ltd and secured it by a pledge of shares held by Doshi Holdings. When Premier defaulted, the creditor filed separate petitions under Section 7 of the IBC against both Premier and Doshi Holdings, contending that Doshi Holdings was also a borrower under the loa

SWAN GOLD MINING LTD.versusHINDUSTAN COPPER LTD.

2014 INSC 66122 September 2014Dismissed

Swan Gold Mining Ltd, an Australian company, entered into a contract with Hindustan Copper Ltd for the operation of a mine, agreeing that the successful bidder would be liable for taxes as per the Notice Inviting Tender (NIT) and subsequent Work Order. After completing work, the appellant sought reimbursement of excise

BHAURAO DAGDU PARALKARversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 36522 August 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners challenged the grant of Freedom Fighters' Pension Scheme benefits to a large number of persons in Beed district who were either not born during the freedom struggle or were toddlers at independence, alleging fraud and false claims. The Bombay High Court had constituted an enquiry committee, which report

R.D.SAXENAversusBALRAM PRASAD SHARMA

2000 INSC 40922 August 2000Disposed off

The appellant, a senior advocate and former legal advisor to a cooperative bank, refused to return the bank's case files after the retainership was terminated, demanding payment of alleged fees of Rs. 97,100. The bank filed a complaint before the State Bar Council, which was transferred to the Bar Council of India; the

UNITED BANK OF INDIA (NOW PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK)versusSWAPAN KUMAR MULLICK & ORS.

2025 INSC 88122 July 2025Disposed off

Swapan Kumar Mullick worked for United Bank of India for 36 years and resigned in 2006 citing mental depression, opting for provident fund benefits rather than pension. A 2010 circular issued under a bipartite settlement offered a new pension option to employees who had not previously opted for pension, and Mullick app

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, BHAVNAGARversusM/S GUJARAT MARITIME BOARD, JAFRABAD

2015 INSC 50922 July 2015Dismissed

The Commissioner of Central Excise appealed against the Gujarat Maritime Board (GMB) claiming that wharfage charges collected from its licensee, Ultratech Cement Ltd (UCL), were liable to service tax as "port services" under the Finance Act, 1994. The dispute centered on a licence agreement under the Gujarat Maritime B

N. R. SRINIVASA IYERversusNEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO., LTD.

1983 INSC 8222 July 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff's motor car was damaged in an accident and, under the terms of his insurance policy, was taken to a repair workshop where the insurer approved the repair estimate and agreed to pay the charges. While in the workshop the car was destroyed by fire. The plaintiff sued the insurer claiming that, by virtue of

NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION OF INDIAversusALIMENTA S.A.

2020 INSC 34522 April 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The National Agricultural Cooperative Marketing Federation of India (NAFED) entered into a 1979‑80 groundnut export contract with Alimenta S.A. containing an arbitration clause and a contingency provision (Clause 14) that the contract would be cancelled if export was prohibited by the Government. Due to cyclone damage

AXIS BANKversusSBS ORGANICS PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANOTHER

2016 INSC 33422 April 2016Dismissed

Axis Bank appealed against the Gujarat High Court’s order allowing SBS Organics Private Limited to withdraw its appeal before the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) and to get back the Rs 50 lakh pre‑deposit made under Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act. The Supreme Court examined whether such a pre‑deposit constitute

PERCEPT D'MARK (INDIA) PVT. LTD.versusZAHEER KHAN

2006 INSC 16122 March 2006Dismissed

Percept D'Mark (India) Pvt. Ltd. entered into a three‑year promotion agreement with cricketer Zaheer Khan that contained a clause giving the company a right of first refusal on any third‑party endorsement offers, even after the contract expired. After the term ended, Khan signed a similar agreement with another firm. P

FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIAversusM/S. LAXMI CATTLE FEED INDUSTRIES

2006 INSC 9922 February 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Food Corporation of India (FCI) invited tenders for damaged foodgrains and accepted a bid from Laxmi Cattle Feed Industries, which deposited the earnest money. The buyer later sought cancellation of the portion of the contract that could not be performed and a refund of the balance, also requesting waiver of storag

ARIES ADVERTISING BUREAUversusC.T. DEVARAJ (DEAD) BY LRS.

