Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

Judgments of 2005

627 judgments, newest first — showing 401–600.

KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGTHAN AND ANR.versusS.C. SHARMA

2005 INSC 2611 January 2005Case Partly allowed

The respondent, a Principal in Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan, applied for earned leave with permission to go abroad which was rejected, after which he failed to report for duty for an extended period. The employer declared him absconding and terminated his services under Rule 19(ii) of the Central Civil Services (Classi

RAJAN RAIversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2005 INSC 55910 November 2005Dismissed

The appellant Rajan Rai was convicted of murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC and under Sections 3 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act for allegedly throwing a bomb that killed his brother. Four co‑accused were earlier acquitted by the High Court, while a fifth co‑accused had died before trial. Th

HARBANSversusOM PRAKASH AND ORS.

2005 INSC 56010 November 2005Dismissed

Harbans (plaintiff) and co‑defendants claimed ownership of a suit land on the basis that a usufructuary mortgage created over a century ago had become extinguished because the statutory limitation period for redemption (60 years) had expired. The defendant, Om Prakash, asserted that he had redeemed the mortgage by payi

UDAY SHANKAR TRIYARversusRAM KALEWAR PRASAD SINGH AND ANR.

2005 INSC 55810 November 2005Dismissed

The landlord filed an eviction suit against A.N. Singh and the District Congress Committee (DCC). Both appealed the eviction decree, but the appeal memorandum was signed only by A.N. Singh and was accompanied by a vakalatnama executed solely by him, with no separate vakalatnama for DCC. After A.N. Singh's death, the DC

S.K. SHUKLA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS

2005 INSC 56110 November 2005

The Supreme Court examined a raid that uncovered AK‑56 rifles, ammunition and about 600 g of explosive material at the residence of three accused, leading to prosecution under the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 (POTA). The State Government’s order withdrawing the POTA cases and the Review Committee’s finding of no p

GOVT. OF A.P. AND ORS.versusKOLLUTLA OBI REDDY AND ORS.

2005 INSC 35110 August 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned lands acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and the Nagarjuna Sagar Project (Acquisition of Lands) Act, 1956. Original acquisition and awards were made in the early 1980s; fresh notifications were issued in 1991 and market values were fixed in 1992 pursuant to the amended Nagarjuna Act. Writ

KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARDversusHITECH ELECTROTHERMICS AND HYDROPOWER LTD.

2005 INSC 35210 August 2005Dismissed

The Kerala State Electricity Board (KSEB) sought review of a Supreme Court judgment that had granted Hitech Electrothermics limited a reduced concessional tariff of three years, instead of the full five years, because the Board’s delay in supplying electricity prevented the company from commencing commercial production

GURPAL SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

2005 INSC 27110 May 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was appointed Auction Recorder of the Patran Market Committee in 1986. A complaint alleged that he was ineligible because of a 1974 conviction under s.61(l)(a) of the Punjab Excise Act, but the Market Committee held the conviction involved no moral turpitude and the appointment was lawful. Respondent No.4

SHEIKH MEHEBOOB @ HETAK AND ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2005 INSC 12710 March 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The accused were convicted under IPC sections 302 and 34 for allegedly setting a 20‑year‑old victim on fire. The prosecution’s case rested on the victim’s dying declaration and the testimony of the victim’s father (PW‑2). The Supreme Court found that the father’s written report to police was suppressed, that his eyewit

SAVITABEN SOMABHAI BHATIYAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS.

2005 INSC 12810 March 2005Disposed off

Savitaben Somabhai Bhatiya claimed maintenance under Section 125 of the CrPC, asserting that she was married to the respondent under customary rites while he already had a living wife. The trial court and High Court had granted her maintenance and that for the child, but the High Court held that she was not a legal wif

JAYENDRA SARASWATHI SWAMIGALversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2005 INSC 1710 January 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioner, Jayendra Saraswati Swamigal, the Shankaracharya of Kanchi Mutt, was arrested on charges of conspiring to murder Sankararaman, an administrative manager. The prosecution alleged that the deceased had lodged complaints against the petitioner and that the petitioner offered Rs 50 lakhs to hired men to kill

BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET, INDIA AND ANR.versusNETAJI CRICKET CLUB AND ORS.

2005 INSC 1810 January 2005Disposed off

The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), a society registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, was accused of acting arbitrarily in its election of office‑bearers and in disqualifying a candidate on residence grounds. The High Court admitted a review petition alleging breach of an undertaking g

H.P. STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD AND ORS.versusSHIV K. SHARMA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 1910 January 2005Dismissed

The Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board purchased land that, according to the sale deed, provided Shiv K. Sharma and others a right of access through a passage. After the State Government acquired the land for a sub‑station, it fenced the passage, blocking the respondents' access. The respondents sued for an injun

PAPILA BAIversusCHAVDAS T. BHORTAKKE (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ORS.

2005 INSC 2010 January 2005Dismissed

The appellant, daughter of the original landowner, sought redemption of a mortgage executed in 1941. The mortgagee had inducted a tenant, who was entered in revenue records and later received a certificate under s.88C of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948. After redemption, the appellant attempted to e

STATE OF ORISSA AND ORS.versusGOPINATH DASH AND ORS.

2005 INSC 6109 December 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Orissa issued an executive order to allot quarters to armed police personnel on a rotational basis for a minimum of three years, aiming to address a shortage of accommodation. Petitioners challenged this policy as unfair and illegal, first before the Orissa Administrative Tribunal, which dismissed the appl

NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.versusMASTAN AND ANR.

2005 INSC 6119 December 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Mastan, a cleaner employed by the owner of a lorry insured by National Insurance Company Ltd., was injured (45‑50% disability) in a road accident while driving the employer's vehicle. He filed a claim under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 and obtained an award of compensation payable by the insurer. The insurer ap

RUKMANI AMMAL AND ANR.versusJAGDEESA GOUNDER

2005 INSC 5559 November 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved a usufructuary mortgage where the mortgagee, Rukmani Ammal, purchased the mortgaged property in a court‑sanctioned auction in 1966. The plaintiff, Jagdesa Gounder, who had bought a portion of the property from the original owner in 1964, sued for declaration of title and possession. The Supreme Court

PARAMJIT BHASIN AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 5569 November 2005Disposed off

The petitioners challenged state government notifications that allowed vehicles to continue carrying excess load after the offence had been compounded under Section 200 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Court examined the provisions of Sections 113, 114, 194 and 200, holding that Section 200 only permits compounding

GURPREET SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2005 INSC 5579 November 2005

The Supreme Court examined the murder of Kuljit Singh, where the accused Gurpreet Singh and Mohinder Pal Singh, along with others, were convicted under Section 302 IPC. The prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused shared a common intention to kill, supported by eyewitness testimony and medical eviden

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, BHUBANESHWAR-11versusM/S IFGT REFRACTORIES LTD.

2005 INSC 3479 August 2005Disposed off

The Commissioner of Central Excise appealed against a Tribunal order that had allowed IFGT Refractories Ltd. to treat a benefit obtained under the Duty Exemption Scheme as a statutory benefit, not as part of the price for excise duty. IFGT had sold refractories to Visakhapatnam Steel Plant; the buyer surrendered its ad

G. MAHALINGAPPAversusG.M. SAVITHA

2005 INSC 3489 August 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The father purchased a house in 1970 in the name of his minor daughter and later the daughter filed a suit in 1984 for declaration of title and possession. The father pleaded that the purchase was a benami transaction and that he was the real owner, a defence taken in his written statement before the Benami Transaction

BHAGWATI DEVELOPERSversusPEERLESS GENERAL FINANCE & INVESTMENT CO. LTD. AND ORS.

2005 INSC 3499 August 2005Dismissed

The appellant, a shareholder of Peerless General Finance & Investment Co. Ltd., challenged the company's resolution to issue bonus shares out of its revaluation reserve. The dispute centered on whether Section 205 of the Companies Act, 1956 and Article 182 of the company's Articles of Association permitted such capital

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusM/S ESSEL MINING & INDUSTRIES LTD. AND ANR.

