M/S RAPTAKOS BRETT AND CO. LTD.versusGANESH PROPERTY
1998 INSC 3548 September 1998Dismissed
The landlord, a partnership firm, sued its former tenant for possession of premises after a 21‑year lease expired. The partnership was unregistered when the suit was filed, raising a bar under Section 69(2) of the Partnership Act. The trial court and High Court held the suit maintainable and granted possession. On appe…
CHAGANTI SATYANARAYAN & ORS.versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
1986 INSC 1168 May 1986Dismissed
The appellants were arrested following a deadly riot and were remanded to judicial custody on July 20, 1985, with successive extensions until October 18, 1985. A charge‑sheet was filed on October 17, the 90th day of remand, and the magistrate granted bail, holding that the 90‑day limit in proviso (a) to Section 167(2) …
JITENDRA KUMAR KHAN AND OTHERSversusTHE PEERLESS GENERAL FINANCE AND INVESTMENT COMPANY LIMITED AND OTHERS
2013 INSC 5237 August 2013Disposed off
The plaintiffs filed a suit for a declaration that they were entitled to commissions and incentives from the defendant company. The defendants filed a written statement in 1994 and, in 1998, sought to amend it to claim a decree of Rs 4,19,509.43 and interest, essentially raising a set‑off claim. A single High Court jud…
JAIPRAKASH ASSOCIATES LTD. (JAL) THROUGH ITS DIRECTORversusTEHRI HYDRO DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION INDIA LTD.
2019 INSC 1587 February 2019Dismissed
Jai Prakash Associates Ltd. (JAL) entered into a contract with Tehri Hydro Development Corporation Ltd. (THDC) that contained General Conditions of Contract (GCC) clauses 50 and 51 expressly prohibiting any interest on monies due. An arbitral tribunal under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 awarded the appella…
LAKSHMI BANGLE STORESversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
1990 INSC 3786 December 1990Dismissed
Lakshmi Bangle Stores booked a railway wagon in June 1964, declaring the value of the consigned glass bangles as Rs.25,000. The wagon was involved in an accident on June 22, 1964 and the goods were delivered after an open assessment on September 4, 1964, revealing that more than half were damaged. The appellant claimed…
BHAVEN CONSTRUCTION THROUGH AUTHORISED SIGNATORY PREMJIBHAI K. SHAHversusEXECUTIVE ENGINEER SARDAR SAROVAR NARMADA NIGAM LTD.& ANR.
2021 INSC 96 January 2021Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, Bhaven Construction, entered into a contract to manufacture and supply bricks that contained an arbitration clause. It unilaterally appointed a sole arbitrator, who dismissed Respondent No.1's Section 16 challenge to his jurisdiction. Instead of using the statutory remedy under Section 34, Respondent No.…
M/S EXL CAREERS AND ANOTHERversusFRANKFINN AVIATION SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED
2020 INSC 4775 August 2020Disposed off
The appellant, EXL Careers, filed a suit for recovery in a Gurgaon civil court despite an exclusive jurisdiction clause in a franchise agreement that designated Delhi courts as the sole forum. The Gurgaon court returned the plaint under Order VII Rule 10 of the CPC, and the High Court ordered its transfer to Delhi, dir…
BHAWARLAL BHANDARIversusM/S UNIVERSAL HEAVY MECHANICAL LIFTING ENTERPRISES
1998 INSC 4614 December 1998Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant Bhandari had given a short‑term loan of Rs 15 lakh to the respondent Heavy Mechanical Lifting Enterprises. A dispute over interest and repayment was referred to arbitration; the arbitrator passed an award on 17‑Apr‑1985 and, after a four‑year delay, filed it in the Calcutta High Court on 23‑Mar‑1989 to be…
RAJESHWAR DAYAL AND ORS.versusAVNEESH KUMAR AVASTHI AND ORS.