1995 INSC 12822 February 1995Dismissed

Aries Advertising Bureau placed an advertisement for a circus operated by Balakrishnan and sued C.T. Devaraj, the circus’s financier, for the Rs 27,000 advertising cost. The trial court held that a contract existed between the advertiser and Devaraj and awarded a decree, but the Madras High Court reversed, finding no p

MURLIDHAR DAYANDEO KESEKARversusVISHWANATH PANDU BARDE AND ANR.

1995 INSC 13022 February 1995Dismissed

The State allotted 11 acres of land to a tribal respondent. The appellant entered into a sale agreement with the tribal and applied to the Collector for permission to alienate the land under the Bombay Revenue Code. The Collector and Commissioner refused, stating that land assigned to Scheduled Tribes cannot be sold or

ASSISTANT EXCISE COMMISSIONER AND ORS.versusISSAC PETER AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

1994 INSC 8522 February 1994

The Supreme Court examined disputes arising from the Kerala Abkari Shops (Disposal in Auction) Rules, 1974, where licensees of arrack shops claimed the State was contractually obliged to supply additional quantities of liquor beyond the statutorily mandated monthly quota. The Court held that the monthly quota is obliga

BCCIversusCRICKET ASSOCIATION OF BIHAR & ORS.

2015 INSC 6422 January 2015Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) is a "State" under Article 12 and concluded that, although it is not, it performs public functions and is therefore amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226. The Court upheld the Probe Committee’s findings that Gurunath Meiyappan

TRIMEX INTERNATIONAL FZE LTD. DUBAIversusVEDANTA ALUMINIUM LIMITED, INDIA

2010 INSC 5722 January 2010Case Allowed

Trimex International FZE Ltd. sent a commercial offer by email on 15 October 2007 for the supply of bauxite, containing an arbitration clause. Vedanta Aluminium Ltd. accepted the offer on 16 October 2007, confirming five shipments. A dispute later arose and Vedanta denied the existence of a concluded contract and the e

S. BRAHMANAND AND ORS.versusK.R. MUTHUGOPAL (D) AND ORS.

2005 INSC 51821 October 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiffs entered into a 1989 agreement to purchase two shops and a godown, which stipulated a fixed date for performance contingent on the vacating of an injunction. In 1992 the defendants wrote requesting a postponement of performance without fixing a new date, which the plaintiffs accepted by forbearance. The p

PUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LIMITED AND ANOTHERversusEMTA COAL LIMITED

2021 INSC 52321 September 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd (PSPCL) entered a joint‑venture with EMTA Coal Ltd for the captive Pachhwara coal block. After the Supreme Court’s Manohar Lal Sharma judgment, the block was re‑allotted to PSPCL, which later decided to invite competitive bidding for a mine‑developer‑operator, rejecting EMTA’s cla

VIDUR IMPEX AND TRADERS PVT. LTD. AND OTHERSversusTOSH APARTMENTS PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS

2012 INSC 34421 August 2012Dismissed

The Delhi High Court entertained a suit for specific performance of an agreement dated 13‑9‑1988 and restrained the vendor from alienating the property. The vendor later sold the suit property to six companies (the appellants) who, in turn, sold it to Bhagwati Developers, all in violation of the injunction. The appella

LALIT KUMAR JAINversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2021 INSC 29721 May 2021Dismissed

The petitioners, who were personal guarantors to corporate debtors, challenged a Central Government notification dated 15‑Nov‑2019 that brought certain provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) into force only for personal guarantors. They argued that the notification exceeded the power conferred by

MANJUNATH TIRAKAPPA MALAGI AND ANR.versusGURUSIDDAPPA TIRAKAPPA MALAGI (DEAD THROUGH LRS)

2025 INSC 51421 April 2025Dismissed

The appellants, sons of Tirakappa Gurusiddappa Malagi, challenged a compromise decree dated 18 January 2000 that partitioned seven acres of land among their father, uncles, and grandfather, alleging that their father was coerced into the settlement and that the land was not ancestral joint family property. The trial co

LARSEN AND TOUBRO LIMITEDversusPURI CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 52321 April 2025Dismissed

Larsen & Toubro (L&T) and Puri Construction Ltd (PCL) entered into a Development Agreement for land development, later supplemented by a Supplementary Agreement and a Tripartite Agreement involving a bank. Disputes arose over alleged economic duress, non‑fulfilment of conditions precedent, and L&T's abandonment of the

SHANTI BUDHIYA VESTA PATEL AND ORS.versusNIRMALA JAYPRAKASH TIWARI AND ORS.