2005 INSC 3509 August 2005Disposed off

The Union of India appealed a decision of the Orissa High Court that had struck down Clause‑iii of paragraph 7 in Notification No. 514/1994, which defined a person working ‘below ground’ to include open‑cast excavations deeper than six metres. The High Court held that the Ministry of Labour lacked statutory authority u

MURLIDHAR AND ORS.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2005 INSC 2689 May 2005Case Partly allowed

The appellants Murlidhar, Chhaju Ram and Babu Lal were convicted of abduction under Section 364 IPC and of murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC. The Supreme Court examined the evidence of eye‑witnesses, circumstantial facts and the applicability of Section 106 of the Evidence Act. It held that the testimon

NATIONAL INSURANCE CORPORATION LTD.versusKANTI DEVI AND ORS.

2005 INSC 2699 May 2005Disposed off

The claimant, Kanti Devi, filed a claim before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for the death of her son in a road accident. The insurer, National Insurance Corporation Ltd., contended that the driver of the vehicle did not hold a licence appropriate for the

RAM DAYAL RAIversusJHARKHAND STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD AND ORS

2005 INSC 1259 March 2005Disposed off

The appellant, a retired foreman of the Jharkhand State Electricity Board, failed to vacate the Board's quarters after retirement and sought extensions from the High Court, which were eventually granted up to 1 November 1999. He finally vacated the premises on 6 January 2000, after which the Board imposed a permanent 5

CALCUTTA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ORS.versusM/S. SHREY MERCANTILE PVT. LTD. AND ORS.

2005 INSC 1239 March 2005Dismissed

The Calcutta Municipal Corporation demanded mutation fees, calculated on an ad‑valorem basis and varying with property value and the cause of transfer, from developers who had purchased land and sought to change the name in the municipal assessment books. The developers challenged the levy, arguing that it was labelled

M/S. SAHAKARI KHAND UDYOG MANDAL LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS

2005 INSC 1249 March 2005Dismissed

M/S. Sahakari Khano Udyog Mandal Ltd., a sugar manufacturer, claimed a refund of excise duty on excess sugar production under Notification No. 257/76 and Notification No. 108/78. The claim was filed after the six‑month period prescribed by Section 11B of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944, and the factory had not so

K. VENKATACHALA BHAT AND ANR.versusKRISHNA NAYAK (D) BY LRS. AND ORS.

2005 INSC 1269 March 2005Disposed off

The appellants challenged a writ petition that had been disposed of by a single High Court judge on the basis of a purported compromise memo signed only by the respondents. The appellants asserted that they never signed the memo and that the disposal was therefore erroneous. The Division Bench of the High Court refused

SECY. DEPTT. OF HOME A.P. AND ORS.versusB. CHINNAM NAIDU

2005 INSC 699 February 2005Dismissed

B. C. Naidu was selected as a Stipendiary Cadet Trainee Police Constable but was barred from training because the authorities said he had been arrested under the IPC and the Andhra Pradesh Public Examination Prevention of Malpractice and Unfair Means Act, 1997, which he had not disclosed in the attestation form. The Tr

ADMINISTRATOR KAMALA NEHRU MEMORIAL HOSPITALversusVINOD KUMAR

2005 INSC 5998 December 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The Administrator of Kamala Nehru Memorial Hospital terminated the services of clerk Vinod Kumar, who claimed that he had worked continuously for at least 240 days in a calendar year and was therefore entitled to protection under Section 6(N) of the Uttar Pradesh Industrial Disputes Act. The Labour Court held that he h

SIVAKUMARversusSTATE BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2005 INSC 6008 December 2005Dismissed

The appellant Sivakumar was convicted under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code for the death of his relative, based on circumstantial evidence, the recovery of an air‑gun, and an extra‑judicial confession he made to a Village Administrative Officer (VAO) and later to a police inspector. The appellant challeng

SUBHASH SHAMRAO PACHUNDEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2005 INSC 6018 December 2005Dismissed

The appellant and his co‑accused, members of a joint family, attacked the deceased and a complainant while they were standing on their own plot watching the planting of an almond tree. The victims retreated, fell into a gutter and were assaulted with a knife, pick‑axe and other weapons; the deceased sustained multiple

U.P. STATE BRASSWARE CORPN. LTD. AND ANR.versusUDAI NARAIN PANDEY

2005 INSC 6028 December 2005Case Partly allowed

The workman Udai Narain Pandey was engaged on a daily‑wage basis for a fixed tenure by U.P. State Brassware Corporation Ltd. His services were terminated on the expiry of that tenure, but he had rendered more than 240 days of service in the preceding year, making him a "workman" under Section 6‑N of the U.P. Industrial

HARJIT SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2005 INSC 6038 December 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Harjit Singh was convicted by the trial court under Section 304‑B IPC for the alleged dowry death of his wife, Jasbir Kaur, and sentenced to seven years' rigorous imprisonment. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined whether the prosecution had proved the essential ingredients of a dowry death – that the deceased was sub

MEERA KANWARIAversusSUNITA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 6058 December 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The first respondent, a Rajput woman, married a Scheduled Caste man and fraudulently obtained a Scheduled Caste certificate by birth, which was later cancelled. She contested a Delhi municipal corporation election for a seat reserved for Scheduled Caste women and was declared elected. The appellant, another candidate,

HINDUSTAN COPPER LTD. AND ANR.versusBANSHI LAL AND ORS.

2005 INSC 6068 December 2005Disposed off

Hindustan Copper Ltd., a government undertaking, closed its Dariba mine and offered employees the choice of transfer or a Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS). While 112 employees opted for VRS, ten later withdrew their offers. The company refused the withdrawals, relying on a clause in the option form stating that the op

M/S. TASHI DELEK GAMING SOLUTIONS LTD. AND ANR.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 6078 December 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, lottery agents of the State of Sikkim, had invested heavily in an online lottery network in Karnataka. Karnataka issued a notification under Section 5 of the Lotteries (Regulation) Act, 1998 prohibiting online lotteries, which threatened the appellants' business and exposed them to penal liability under

CENTRAL MINE PLANNING AND DESIGN INSTITUTE LTD.versusRAMU PASI AND ANR.

2005 INSC 6088 December 2005Disposed off

Ramu Pasi, a casual worker in the factory of Central Mine Planning and Design Institute Ltd., claimed compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 for an injury to his left ring finger suffered on 11 June 1986. The Labour Court awarded Rs 4001, but the employer appealed, contending that a casual worker is ex

INCOME TAX OFFICER, BANGALOREversusM/S. INDUFLEX PRODUCTS (P) LTD.

2005 INSC 6098 December 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Induflex Products (P) Ltd, an export house, claimed a deduction under Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961 despite declaring a loss on its export of trading goods. The Assessing Officer allowed the deduction, but the Commissioner ordered its withdrawal. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal reinstated the benefit, and

AJAI AGRAWAL AND ORS.versusHAR GOVIND PRASAD SINGHAL AND ORS.

2005 INSC 5488 November 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, legal heirs of a tenant, challenged a suit for recovery of arrears and eviction filed by the landlord who claimed periodic rent enhancements to Rs 200 and Rs 400 per month after the tenant carried out improvements. The lower courts had accepted the landlord's oral agreement for such enhancements based s

M/S. AMAR ALCOHOLI LTD.versusSICOM LTD. AND ANR.

2005 INSC 5498 November 2005Dismissed

Mis. Amar Alcohol Ltd. obtained a Rs.90‑lakh loan from SI Com Ltd., a State Financial Corporation (SFC) originally 100% owned by the Maharashtra Government. After the government reduced its share to 49%, the borrower defaulted and SI Com invoked Section 29 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 to take possessio

PATTAMMAL AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2005 INSC 5508 November 2005Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the fixation of market value for lands acquired under the Land Acquisition Act for a stadium in Karaikal. The Reference Court had classified the lands as potential house sites and fixed the market value at Rs.13,500 per acre, while the Madras High Court reduced it to Rs.7,000 per acre using a

ORISSA AGRO INDUSTRIES CORPORATION LTD. AND ORS.versusBHARATI INDUSTRIES AND ORS.

2005 INSC 5518 November 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The Orissa Agro Industries Corporation entered into a non‑statutory contract with Sharati Industries to lift unserviceable machinery and scrap. A dispute arose over the value of the items actually lifted, with the respondent claiming breach of contract and seeking a refund of Rs 8.5 lakhs plus interest. The Orissa High

RAMASHRAY YADAY AND ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR

2005 INSC 5538 November 2005Dismissed

The deceased, a timber merchant, was shot dead by three local goondas who demanded a "goonda tax" which he refused to pay. The prosecution’s case rested on the testimony of the deceased’s brother (PW12), corroborated by the tractor driver (PW3) and a by‑stander (PW5), as well as medical evidence. Seven prosecution witn

DILAWAR SINGHversusPARVINDER SINGH@ IQBAL SINGH AND ANR.