2002 INSC 1844 April 2002Dismissed
The Lala Nanak Chand Trust leased a plot in Meerut to trustee Bateshwar Dayal for 30 years with a renewal clause. After the lease expired, the Trust sued for possession and obtained a decree; the lessee’s heirs later sought specific performance of the renewal clause, but their suit was dismissed as time‑barred. While t…
LAXMI ENGINEERING WORKSversusP.S.G. INDUSTRIAL INSTITUTE
1995 INSC 2484 April 1995Dismissed
Laxmi Engineering Works, a small‑scale proprietary concern, bought a CNC universal turning machine from P.S.G. Industrial Institute and alleged it was defective, claiming Rs. 4 lakhs. The Maharashtra Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission allowed part of the claim, but the National Consumer Commission set it aside, hol…
RAM KARAN GUPTAversusJ.S. EXIM LTD. AND ORS.
2012 INSC 5593 December 2012Dismissed
In a partition suit, the suit property was ordered to be sold by public auction. J.S. Exim Ltd., the highest bidder, paid 25% of the bid amount by demand drafts on the auction day and the remaining 75% within the statutory period. The judgment debtor, Ram Karan Gupta, challenged the sale alleging non‑compliance with Or…
DALIP SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.
2009 INSC 12773 December 2009Dismissed
The appellant, Dalip Singh, sought to set aside an ex‑parte order that declared 18.22 acres of his late father Praveen Singh's land surplus under the Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960. The tenure‑holder had been served a notice in 1975 but failed to object; an ex‑parte order was made in Dec…
A. NAWAB JOHN & ORS.versusV.N. SUBRAMANIYAM
2012 INSC 2633 July 2012Dismissed
The appellants filed a suit for specific performance but initially paid only a deficient court fee. After multiple representations and condonation of delay, the trial court allowed the deficit fee to be paid well beyond the limitation period. The second defendant, a pendente‑lite purchaser, was impleaded and challenged…
SUBODH KUMARversusSHAMIM AHMED
2021 INSC 1463 March 2021Appeal(s) allowed
In 1994 the landlord filed a suit for possession, rent and mesne profits against the tenant, who failed to file a written statement, leading to an ex‑parte decree in 1998. The tenant later filed an application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the CPC (and Section 5 of the Limitation Act) on 25 August 1998 to set aside the decr…
GURCHARAN SINGHversusSURJIT SINGH AND ANR.
2012 INSC 5072 November 2012Disposed off
The petitioner filed Special Leave Petition (SLP) No.7735 of 2010 against respondent Surjit Singh, who had actually died on 09‑06‑2009, a fact discovered only later. The petitioner then moved Interlocutory Application (I.A.) No.2 seeking substitution of the deceased respondent’s legal representatives and I.A. No.3 seek…
SMT. KANAK AND ANR.versusU.P. AVAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD AND ORS.
2003 INSC 4411 September 2003Disposed off
The Supreme Court examined a dispute arising from a housing scheme originally framed by Agra Nagar Mahapalika under the U.P. Nagar Mahapalika Act, 1959, whose execution was later transferred to the U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad (Parishad). Owners of the acquired land, dissatisfied with the compensation, applied for a r…
ARM GROUP ENTERPRISES LTD.versusWALDORF RESTAURANT AND ORS.
2003 INSC 2011 April 2003Appeal(s) allowed
The landlord, ARM Group Enterprises Ltd., owned premises that were leased to Allenberry & Co., who gave notice of surrender on 31‑Aug‑1953 but failed to hand over vacant possession. The tenant vacated under a compromise decree that reserved the landlord's right to evict any sub‑tenants. The restaurant Waldorf, initiall…
STATE OF KERALA AND ORS.versusV.R. KALLIYANIKUTTY AND ANR. ETC. ETC.
1999 INSC 1511 April 1999Disposed off
The State of Kerala issued notifications under Section 71 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, 1968 to enable banks and the Kerala Financial Corporation to recover agricultural loans through a speedy summary procedure. The respondents argued that even if the loans were time‑barred under the Limitation Act, the Act’s pro…
MAHALAXMI CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. & ETC.versusASHABHAI ATMARAM PATEL(D) TH. LRS. AND ORS.
2013 INSC 1301 March 2013Appeal(s) allowed
The Supreme Court examined appeals by Mahalaxmi Co‑operative Housing Society Ltd. against a High Court order that set aside trial‑court orders allowing the society to record a pursis (settlement) under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC in two civil suits concerning land ownership. The Court held that the pursis was valid b…