2010 INSC 22921 April 2010Dismissed

The case arose from a dispute over a suit property originally held by Budhiya Vesta Patel, who transferred his rights to respondent No.9 via a Development Agreement and an irrevocable Power of Attorney (POA). After Patel's death, his heirs (the appellants) executed further irrevocable POAs in favour of the same respond

FEDERAL BANK LTD. AND ORS.versusSTATE OF KERALA AND ORS.

2007 INSC 32821 March 2007Dismissed

Federal Bank Ltd. and other banks challenged notices issued by the Kerala tax department demanding sales tax on the auction sale of gold and other valuables pledged as security for loans. The banks argued that such sales were not "sales" within the meaning of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 and that they did not

HER HIGHNESS MAHARANI SHANTIDEVI P. GAIKWADversusSAVJIBHAI HARIBHAI PATEL AND ORS.

2001 INSC 15721 March 2001

The plaintiff entered into an agreement with the original defendant to develop dwelling units for weaker sections under Section 21 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, but possession of the land was never transferred and the agreement contained a clause allowing unilateral termination before possession

NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.versusSUJIR GANESH NAYAK AND CO. AND ANR.

1997 INSC 30621 March 1997Leave Granted & Allowed

The appellant National Insurance Co. Ltd. issued two fire policies with a Riot and Strike endorsement to the respondent Sujir Ganesh Nayak & Co. When a strike halted production and caused damage, the insurer denied liability, invoking Special Condition 5(i)(b) which excludes loss from cessation of work, Clause 19 which

M/S. BEJGAM VEERANNA VENKATA NARASIMLOO ETC.versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ORS.

1997 INSC 31521 March 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, rice millers, supplied rice to the Food Corporation of India under the Andhra Pradesh Rice (Procurement Ex‑Mill Prices) Order, 1975 and were paid the notified procurement price. The State later issued a memorandum (Nov 2 1976) extending that price to the 1976‑77 crop and, by a Gazette notification dated

M/S. A.S. MOTORS PVT. LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2013 INSC 11721 February 2013Dismissed

The National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) awarded a fee‑collection contract to A.S. Motors, which was later terminated on grounds of overcharging and other malpractices. The appellant challenged the termination, alleging violation of natural‑justice principles and lack of a factual basis for termination, as well a

R. RAJANNAversusS.R. VENKATASWAMY & ORS.

2014 INSC 79620 November 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff obtained a decree declaring a 1982 gift deed void. The respondents appealed and the High Court set aside that decree on the basis of a compromise recorded under Order XXI Rule 3 of the CPC. The plaintiff contended that the compromise was forged and void, and filed a suit (OS No.5236 of 2005) seeking to se

SMT. RAMTI DEVIversusUNION OF INDIA

1994 INSC 47720 October 1994Dismissed

Ramti Devi filed a suit on 30 July 1966 seeking a declaration that she was the absolute owner of a house and that the sale deed dated 29 January 1947, by which the defendant had allegedly alienated the property, should be avoided or cancelled. The trial court dismissed the suit and the Delhi High Court affirmed the dis

AJAY MADHUSUDAN PATEL & ORS.versusJYOTRINDRA S. PATEL & ORS.