2005 INSC 5548 November 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether a public servant, Dilawar Singh, could be summoned and tried under Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 when no specific sanction under Section 19 had been obtained for him. The case arose from a complaint alleging extortion by police officials, leading to a charge‑

DAMODARAN PILLAI AND ORS.versusSOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD.

2005 INSC 4108 September 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent (South Indian Bank Ltd) obtained a decree against the appellants (Damodaran Pillai & ors.) and filed an execution petition which was dismissed for default on 1 November 1990 under Order 21 Rule 105(2) of the CPC. The appellants filed a restoration application on 4 April 1998, claiming they learned of the

STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.versusSATYENDER SINGH RATHORE

2005 INSC 4118 September 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The employee, Satyendra Singh Rathore, was appointed on a six‑month contractual basis as Medical Officer of the Haryana Health Services and was terminated on 25 March 2002. The termination order of 11 April 2002 referred to alleged misconduct but no departmental enquiry or finding of guilt was conducted. The employee c

REDDY SAMPATH KUMARversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2005 INSC 4128 September 2005Dismissed

The appellant, a medical practitioner, administered the poison Pavulon to his parents‑in‑law and their three minor children, falsely claiming they were suffering from AIDS, with the intention of acquiring his father‑in‑law's property. The trial court convicted him under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentence

BINNY LTD. AND ANR.versusV. SADASIVAN AND ORS.

2005 INSC 3438 August 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether a private employer could be subjected to a writ of mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution for terminating employees under a contractual clause. The Court held that mandamus is a public‑law remedy and is available only when the body performs a public function or the duty has a

UMESH KORGA BHANDARIversusMAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAM LTD. AND ANR.

2005 INSC 3448 August 2005Matter referred to larger bench

Employees of the departmental canteen of Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. were terminated and challenged the termination before the Central Government Industrial Tribunal (CGIT), which reinstated them. The Bombay High Court division bench held that, because the canteen posts were civil posts under a 1979 notification, th

G.M., O.N.G.C. LTDversusSENDHABHAI VASTRAM PATEL AND ORS.

2005 INSC 3458 August 2005Dismissed

The appellant, G.M. O.N.G.C. Ltd., challenged the compensation awarded for land acquired by the Gujarat State under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Land Acquisition Collector had fixed a market value of Rs.1.55 per sq. m. based on deeds of sale, but the Reference Court enhanced it to Rs.10 per sq. m. relying solely

BAL PATIL AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 3428 August 2005Disposed off

The petitioners, representing a section of the Jain community, filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the Central Government to notify Jains as a minority under section 2(c) of the National Commission for Minorities Act, 1992, based on a recommendation of the National Commission. The High Court dismissed the peti

P.V. MAHADEVANversusM.D. TAMIL NADU HOUSING BOARD

2005 INSC 3468 August 2005Appeal(s) allowed

P.V. Mahadevan, a Superintending Engineer of the Tamil Nadu Housing Board, was served with a charge memo in 2000 for alleged irregularities in issuing a sale deed in 1990. The disciplinary proceedings were initiated after a delay of more than ten years, with the Board offering no satisfactory explanation for the lapse.

HOLIRAM BORDOLOIversusSTATE OF ASSAM

2005 INSC 1958 April 2005Dismissed

Holiram Bordoloi, the appellant, was part of a gang that attacked the bamboo hut of Narayan Bordoloi, pelting stones, locking the door and setting it on fire, resulting in the deaths of Narayan and his six‑year‑old son, the latter being thrown back into the flames by the appellant. The appellant later dragged Narayan's

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESHversusPAWAN KUMAR

2005 INSC 1938 April 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Himachal Pradesh appealed against the acquittals of Pawan Kumar in two criminal appeals, challenging the High Courts' findings that Section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act was not complied with during the search of a bag carried by the accused. The Supreme Court examined whe

DHAMPUR SUGAR MILLS LTD.versusBHOLA SINGH

2005 INSC 678 February 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Bhola Singh was engaged as a trainee/apprentice under a state‑sponsored training scheme in the cane department of Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd. After 45 trainees were interviewed, only 11 were regularised; Singh was not qualified and continued as a trainee until the scheme ended on 16 November 1987, when all remaining train

STATE OF U.P.versusSATISH

2005 INSC 688 February 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh prosecuted Satish for the rape and murder of a six‑year‑old girl, relying on circumstantial evidence that the accused was last seen carrying the victim on a bicycle and on the recovery of both parties' undergarments. The trial court convicted Satish under sections 302, 376(2), 363, 366 and 20

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MEERUTversusM/S. MAHARSHI AYURVEDA CORPORATION LTD.

2005 INSC 5957 December 2005Dismissed

Maharshi Ayurveda Corporation Ltd manufactured a tonic called “Herbonic”, a mixture of vegetables, nuts, seeds and other plant parts, and claimed nil excise duty under heading 2001.90 of Chapter 20 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The Revenue argued that the product should be classified under the residuary headi

STATE OF ORISSA AND ANR.versusSAROJ KUMAR SAHOO

2005 INSC 5967 December 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Orissa filed FIRs against Saroj Kumar Sahoo and Nalinikanta Muduli for alleged offences under the IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act. While the investigation was still pending, a Single Judge of the Orissa High Court exercised its inherent power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to

S.D. SINGHversusJHARKHAND HIGH COURT, THROUGH R.G. AND ORS.

2005 INSC 5977 December 2005Dismissed

The petitioner, an Additional District Judge, was ordered by the Jharkhand High Court to retire at age 58, denying him the benefit of the extended retirement age to 60 years mandated by Supreme Court directions. He challenged the order under Article 32, arguing that the High Court had not complied with the Supreme Cour

STATE OF M.P. AND ORS.versusONKAR PRASAD PATEL

2005 INSC 5987 December 2005Disposed off

Onkar Prasad Patel, a helper in the Public Health Engineering Department of Madhya Pradesh, worked continuously from 17 November 1991 and sought regularisation as a permanent employee under the Madhya Pradesh Industrial Relations Act, claiming six months of satisfactory service in a clear vacancy. The Labour Court allo

R.M. YELLATTIversusTHE ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

2005 INSC 5457 November 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a daily‑wage worker appointed on 26‑Nov‑1988, was terminated on 20‑Jun‑1994 and claimed that he had worked continuously for more than 240 days in the preceding year, invoking section 25‑F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The labour court held him to be a workman, found that he had satisfied the 240‑

N. NANALAL KIKLAWALA AND ANR.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS.

2005 INSC 5467 November 2005Case Partly allowed

The appellants sought a writ of mandamus directing the Nagarpalika to implement a town planning scheme that had been sanctioned under the Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act, 1976. The High Court Single Judge granted the direction, but the Division Bench set it aside on the ground that a variation of the sc

BHAVNESH MOHANLAL AMIN AND ANR.versusNIRMA CHEMICALS WORKS LTD. AND ANR.

2005 INSC 5477 November 2005Disposed off

The respondents, Nirma Chemicals Works Ltd., owned the registered trademarks "NIRMA" and "NIMA" for soaps, detergents and other consumer items. The appellants, Bhavnesh Mohanlal Amin and others, began using the mark "NIMA" for electric flour mills (Class 7) and were served notice to cease. The respondents filed a suit

RAMESHWAR PRASAD AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2005 INSC 4917 October 2005

The Supreme Court examined writ petitions challenging the Governor's proclamation dated 23 May 2005 that dissolved the Bihar Legislative Assembly after the state had been placed under President's Rule on 7 March 2005. The petitions argued that the dissolution was unconstitutional because the assembly was kept in suspen

SRIKANTHA S.M.versusM/S. BHARATH EARTH MOVERS LTD.