2024 INSC 71020 September 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The AMP Group and the JRS Group entered into a Family Arrangement Agreement (FAA) containing an arbitration clause, and later sought to appoint a sole arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The petition raised two questions: the scope of the referral court’s jurisdiction after the

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIAversusSHRI KANAIYALAL BALDEVBHAI PATEL

2017 INSC 96320 September 2017Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether non‑intermediary front‑running—where a person receives confidential information about a forthcoming large block trade and trades ahead of it—constitutes a prohibited fraudulent or unfair trade practice under SEBI’s Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices Regulations, 2003

THE SECRETARY, JAIPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, JAIPURversusDAULAT MAL JAIN

1996 INSC 108520 September 1996Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the validity of land allotted to "sub‑awardees" after the land had been acquired under the Rajasthan Land Acquisition Act. It held that once a notification under S.4 and possession under S.16 were effected, the original owner's title ceased and vested in the State, rendering any subsequent sa

BYRAM PESTONFL GARIWALAversusUNION BANK OF INDIA AND ORS.

1991 INSC 24520 September 1991Dismissed

The appellant, Gariwala, challenged a decree passed on a compromise that was reduced to writing and signed only by his counsel, arguing that the 1976 amendment to Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC required the parties themselves to sign. The respondents contended that the expression "parties" includes a recognised agent or

TILAK RAJ BAKSHIversusAVINASH CHAND SHARMA (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. & OTHERS

2019 INSC 92320 August 2019Dismissed

The plaintiff, Tilak Raj Bakshi, claimed that his brother (the first defendant) violated a family settlement by selling his one‑third share of a Chandigarh house to a stranger (the second defendant) without obtaining the written concurrence of the other brothers and without offering the share to the plaintiff as requir

SHAMSU SUHARA BEEVIversusG. ALEX AND ANR.

2004 INSC 46120 August 2004Disposed off

The appellant, Shamsu Suhara Beevi, entered into a sale agreement with the respondents, G. Alex and others, but failed to execute the deed. The respondents sued for specific performance; the trial court ordered them to deposit the balance sale consideration and directed the appellant to register the deed. The responden

STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.versusBRIDGE AND ROOF CO. (INDIA) LTD.

1996 INSC 90620 August 1996Dismissed

The State of Uttar Pradesh entered into a works contract with Bridge & Roof Co. (India) Ltd., which required the State to deduct 4% tax at source under the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948. The Commissioner of Sales Tax, under a composition scheme, directed a reduced deduction of 1% and the State complied, prompting the contra

INDIAN FINANCIAL ASSN. SEVENTH PAY ADVENTISTSversusM.A. UNNEERIKUTTY AND ANR.

2006 INSC 45720 July 2006Dismissed

The Indian Financial Association of Seventh Day Adventists (the appellant) owned a 30‑cent property containing a church, school and other buildings. It passed a resolution to sell the land and, through a duly executed power of attorney, its representative (defendant No. 2) entered into two sale agreements with the plai

PASL WIND SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITEDversusGE POWER CONVERSION INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

2021 INSC 26420 April 2021Disposed off

PASL Wind Solutions and GE Power Conversion India, both Indian companies, entered a settlement agreement that provided for arbitration under ICC rules with the seat in Zurich and the substantive law of India. A dispute over warranty claims was arbitrated, the arbitrator held the seat to be Zurich (with hearings in Mumb

PRANAB KUMAR PALversusM/S. LIZ. INVESTMENT PVT. LTD. AND ORS.

2009 INSC 55920 April 2009Disposed off

The petition filed by Liz Investment Pvt. Ltd. before the Company Law Board (CLB) alleged that the appellant, Pranab Kumar Pal, diverted a corporate opportunity and sought to restrain his resignation as a director. The CLB initially ordered the appointment of three directors by the petitioner and barred the appellant’s

STATE OF ORISSA AND ORS.versusHARAPRIYA BISOI

2009 INSC 56020 April 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute concerned 53.95 acres of land in Bhubaneswar that vested in the State of Orissa under a 1954 notification of the Orissa Estate Abolition Act, 1951. The respondent, Harapriya Bisoi, claimed she was a "deemed tenant" because her predecessor had obtained a lease from the erstwhile intermediaries before vesting

RACING PROMOTIONS PRIVATE LIMITEDversusDR. HARISH & ORS.

2025 INSC 25220 February 2025Case Partly allowed

Racing Promotions Private Limited (RPPL) entered into a three‑year Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the Sports Development Authority of Tamil Nadu (SDAT) to organise Formula 4 motor‑racing events. Several public‑interest litigations were filed challenging the event on grounds of safety, noise, and the use of publ

BALMER LAWRIE & CO. LTD. & ORS.versusPARTHA SARATHI SEN ROY & ORS.

2013 INSC 11220 February 2013Disposed off

Balmer Lawrie & Co. Ltd., a government‑owned company, terminated the services of employee Partha Sarathi Sen Roy under a clause that allowed dismissal at the company's sole discretion without reason. The employee challenged the termination by filing writ petitions, contending that the clause was unconstitutional and th

M/S. BHANDARI CONSTRUCTION COMPANYversusNARAYAN GOPAL UPADHYE

2007 INSC 17320 February 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Bhandari Construction Company, sold an office space to the respondent, Narayan Gopal Upadhye, for Rs.7,75,000 as per a written agreement dated 27‑7‑1997. The respondent paid Rs.5,00,000 by cheque but claimed to have paid the remaining balance, including Rs.4,00,000 in cash, for which no receipt or docume

THIRNEEDHI CHANNAIAHversusGUDIPUDI VENKATA SUBBA RAO (D) BY LRS. & ORS.

2007 INSC 17720 February 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant entered into a sale agreement on 19 July 1981, paying Rs 50,000 as advance with the balance due by 25 February 1982, and a separate agreement stipulated forfeiture of the advance on default. Before the sale deed could be executed, a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was iss

NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.versusSEEMA MALHOTRA AND OTHERS

2001 INSC 9720 February 2001Appeal(s) allowed

The insured, Yash Paul Malhotra, entered into a motor insurance contract on 21‑12‑1993, gave a cheque for the first premium and received a cover note. He died in a road accident on 31‑12‑1993, and the insurer discovered that the cheque had bounced on 10‑01‑1994, cancelling the policy on 20‑01‑1994. The legal heirs clai

M/S H.D.F.C.versusGAUTAM KUMAR NAG & ORS.

2012 INSC 4820 January 2012

The appellant, HDFC, granted a loan to the borrower (defendant No.1) who executed a loan agreement, a promissory note and created an equitable mortgage. Two other defendants stood as guarantors and signed letters of guarantee. After the borrower defaulted, HDFC sued both the borrower and the guarantors, but the borrowe

HONGKONG AND SHANGHAI BANKING CORP. LTD.versusAWAZ & ORS.

2024 INSC 104419 December 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a consumer complaint filed by two trusts on behalf of credit‑card users alleging that banks were charging exorbitant interest rates of 36%‑49% p.a., which the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) had deemed an unfair trade practice and capped at 30% p.a. The Court held that

CHINA DEVELOPMENT BANKversusDOHA BANK Q.P.S.C. & ORS.

2024 INSC 102919 December 2024

The Supreme Court examined whether several foreign banks that had extended loans to Reliance entities could be treated as "financial creditors" of Reliance Infratel Ltd (the corporate debtor) under Section 5(7) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The dispute arose because the corporate debtor, Reliance Communi

G. JAYASHREE & ORS.versusBHAGWANDAS S. PATEL & ORS.

2008 INSC 150119 December 2008Dismissed

The appellants (joint purchasers) entered into an agreement of sale with the respondents (vendors) for land development, which required the purchasers to obtain a layout plan. After disputes, one co‑purchaser entered into a compromise with the vendors, effectively rescinding his part of the contract. The remaining purc

GANGA RETREAT AND TOWERS LTD. AND ANR.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

2003 INSC 74119 December 2003Dismissed

The appellants, Ganga Retreat and Towers Ltd., bought a prime property at a public auction on the basis that it was free‑hold, ceiling‑free and had a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 2.0. After paying the full consideration, they obtained possession and applied for building‑plan approval, but the municipal bye‑laws were amend

MAFATLAL INDUSTRIES LTD. ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA ETC. ETC.