2005 INSC 4927 October 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Srikanta S.M., a senior manager of Bharath Earth Movers Ltd., submitted a resignation on 4 January 1993 which was accepted the same day, but the company granted him casual leave until 13 January and relieved him on 15 January. He withdrew his resignation by letter on 8 January, seeking to remain in service. The company

STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH CBIversusC. NAGARAJASWAMY

2005 INSC 4937 October 2005Disposed off

The State of Karnataka, represented by the CBI, charged C. Nagarajaswamy under the Prevention of Corruption Act for demanding illegal gratification and later for misappropriation of funds. In both cases the trial courts took cognizance and conducted full trials, but discharged the accused on the ground that the sanctio

UNION OF INDIA THROUGH INSPECTOR, CBIversusPURNANDU BISWAS

2005 INSC 4947 October 2005Dismissed

Purnandu Biswas, a surveyor in the Mercantile Marine Department, was alleged to have demanded Rs 50,000 as illegal gratification from a sub‑agent (PW‑3) for issuing a clearance certificate for the vessel M.V. Lilly. After the vessel's defects were rectified, the CBI set up a trap on 17 July 1992, during which PW‑3 hand

STATE THROUGH INSPECTOR OF POLICE, A.P.versusK. NARASIMHACHARY

2005 INSC 4957 October 2005Dismissed

The State appealed the acquittal of K. Narasimhachary, a former Mandal Revenue Inspector, who had been convicted under the Prevention of Corruption Act for taking a bribe of Rs.600. The High Court set aside the conviction on the ground that the order of sanction issued by the Governor was not proved in accordance with

N.K. SHARMAversusABHIMANYU

2005 INSC 4967 October 2005Dismissed

N.K. Sharma, a Class‑I officer of the Haryana Government, was deputed as Managing Director of the Haryana State Cooperative Land Development Bank Ltd. A criminal complaint for defamation (IPC s.500) was filed against him after he sent a letter alleging false implication of a colleague. Sharma was summoned and applied t

M/S. WESTERN INDIA PLYWOODS LTD.versusCOLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, KOCHIN

2005 INSC 4977 October 2005Appeal(s) allowed

M/s Western India Plywoods Ltd. imported a set of pulp‑making machinery that included a motor vibrator with actuator. The Customs department classified the motor vibrator under the residuary heading 8479.89 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, while the importer argued it should fall under heading 8439.91 as a part of pulp

HARNEK SINGHversusCHARANJIT SINGH AND ORS.

2005 INSC 4987 October 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned an election for Chairman of a Gram Panchayat in Punjab where the initial poll resulted in a tie and the process was adjourned due to law‑and‑order problems. The Returning Officer fixed a new date for the continuation of the election, but the respondent argued that only the State Election Commission c

ASSAM SMALL SCALE IND. DEV. CORPN. LTD. AND ORS.versusM/S J.D. PHARMACEUTICALS AND ANR.

2005 INSC 4997 October 2005Case Partly allowed

The Assam Small Scale Industries Development Corporation (ASIDC) placed orders for medicines with J.D. Pharmaceuticals under the Assam Preferential Stores Purchase Act, 1989, but failed to pay the price despite receiving the goods. J.D. sued for the outstanding amount and interest under the Interest on Delayed Payment

SAROOP SINGHversusBANTO AND ORS.

2005 INSC 5007 October 2005Dismissed

The appellant, Saroop Singh, claimed ownership of suit properties that had been gifted to him by the widow, Indira Devi, who possessed only a life interest under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The respondents, Banto and others, were reversioners who sued for possession, asserting that the widow's gift did not affect t

P.C. VARGHESEversusDEVAKI AMMA BALAMBIKA DEVI AND ORS.

2005 INSC 5017 October 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, P.C. Vargese, sued the respondents for specific performance of a sale agreement covering 19 cents of land, seeking also a decree of partition. The agreement required the respondents to obtain court permission to sell the minor’s one‑fourth share, which was denied during the suit. The appellant amended hi

M/S. COMPACK PVT. LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, VADODARA

2005 INSC 5027 October 2005Case Partly allowed

Mis. Compack Pvt. Ltd., a small‑scale manufacturer of cardboard containers, claimed exemption under Central Excise Notification No. 67/82‑CE, having paid duty on the base paper component but availing MODVAT credit on a plastic‑coated paper layer. The Revenue argued that the exemption was available only to manufacturers

U.O.I. THROUGH GOVT. OF PONDICHERRY AND ANR.versusV. RAMAKRISHNAN AND ORS.

2005 INSC 5037 October 2005Dismissed

The first respondent was appointed Chief Engineer of Pondicherry's Public Works Department on short‑term deputation pending a regular appointment under the 1996 Recruitment Rules. He was repatriated after eight months and challenged the repatriation before the Central Administrative Tribunal, which set aside the order.

BATALA COOPERATIVE SUGAR MILLS LTD.versusSOWARAN SINGH

2005 INSC 5047 October 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The workman, Sowaran Singh, claimed he was a regular employee of Batalá Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd. from April 1986 and that his termination on 12 February 1994 was illegal, seeking reinstatement and back wages. The employer contended that Singh was engaged on a casual, seasonal basis for a specific period and purpose

ANANTLAL GHOSHversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2005 INSC 4077 September 2005Dismissed

Anantalal Ghosh was convicted under Sections 302, 201 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of Lilabati. The conviction was based solely on circumstantial evidence and the testimony of three prosecution witnesses, as there was no eye‑witness. The High Court upheld the conviction, finding that the injurie

STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.versusBASANT NAHATA

2005 INSC 4067 September 2005Dismissed

The respondent, Basant Nahata, sought registration of a power of attorney, which the Sub‑Registrar refused under a Rajasthan Government notification issued pursuant to Section 22‑A of the Indian Registration Act. The notification declared such documents "opposed to public policy" and barred their registration. The resp

RANVIR SINGH AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA

2005 INSC 4087 September 2005Disposed off

The Union of India issued four notifications under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to acquire land in Delhi’s village Rithala. Different compensation rates were awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer, enhanced by a Reference Court, and further increased by the Delhi High Court relying on circle‑rate not

UNION OF INDIAversusPRAMOD GUPTA (D) BY LRS. AND ORS.

2005 INSC 4097 September 2005Disposed off

The case concerned the acquisition of about 5,000 bighas of land in Masoodpur for the construction of Jawaharlal Nehru University. The Union of India appealed against the Delhi High Court’s award of compensation based on questionable valuation methods, the grant of interest during a stay, and the allowance of amendment

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusSKIPPER CONSTRUCTION AND ANR.

2005 INSC 1887 April 2005Directions issued

The Supreme Court examined the findings of the Justice Bahri Commission on alleged diversion of funds by Skipper Construction in the Barakhamba Road project and on the claims of purchasers in the Technology Parks Ltd. schemes. The Court held that the Commission’s detailed valuation and accounting analysis was reliable

AMARENDRA KOMALAM AND ANR.versusUSHA SINHA AND ANR.

2005 INSC 1917 April 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants Amarendra Komalam and others sued respondent Usha Sinha for specific performance of a lease renewal clause, while the respondent had earlier filed an eviction suit and, in earlier proceedings, undertook not to contest the authenticity of the 02‑09‑1978 lease agreement. The respondent later attempted to r

M/S. GUJARAT CYPROMET LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 1897 April 2005Dismissed

Gujarat CyproMet Ltd imported copper cathodes that remained unclaimed at Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust and were sold by public auction in 2000 for Rs 52.5 lakh. The Port Trust deducted 50 % of the sale proceeds as "sale expenses" pursuant to Board Resolution No. 624 dated 23‑July‑1999. The company challenged the deductio

RANJITSING BRAHMAJEETSING SHARMAversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

2005 INSC 1907 April 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from the investigation of a massive counterfeit stamp scam in which the former Pune Police Commissioner, Ranjitsing Sharma, was arrested under the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act (MCOCA) on allegations that he had helped and supported members of the organized crime syndicate. The prosecution a

RAJASTHAN WELFARE SOCIETYversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2005 INSC 1927 April 2005Dismissed

The Rajasthan Welfare Society, an aided non‑government educational institution, challenged the State of Rajasthan's refusal to allow the gratuity payable to its employees to be counted as part of the approved expenditure for computing grant‑in‑aid under the Rajasthan Non‑Government Educational Institution Act, 1989. Th

KIRLOSKAR BROTHERS LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, PUNE.

2005 INSC 1227 March 2005Dismissed

Kirloskar Brothers Ltd filed two price lists for its compressors, one showing a lower price for sales to alleged bulk buyers. The revenue authorities disallowed the lower price, contending that bulk buyers could not be distinguished from other wholesale buyers and that only one price could be charged for the same class

STATE OF HARYANAversusRAM PAL AND ORS.