1996 INSC 151419 December 1996Disposed off

The case concerns refunds of excise and customs duties collected contrary to law. The Supreme Court examined the validity of Section 11-B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, as amended in 1991, which restricts refunds to claimants who have not passed on the burden of duty to others. The Court overruled its earli

M/S UNIBROSversusALL INDIA RADIO

2023 INSC 93119 October 2023Dismissed

M/s Unibros was awarded a construction contract by All India Radio, but the project was delayed by about 42.5 months due to the employer's failure to provide site and drawings. The arbitrator awarded the contractor Rs. 1.44 crore as loss of profit based on Hudson's formula, despite the contractor providing no credible

GURPREET SINGHversusUNION OF INDIA

2006 INSC 71219 October 2006Reference answered

Gurpreet Singh appealed against the Union of India challenging the applicability of the rule of appropriation in execution of award decrees under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (as amended by Act 68 of 1984) and the entitlement to interest on solatium. The Court examined whether the normal CPC rule of appropriation (Or

AJIT KUMAR NAGversusGENERAL MANAGER, INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. AND ORS.

2005 INSC 42519 September 2005Dismissed

The appellant, a senior officer of Indian Oil Corporation (IOC), was dismissed by the General Manager under clause (vi) of Standing Order 20 after an incident at the refinery hospital where he was alleged to have led a mob and assaulted the Chief Medical Officer. The dismissal was effected without a disciplinary enquir

AVITEL POST STUDIOZ LIMITED & ORS.versusHSBC PI HOLDINGS (MAURITIUS) LIMITED

2020 INSC 49819 August 2020Disposed off

Avitel Post Studioz Ltd and its promoters invested USD 60 million in HSBC based on alleged representations that Avitel would secure a lucrative BBC contract, which later proved to be fictitious. HSBC obtained interim awards and a foreign final award from a Singapore tribunal finding the appellants liable for fraudulent

DECCAN PAPER MILLS CO. LTD.versusREGENCY MAHAVIR PROPERTIES & ORS.

2020 INSC 49719 August 2020Dismissed

Deccan Paper Mills entered into a development agreement with Ashray, which was later assigned to Regency Mahavir Properties containing an arbitration clause. Deccan alleged fraud by a partner of Regency and filed a suit under the Specific Relief Act, seeking cancellation of the 2006 agreement and a deed of confirmation

KAUSHIK PREMKUMAR MISHRA & ANR.versusKANJI RAVARIA @ KANJI & ANR.

2024 INSC 54019 July 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants purchased half of a 3.40‑hectare land from respondent No.2 in 1985, and a sale deed was executed on 02‑12‑1985 but remained unregistered due to stamp‑duty deficiency until 14‑06‑2011. Respondent No.2 later executed a second conveyance in 2010 in favour of respondent No.1 for the same land, leading the ap

KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD AND ANR.versusKURIEN E. KALATHIL AND ORS.

2000 INSC 34119 July 2000Case Partly allowed

The Kerala State Electricity Board entered into a contract with contractor Kurien E. Kalathil for dam construction. After a 1983 government notification raised minimum wages, the Board paid labour‑escalation amounts to the contractor until December 1984, but stopped payments from January 1985, claiming the notification

KANCHAN UDYOG LIMITEDversusUNITED SPIRITS LIMITED

2017 INSC 48019 June 2017Dismissed

Kanchan Udyog Ltd. entered into a bottling agreement with United Spirits Ltd. for a non‑alcoholic beverage plant, relying on the respondent to supply concentrate. The agreement was terminated by United Spirits in March 1988 and the plant ceased operations in May 1989. The appellant claimed damages for loss of anticipat

MAN ROLAND DRUCKIMACHINEN AGversusMULTICOLOUR OFFSET LTD. AND ANR.

2004 INSC 28719 April 2004Disposed off

The appellant, a German manufacturer of printing machines, sold a machine to the Indian respondent and was later accused before the MRTP Commission of unfair trade practices and faced a compensation claim. The appellant challenged the Commission's jurisdiction on two grounds: a contractual clause that stipulated German

UNION OF INDIAversusM/S. JAIN ASSOCIATES AND ANR.

1994 INSC 16119 April 1994

The Union of India entered into a construction contract with M/s. Jain Associates, which was later terminated for non‑completion. The contractor claimed Rs 37,37,885 and the Union counter‑claimed Rs 9,49,701. An umpire under the Arbitration Act, 1940 awarded the contractor Rs 24,10,330, granting interest up to the date

B.O.I. FINANCE LIMITED ETC.versusTHE CUSTODIAN AND ORS. ETC.