2005 INSC 667 February 2005Case Partly allowed

The State of Haryana sought leave to appeal under Section 378(3) of the CrPC against the acquittal of several accused in a case involving offences under Sections 148, 302, 452, 506, 323 and 149 of the IPC. The trial court had convicted some accused but acquitted others, holding that Section 149 IPC did not apply becaus

COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, PUNEversusM/S. BAJAJ TEMPO LTD.

2005 INSC 657 February 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The Central Excise Department issued a show‑cause notice to Mis Bajaj Tempo Ltd demanding duty on advertisement expenses that the manufacturer initially incurred and later recovered from its dealers, invoking the extended period of limitation under Section 1IA(b) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Adjudicating Author

MOHD. SHAMIM AND ORS.versusSMT. NAHID BEGUM AND ANR.

2005 INSC 167 January 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The husband (Mohd. Shamim) and his relatives were accused by his wife, Nahid Begum, of offences under Sections 406, 498A and 34 IPC. During the hearing of an anticipatory bail application, an Additional Sessions Judge facilitated a settlement whereby the appellants paid Rs. 2.25 lakh and agreed to pay a further Rs. 50,

NIRMALJIT KAURversusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

2005 INSC 5936 December 2005Disposed off

The widow Nirmaljit Kaur filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking production of her minor daughter, alleging that the husband's siblings forcibly took the child after his death and concealed her whereabouts. The respondents claimed the child had lived with them since birth and produced a passport, later asserting

UMRAO SINGHversusPUNJABI UNIVERSITY, PATIALA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 5946 December 2005

Punjabi University advertised three Lecturer positions in Defence & Strategic Studies, requiring a MA, UGC eligibility test or exemption via M.Phil/Ph.D. thesis submission by 31 Dec 2002, and a Punjabi language qualification. The High Court quashed the selections of Umrao Singh, Kewal Krishan and Inderjeet Singh on gro

D. GANESH RAO PATNAIK AND ORS.versusSTATE OF JHARKHAND AND ORS.

2005 INSC 4876 October 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the inter‑se seniority of nine directly recruited judges (appellants) and eleven promotee judges (respondents) in the Bihar Superior Judicial Service after the creation of Jharkhand. The dispute arose because the Jharkhand High Court, relying on a committee report, declared the promotees senior to th

K. CHANNEGOWDA AND ORS.versusKARNATAKA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION AND ORS.

2005 INSC 4896 October 2005Dismissed

The Karnataka Public Service Commission conducted a competitive examination for gazetted probationer posts, after which several unsuccessful candidates alleged irregularities in the evaluation of answer scripts, particularly favouritism by the Chief Examiner. The Karnataka Administrative Tribunal ordered fresh evaluati

CENTER FOR PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION AND ANR .versusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2005 INSC 4886 October 2005

The Supreme Court examined a petition challenging the appointment of Ms. Neera Yadav as Chief Secretary of Uttar Pradesh, where she faced pending corruption investigations and disciplinary proceedings. The petition raised whether Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, barred prosecution of a public servan

LILLY KUTTYversusSCRUTINY COMMITTEE, S.C. AND S.T. AND ORS.

2005 INSC 4906 October 2005Dismissed

Lilly Kutty claimed to be a Hindu Pulayan Scheduled Caste member and, on the basis of a caste certificate, was elected President of a Gram Panchayat seat reserved for Scheduled Castes. A rival candidate filed a complaint under the Kerala (Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes) Regulations of Issue of Community Certific

BAGIRATH SINGH AND ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 4006 September 2005Dismissed

The case concerns the validity of a 1995 Consolidation Scheme for Shamlat Deh lands in three villages of Haryana, originally framed under the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1966 and later modified after a series of challenges. Earlier, the Deputy Commissioner had quashed the partition of these lands unde

SURINDER SINGH @ SHINGARA SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2005 INSC 4016 September 2005Disposed off

Surinder Singh, convicted of murder under IPC s.302 read with s.34 and sentenced to life imprisonment, appealed his conviction. While his appeal was pending, he applied for regular bail; the Punjab and Haryana High Court denied it, though a co-accused was released on bail. The Supreme Court noted that the High Court's

BAGIRATH SINGH AND ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 4026 September 2005Dismissed

Bagirath Singh and another appealed to the Supreme Court against the Punjab and Haryana High Court's order dismissing their review petition. The review petition sought a re‑examination of the High Court's judgment in Civil Writ Petition No. 18310 of 1998. The Supreme Court examined whether the appeal raised any substan

DHARAM VEER SINGH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 4036 September 2005Dismissed

The petitioners, land holders affected by a consolidation scheme for Shamlat Deh lands, filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution alleging displacement because they were not parties to an earlier High Court writ petition (Civil Writ Petition No. 18310 of 1998) that had been dismissed. The earlier petit

MAHADEO BAJIRAO PATILversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 4046 September 2005Dismissed

The appellant, a lessee of land acquired for a railway project, was denied compensation when the Special Land Acquisition Officer declared a "nil award" on 29‑8‑1994, awarding compensation only to the land owners. A telegram sent on 18‑9‑1994, received on 20‑9‑1994, served as notice under Section 12(2) of the Land Acqu

B LEELAVATHIversusHONNAMMA AND ANR.

2005 INSC 2656 May 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff, B. Leela Vathi, claimed ownership of a property alleging that the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) had executed a sale deed in favour of the appellant, Honnamma, without issuing a show‑cause notice under Section 64 of the BDA Act and that she had acquired title by adverse possession since 1940. The

SHANTHA @ USHADEVI AND ANR.versusB.G. SHIVANANJAPPA

2005 INSC 2666 May 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Shantha @Ushadevi and her minor daughter filed a petition under Section 125 of the CrPC for maintenance, which was granted on 20 January 1993. They later filed a Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No.47/1993 under Section 125(3) to recover arrears up to August 1993, but the husband filed revisions in the Sessions Court an

VELLIKANNUversusR. SINGAPERUMAL AND ANR.

2005 INSC 2676 May 2005Dismissed

The appellant, Vellikannu, a daughter‑in‑law, claimed inheritance of the joint family property of her deceased father‑in‑law, Ramasami Konar, asserting her right as his widow. The sole son of the deceased, Respondent No.1, had murdered his father and was convicted under Section 302 IPC, later released. The issue was wh

STATE OF KERALA AND ORS.versusMAHARASHTRA DISTILLERIES LTD. AND ORS

2005 INSC 2646 May 2005Disposed off

The State of Kerala created a monopoly in the wholesale trade of Indian Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL) by establishing the Kerala State Beverages Corporation (KSBC) as the sole purchaser of liquor from manufacturers. The dispute centered on whether the duty levied under Section 17 of the Kerala Abkari Act was a true excise

SUBHADRA RANI PAL CHOUDHARYversusSHEIRLY WEIGAL NAIN AND ORS.

2005 INSC 1876 April 2005Disposed off

The mother bequeathed two properties to her daughters, Subhadra Rani Pal Choudhary and Jyotsnamayee Pal Choudhary, who obtained probate. The brothers appealed; during pendency the sisters were appointed administrators‑cum‑joint receivers and were permitted by the Calcutta High Court to lease the premises to Harvard Hou

KAILASHversusNANHKU AND ORS.

2005 INSC 1866 April 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Kailash, elected to the Uttar Pradesh Legislative Council, challenged a High Court order that refused to accept his written statement filed after the 90‑day limit prescribed by Order VIII, Rule I of the CPC. The Supreme Court examined when the trial of an election petition begins, whether the CPC time‑li

RAJASTHAN FINANCIAL CORPORATION AND ANR.versusTHE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR AND ANR.

2005 INSC 4815 October 2005Disposed off

The Rajasthan Financial Corporation and the Rajasthan State Industrial Development and Investment Corporation, as secured creditors of Vikas Woolen Mills Ltd., sought to sell the company's assets outside the winding‑up proceeding under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporations Act and to distribute the net proceed

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, TNSTC LTD.versusK.I. BINDU AND ORS.

2005 INSC 4855 October 2005Appeal(s) allowed

A bus owned by the appellant corporation collided with a motorcycle ridden by Satheesh Kumar, aged 34, who died. The widow, children and mother filed a claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal calculated an annual dependency of Rs 46,752, applied a multiplier of 17 and

IN RE: SMT. SAYALEE SANJEEV JOSHI, MEMBER MAHARASHTRA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION.versus.