1997 INSC 29219 March 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant banks entered into ready‑forward (buy‑back) contracts with brokers before June 1992, consisting of a completed ready leg (purchase of securities) and a future forward leg. The Custodian, under the Special Court Act, claimed the contracts were void for violating RBI circulars issued under the Banking Regul

AMITABHA DASGUPTAversusUNITED BANK OF INDIA & ORS.

2021 INSC 10419 February 2021Disposed off

Amitabha Dasgupta, a locker holder, complained that United Bank of India had inadvertently broken open his locker despite his rental dues being cleared, and that only two of the seven ornaments he claimed to have deposited were returned. The District Consumer Forum found a deficiency of service and awarded compensation

MAYA DEVIversusLALTA PRASAD

2014 INSC 11619 February 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Maya Devi, filed an objection under Order XXI Rule 58 to execution proceedings initiated by the decree holder, Lalta Prasad, who had obtained an ex‑parte money decree for Rs 3.40 lakh based on an alleged agreement for sale dated 3 Nov 2003 between him and the judgment debtor, Prem Chand Verma. Maya Devi

M/S ALPINE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION PVT. LTD.versusASHOK S DHARIWAL AND OTHERS

2023 INSC 5719 January 2023Dismissed

The dispute arose from an ex‑parte arbitral award dated 12‑03‑1998 in a matter concerning specific performance and land‑plot amalgamation. The respondents sought to set aside the award under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, invoking the public‑policy ground and sought to adduce additional evidenc

M/S. DYNA TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.versusM/S. CROMPTON GREAVES LTD.

2019 INSC 139518 December 2019Disposed off

M/s Dyna Technologies entered into a contract with M/s Crompton Greaves for construction work on an aquaculture project, which was terminated prematurely, leading Dyna to claim compensation for loss of profit, idle charges and unproductive use of machinery. The arbitral tribunal awarded Rs 27,78,125 for the unproductiv

H.P. STATE FOREST COMPANY LTD.versusM/S. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.

2008 INSC 146818 December 2008Dismissed

The appellant, H.P. State Forest Co. Ltd., insured timber with United India Insurance Co. Ltd. under a policy dated 16 November 1987 that was later found to be a typographical error and effectively covered only eight months. The timber was washed away in September 1988, and the insurer repudiated the claim on 13 Octobe

M/S. P. MANOHAR REDDY & BROS.versusMAHARASHTRA KRISHNA VALLEY DEV. CORPN. & ORS.

2008 INSC 148218 December 2008Dismissed

The contractor, M/s P. Manohar Reddy & Bros., completed an excavation contract for the Maharashtra Krishna Valley Development Corporation, received full payment and accepted the final bill. Later it claimed extra work, but raised the claim after the contract had ended and beyond the 30‑day period prescribed in clauses

K. BALAKRISHNANversusK. KAMALAM AND ORS.

2003 INSC 73718 December 2003Case Partly allowed

The mother executed a registered gift deed in 1945 transferring an 1/8 share of her property to her minor son and daughter, while reserving possession and enjoyment for herself during her lifetime. After the son attained majority, the mother cancelled the gift deed in 1970 and executed a will bequeathing the same prope

SMT. CHAND RANI (DEAD) BY L.RS.versusSMT. KAMAL RANI (DEAD) BY L.RS.

1992 INSC 35118 December 1992Dismissed

The parties entered into an agreement on 26‑August‑1971 for the sale of a free‑hold house for Rs.1,78,000, with Rs.30,000 earnest money and a further Rs.98,000 payable within ten days. The vendor claimed that the ten‑day payment was the essence of the contract and, when the buyer failed to pay, declared the agreement v

SALONAH TEA COMPANYversusSUPERINTENDENT OF TAXES NOWGONG & ORS. ETC.

1987 INSC 38318 December 1987Appeal(s) allowed

Salonah Tea Co. paid taxes under assessment orders issued under the Assam Taxation (On Goods Carried by Road or Inland Waterways) Act, 1961. The assessments were later declared ultra vires and the tax was held to have been collected without legal authority. The company filed writ petitions under Article 226 seeking a r

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