2005 INSC 4825 October 2005

The President of India, under Article 317(1) of the Constitution, referred the matter of alleged misbehaviour by Smt. Sayalee Sanjeev Joshi, a member of the Maharashtra Public Service Commission, to the Supreme Court for inquiry. The allegations stemmed from a 1999 examination scam, leading to her arrest by the Anti‑Co

BRITANNIA INDUSTRIES LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, WEST BENGAL, KOLKATA AND ANR.

2005 INSC 4805 October 2005Dismissed

Britannia Industries Ltd. claimed a deduction of Rs 31,38,017 for rent, repairs, depreciation and maintenance of a guest house used in its business for AY 1994‑95. The Assessing Officer disallowed the amount under Section 37(4) of the Income‑Tax Act, 1961, and the High Court upheld the disallowance. The company appeale

NARESH KUMAR GOYALversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 4835 October 2005Dismissed

The appellant, NARESH KUMAR GOYAL, challenged a preventive detention order issued by the State of Bihar under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974, alleging that the order was passed belatedly and that the authorities made no effort to execute it, thereby suggesting it w

BALDEV SINGH BAJWAversusMONISH SAINI

2005 INSC 4865 October 2005Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined an eviction dispute under the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, where a landlord who had migrated to the United Kingdom claimed NRI status and sought possession of a shop under Section 13‑B. The tenant argued that the landlord was not a genuine NRI, had not permanently returned to

STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.versusCHARANJIT SINGH AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

2005 INSC 4845 October 2005Disposed off

The State of Haryana appealed against several High Court orders directing daily‑wage and contract workers (ledger clerks, pump operators, fitters, etc.) to receive the minimum pay of regular Class IV employees from the date of filing their writ petitions. While the appeals were pending, the respondents were regularised

V. RAMANAversusA.P.S.R.T.C. AND ORS.

2005 INSC 3995 September 2005Dismissed

V. Ramana, a conductor with the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, was removed from service for failing to issue tickets, collect fares and maintain records. He challenged the removal by filing a writ petition, which was upheld by the Andhra Pradesh High Court. On appeal, he argued that the quantum of pun

JACOB MATHEWversusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR.

2005 INSC 3345 August 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Dr. Jacob Mathew, was charged under Section 304A IPC for the death of a patient who died after an empty oxygen cylinder was attached to him in a private hospital. The trial court framed charges and the High Court dismissed the petition to quash the FIR. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined whether the d

LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIAversusMANI RAM

2005 INSC 3355 August 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant filed a consumer complaint alleging that LIC should pay the death claim of his son, who was insured under a policy back‑dated to 28‑April‑1995. The first premium was paid on 21‑August‑1995, making the next premium due on 28‑April‑1996 with a one‑month grace period until 28‑May‑1996. No premium was paid

SUPRIYA BASU AND ORSversusWEST BENGAL HOUSING BOARD AND ORS.

2005 INSC 3395 August 2005Dismissed

The dispute concerned the allocation of 156 car parking spaces in Samdrita Co-operative Housing Society Ltd, where owners of Type B flats claimed exclusive entitlement while owners of Type A flats relied on a Housing Commissioner’s letter asserting their rights. The petitioners filed a writ petition challenging the soc

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE-I, NEW DELHIversusM/S. S.R. TISSUES PVT. LTD. AND ANR.

2005 INSC 3405 August 2005Dismissed

The Commissioner of Central Excise challenged Mis. S.R. Tissues Pvt. Ltd. for cutting and slitting duty‑paid jumbo rolls of tissue paper into smaller rolls, napkins and facial tissues, alleging that this constituted "manufacture" under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and attracted duty under a different ta

REFERENCE UNDER ARTICLE 317(1) OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, FOR INQUIRY AND REPORT ON THE CHARGES LEVELED AGAINST DR. H.B. MIRDHA,CHAIRMAN ORISSA PSCversus.

2005 INSC 3365 August 2005Hearing Adjourned

The Supreme Court was asked to consider a reference under Article 317(1) of the Constitution, seeking an inquiry into alleged misbehaviour by Dr. H.B. Mirdha, Chairman of the Orissa Public Service Commission. The respondent raised a preliminary objection questioning the maintainability of the reference, specifically wh

KLSHUN @ RAM K!SHUN (DEAD) THROUGH LRS.versusBIHARI (DEAD) BY LRS.

2005 INSC 3375 August 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The suit concerned a gift deed of agricultural land made by the father to his son Kishun, which was challenged by the other son Behari on the ground that the land was joint family property and the deed was fraudulent. Behari claimed that a compromise had been reached before the Tehsildar dividing the land equally, but

M/S. K. RAHEJA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2005 INSC 2625 May 2005Dismissed

The appellant, Mis. K. Raheja Development Corporation, entered into development agreements with land owners and sale agreements with prospective purchasers to construct residential and commercial units for consideration. The State of Karnataka assessed turnover tax under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, contending th

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusINDIAN JUTE MILLS ASSOCIATIONS AND ORS.

2005 INSC 2635 May 2005Disposed off

The Supreme Court heard appeals by the Union of India challenging High Court judgments that had quashed government notifications reducing compulsory jute packaging and had directed the Standing Advisory Committee to hear workers and growers before making recommendations. The Court examined whether the Committee could m

RAJU S. JETHMALANI AND ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 2605 May 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The 1986 development plan for Pune earmarked a privately‑owned 1.5‑acre Plot No.438 as a garden, but the Municipal Corporation and the State Government never acquired the land. After the owners (appellants) bought the plot, the Government de‑reserved it by notification on 12‑Feb‑1993, citing lack of funds. Residents fi

NEERAJ MUNJAL AND ORSversusATUL GROVER MINOR AND ANR.

2005 INSC 2615 May 2005Appeal(s) allowed

A complaint was filed before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) which the parties agreed to refer to arbitration. An arbitrator was appointed on 19‑May‑1995 and rendered an award on 19‑Aug‑1996, which the Commission accepted. The Supreme Court later held that the NCDRC could not refer the matte

STATE OF U.P.versusJAI BIR SINGH

2005 INSC 2585 May 2005Matter referred to larger bench

The Supreme Court was asked to resolve a conflict between two earlier decisions on whether the 'social forestry' department and similar welfare activities fall within the definition of "industry" under Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The conflict arose from differing interpretations of the expansive

STANDARD CHARTERED BANK AND ORS. ETC.versusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT AND ORS. ETC.

2005 INSC 2595 May 2005

The Supreme Court examined whether a company, being a juristic person, can be prosecuted under Section 56 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 when the statute mandates both imprisonment and fine. The appellants argued that because a company cannot be imprisoned, the provision could not apply to them. The Court

U.P. STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION THROUGH ITS CHAIRMANversusOMADITYA VERMA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 1825 April 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (UPSRTC) challenged a High Court order that directed the State Transport Authority to issue 38 stage‑carriage permits to private operators for the Muzaffarnagar‑Chajlet route. The permits covered the Bijnor‑Noorpur segment, which had been notified as a state‑run road‑t

KAMALANANTHA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2005 INSC 1835 April 2005Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the conviction of a swami and his associates for the systematic rape of thirteen orphaned girls in an ashram and the murder of a male inmate. The Court held that the victims' consent was obtained by deceit and threat, rendering it invalid under Section 375 IPC, and that the rape charges were

BHAGAWATI OXYGEN LTD.versusHINDUSTAN COPER LTD.

2005 INSC 1845 April 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Bhagawati Oxygen Ltd. (BOL) entered into a contract with Hindustan Copper Ltd. (HCL) for the supply of oxygen, which contained an arbitration clause. An arbitrator awarded Rs. 74,84,521.34 to BOL and granted interest at 18% per annum, dismissing HCL's counter‑claim. HCL challenged the award under Section 30 of the Indi

M/S CHANNY ENTERPRISESversusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CHANDIGARH

2005 INSC 1855 April 2005Dismissed

Channy Enterprises operates two hot‑rolled steel mills, each equipped with its own reheating furnace. After installing a second furnace (with a single motor that prevents simultaneous operation), the Commissioner, relying on the 26‑February‑1998 circular, fixed the unit’s Annual Capacity of Production (ACP) by adding t

ASSOCIATED CEMENT COMPANIES LTD.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANR.

2005 INSC 1815 April 2005Dismissed

Associated Cement Companies Ltd. manufactures cement at Kymore and was levied a terminal export tax of 0.50% on cement by the Kymore Municipal Council under a 1991 notification. The State Government later issued a circular on 15 December 1995 prescribing a uniform rate of 0.20% for cement across Madhya Pradesh. The com

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISEversusM/S. ESWARAN AND SONS ENGINEERS LTD.

2005 INSC 85 January 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Mis. Eswaran and Sons Engineers Ltd manufactured Minimum Oil Circuit Breakers and had been paying excise duty by classifying them under tariff sub‑heading 8535. The Department issued show‑cause notices in 1993‑94 seeking reclassification to sub‑heading 8537 and the Assistant Collector reclassified the goods on 19‑Dec‑1

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusM/S. UPPER GANGES SUGAR AND INDUSTRIES LTD.

2005 INSC 95 January 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India (Revenue) appealed against a judgment of the Allahabad High Court that had awarded 10% interest to Mis Upper Ganges Sugar & Industries Ltd. on a rebate of Rs.15,07,791 granted for excess sugar production. The Tax Tribunal had allowed the rebate but declined the assessee's prayer for 18% interest. The

COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISEversusM/S. MATADOR FOAM AND ORS.

2005 INSC 105 January 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents, manufacturers of vulcanised rubber products cut to the shape of vehicle seats, had classified their goods under Tariff Heading 40.08 and claimed exemption under Notification No. 175/1986. The assessing authority re‑classified the goods under Tariff Heading 94.01, demanded differential excise duty and t

CHAIRMAN/M.D. MAHANADI COALFIELDS LTD. AND ORS.versusSRI SADASHIB BEHERA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 125 January 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Sadashib Behera completed a one‑year apprenticeship as a welder with Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd. and later applied for a welder post but was not appointed. He filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a mandamus directing the company to appoint him. The Orissa High Court, relying on a claim that nine welder posts we

SATLUJ JAL VIDYUT NIGAM LTD. AND ANR.versusDILA RAM AND ORS.

2005 INSC 135 January 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant corporation acquired agricultural land jointly held by a family for a hydro‑electric project under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and formulated a Resettlement and Rehabilitation Scheme for land‑less families. One brother obtained a land‑less certificate and was granted all benefits under the

IRIDIUM INDIA TELECOM LTD.versusMOTOROLA INC.

2005 INSC 145 January 2005Dismissed

Iridium India Telecom Ltd. filed a suit for Rs. 1,000 crore on the Original Side of the Bombay High Court against Motorola Inc. The respondent sought an extension of time to file its written statement, which the High Court granted beyond the 90‑day period prescribed by Order VIII Rule 1 of the CPC. The appellant appeal

ISHWAR SINGHversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

2005 INSC 155 January 2005Dismissed

Ishwar Singh, a manager of Sadul Shahar Kray Vikray Sahakari Samiti, was compulsorily retired under Rule 244(2)(i) of the Rajasthan Service Rules. He challenged the order by filing a revision before the Additional Registrar, who held that the Service Rules did not apply and that retirement required Registrar approval u

STATE BANK OF INDIAversusK.C. THARAKAN AND ORS.

2005 INSC 4724 October 2005Disposed off

The respondent, a clerk‑cum‑typist of State Bank of India, was caught copying in a bank‑conducted examination and subsequently lodged complaints against the senior officer who acted as invigilator. The bank discharged him on grounds of misconduct and prejudice to the bank's interests, a decision upheld by an Industrial

M.M. MALHOTRAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 4734 October 2005Dismissed

M.M. Malhotra, a permanent commission officer of the Indian Air Force, was married to Roopa (Ruby) Malhotra under Hindu rites. The complainant alleged that Malhotra had an illicit relationship and had contracted a second marriage with Miss Anna Suja John, and that he brutally tortured Roopa. A disciplinary enquiry led

RAJENDER SINGHversusLT. GOVERNOR, ANDAMAN & NICOBAR ISLANDS AND ORS.

2005 INSC 4744 October 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a college lecturer, sought regularisation of his service and award of senior scale and selection grade under the UGC Career Advancement Scheme. The Central Administrative Tribunal had granted these benefits, but the Calcutta High Court set aside the tribunal's order and later rejected the appellant's rev

RUMA CHAKRABORTYversusSUDHA RANI BANERJEE AND ANR.

2005 INSC 4754 October 2005Dismissed

The landlady filed an eviction suit against the tenant for sub‑letting without consent; the tenant had left the premises and his divorced wife, Ruma Chakraborty, remained only as custodian of their minor children. Chakraborty sought to be impleaded as a party defendant under Order I Rule 10(2) CPC, claiming a right to

HAFIZversusSTATE OF U.P.

2005 INSC 4764 October 2005

The case involved a dispute over irrigation water between Hafiz, his brothers Rafiq and Sharif, their cousin Lal Mohammad and the deceased Abdul Rahman. The accused assaulted the deceased with lathis, claiming they acted in private defence because the deceased allegedly threatened them with a sickle. The trial court co

SARUP SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2005 INSC 4774 October 2005Dismissed

The appellant, a police constable, along with two fellow constables, entered the residence of the victims at night, broke doors, and fired upon them, resulting in the murder of Kans Kaur and injuries to Joginder Singh and Avtar Singh. The prosecution proved the case through eye‑witness testimony, ballistic reports link

M/S. SAIT NAGJEE PURUSHOTHAM AND CO. LTD.versusVIMALABAI PRABHULAL AND ORS.

2005 INSC 4784 October 2005Dismissed

A joint Hindu family owned a building that was let to a partnership firm, which later converted into a private limited company in 1948. The landlords, members of the family, sought eviction under the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 on the grounds of bona‑fide need for business expansion (s.11(3)), u

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusM/S. NAV BHARAT CONSTRUCTION CO.

2005 INSC 4794 October 2005Disposed off

The State of Rajasthan awarded a construction contract to Nav Bharat Construction Co., which later terminated the contract for delay. The contractor filed multiple claims, of which the district court initially referred only one claim to arbitration; the High Court later ordered all four claims to be referred. Subsequen

P.T. THOMASversusTHOMAS JOB

2005 INSC 3304 August 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant and his elder brother (respondent) partitioned their father's property, but the brother failed to vacate a portion of a theatre belonging to the appellant, leading to a suit for mandatory injunction which was decreed in the appellant's favour. While the appeal was pending, the dispute was referred to a Lo

M/S. A.B.C. (INDIA) LTD.versusSTATE OF ASSAM AND ANR.

2005 INSC 3314 August 2005Dismissed

The appellant, a transport company, challenged Sections 42, 44 and the later inserted Section 46A of the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993, arguing that transporters are not dealers and thus outside the legislature's competence under Entry 54 of List II. The State contended that these provisions are ancillary measures

ICICI BANK LTD. AND ANR.versusMUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER BOMBAY AND ORS.

2005 INSC 3324 August 2005Appeal(s) allowed

ICICI Bank installed illuminated sign boards above its ATM centres and extension counters in Bombay without obtaining permission from the Bombay Municipal Corporation (BMC). The BMC issued notices under Sections 328 and 328A of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, requiring the bank to remove the boards or pay a

STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.versusNATIONAL CONSUMER AWARENESS GROUP AND ORS.

2005 INSC 2554 May 2005Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the procedure for appointing the President of the Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission under Section 16(1)(a) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, specifically the requirement of consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court. The Court also considered whether the amen

RAJESH KUMAR GUPTA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

2005 INSC 2564 May 2005Dismissed

The State of Uttar Pradesh, facing a severe shortage of primary school teachers, introduced a two‑month special Basic Teacher's Certificate (BTC) training programme for B.Ed/L.T. candidates, reserving 50% of seats for women and imposing a restriction that applications be made only for vacancies in the candidate's home

KAILASH CHAND AND ANR.versusDHARAM DASS

2005 INSC 2534 May 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Kailash Chand and Nokha Ram, owned a two‑storeyed building in Shimla and sought eviction of their tenant, Dharm Dass, under Section 14(3)(a)(i) of the Himachal Pradesh Urban Rent Control Act, 1987, claiming a bona‑fide requirement for his own occupation. An eviction order was initially granted, but duri

VASANTHIversusSTATE OF A.P.

2005 INSC 2574 May 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Vasanthi was arrested under the Andhra Pradesh Control of Organized Crime Act, 2001 and several IPC provisions for allegedly lending her car for a kidnapping. The High Court denied her bail, applying Section 21(4) of the Act and holding that there were reasonable grounds to believe she was guilty and might commit furth

ARVIND MOHAN JOHARI AND ANR.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANR.

2005 INSC 2544 May 2005Disposed off

Arvind Mohan Johar and Anand Krishna Johari were granted bail by the Supreme Court on the basis that Rs. 17 crore and Rs. 13 crore respectively were lying in the credit of the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) and National Stock Exchange (NSE) and would be used to satisfy the claimants. The BSE and NSE later filed applicatio

STATE OF N.C.T. OF DELHI AND ANR.versusSANJEEV @ BITTOO

2005 INSC 1804 April 2005Disposed off

The State of NCT of Delhi appealed against a Delhi High Court order that had set aside an externment order issued under Section 47 of the Delhi Police Act, 1978, which directed a police officer to leave Delhi for one year. The High Court had held that the order lacked sufficient material and reasoning, particularly tha

RAVI KUMARversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2005 INSC 1214 March 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Ravi Kumar was accused of killing Hans Raj with a dhangu during a quarrel that escalated into a physical fight. The trial court convicted him under Section 302 IPC for murder and the High Court affirmed the conviction. On appeal, the appellant contended that there was unreasonable delay in lodging the FIR and sending t

MADHYA PRADESH ELECTRICITY BOARDversusJAGDISH CHANDRA SHARMA

2005 INSC 1204 March 2005Case Partly allowed

The employee, a muster‑roll labourer, assaulted his superior officer with a tension screw, causing a broken nose, and then remained absent without permission for three weeks. A domestic enquiry proved the misconduct and the employer dismissed him. The Labour Court set aside the dismissal as punitive, ordering reinstate

M/S. O.K. PLAY (INDIA) LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE-II, NEW DELHI

2005 INSC 634 February 2005Disposed off

OK Play India Ltd., a manufacturer of plastic water tanks and toys, pulverised LDPE and HDPE granules into moulding powder. The Central Excise Department issued show‑cause notices demanding duty for two periods, alleging that the conversion was a "manufacture" and that the powder was an excisable good. The Supreme Cour

GOVINDARAJUversusMARIAMMAN

2005 INSC 644 February 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute concerned the title to a property claimed by Govindaraju, who purchased it from descendants of Muthuswamy Moopanar, and by Mariamman, who purchased it from descendants of Veeramuthu Moopanar. The trial court and the first appellate court dismissed Mariamman's suit for declaration of title, holding that neit

STATE OF U.P. AND ANR.versusPAWAN KUMAR TIWARI AND ORS.

2005 INSC 44 January 2005Dismissed

In Uttar Pradesh, 93 vacancies for Civil Judge (Junior Division) were to be filled with reservations as per the 1993 and 1994 Uttar Pradesh Public Service Acts. The prescribed percentages yielded 46.5 seats for the general category, which the High Court held should be rounded up to 47, and three seats reserved for free

SUNIL KUMAR SINGHversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 64 January 2005Disposed off

The appellant, appointed on a contractual basis as an Extra Departmental Delivery Agent/Extra Departmental Mail Carrier in the Post Office, faced a criminal charge of kidnapping, for which he was initially denied bail but later released and allowed to join service. An unsuccessful candidate petitioned the Central Admin

PALLA VI REFRACTORIES AND ORS. ETC. ETC.versusM/S. SINGARENI COLLERIES CO. LTD. ETC. ETC.

2005 INSC 74 January 2005Dismissed

The state-owned Singareni Collieries Ltd., which supplies coal to both core (priority) and non‑core industries, issued Notification No. 3/96‑97 imposing a 20% surcharge on non‑core customers. The appellants, small‑scale coal‑using manufacturers, challenged the surcharge as arbitrary discrimination violating Article 14

M.K. KOTECHAversusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, AURANGABAD

2005 INSC 54 January 2005Dismissed

M.K. Kotecha, a manufacturer of RCC pipes and collars, cleared the goods to lift‑irrigation schemes between April 1990 and June 1992, claiming they were captively consumed and filing a price‑list under Part VI(a) stating that comparable prices were not known. In reality, the appellant used a cost‑plus method and was aw

G. SRINIVASGOUDversusSTATE OF A.P.

2005 INSC 4673 October 2005Dismissed

The appellants, G. Srinivas Goud and another, were convicted under Section 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 for possession of 20 kg of diazepam seized during a raid conducted by a gazetted officer. They challenged the conviction on three grounds: (i) the search was not witnessed by indepen

STATE TEXTILE CORPORATION LTD.versusP.C. CHATURVEDI AND ORS.

2005 INSC 4683 October 2005Disposed off

The Uttar Pradesh State Textile Corporation Ltd terminated P.C. Chaturvedi, a senior employee, after disciplinary proceedings for alleged misconduct. The employee challenged the termination on the grounds that the enquiry officer had not supplied certain documents and that he was denied subsistence allowance during sus

STATE OF M.P.versusBALA @ BALARAM

2005 INSC 4643 October 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh appealed a High Court order that reduced the conviction of Bala for rape (under IPC s.376(2)(g)) from the statutory minimum of ten years' rigorous imprisonment to the nine‑month period already served. The Supreme Court examined whether the High Court could lawfully depart from the minimum pu

GAYA PRASAD KARversusSUBRATA KUMAR BANERJEE

2005 INSC 4703 October 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The landlord claimed the tenant defaulted on rent from March 1994 and filed an eviction suit under the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956. The tenant had tendered the March rent twice in April 1994, but the landlord refused to accept it, prompting the tenant to deposit the rent with the Rent Controller and later wi

BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ORS.versusR. HANUMAIAH AND ORS.

2005 INSC 4713 October 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) acquired land for the Koramangala layout under the Mysore/Land Acquisition Acts, paid compensation and took possession. The predecessor Board of Trustees (CITB) passed a 1972 resolution to re‑convey 6 acres 20 guntas to R. Hanumaiah, subject to the withdrawal of compensation, w

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NEW DELHIversusM/S. HARI CHAND SHRI GOPAL ETC.

2005 INSC 4653 October 2005Matter referred to larger bench

The Supreme Court examined whether manufacturers of chewing tobacco could claim input relief under exemption Notification No.121/94‑CE when they had not complied with the Chapter X procedure of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The assessees argued that the intended use of the intermediate product (kimam) was evident fro

SHAKUNTLA DEVIversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2005 INSC 4663 October 2005Dismissed

The petitioner, Shakuntla Devi, filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution seeking a pension as a freedom fighter, alleging that the State Government had not recommended her claim to the Central Government. The petition was presented before the Supreme Court, with Madan Mohan Rai (her husband) and a leg

INDIAN DRUGS AND PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. AND ANR.versusR.K. SHEWARAMANI

2005 INSC 3293 August 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The employee, R.K. Shewaramani, was serving as a medical representative of Indian Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Ltd. and faced two charge‑sheets with departmental enquiries pending. After the amendment of Rule 30(A) of the company's Conduct Discipline and Appeal Rules on 30 March 1990, the employer issued a show‑cause noti

CHURCH OF NORTH OF INDIAversusLAVAJIBHAI RATANJIBHAI AND ORS.

2005 INSC 2483 May 2005Dismissed

The Church of North India (CNI) sought a declaration that the earlier Brethren Church had ceased to exist, that CNI was its legal successor with rights over its properties, and a perpetual injunction restraining dissenting members from obstructing its functioning. The plaintiffs filed the suit in a civil court before C

ALLAHABAD JAL SANSTHANversusDAYA SHANKAR RAI AND ANR.

2005 INSC 2493 May 2005Case Partly allowed

The employee (Respondent No.1) was appointed on an ad‑hoc basis by Allahabad Jal Sansthan and terminated on 24 January 1987. He raised an industrial dispute and the Labour Court, in an ex‑parte award dated 11 April 2000, reinstated him with full back wages, holding the termination invalid under Section 6‑N of the U.P.

SURINDER SINGHversusKAPOOR SINGH (D) THROUGH LRS. AND ORS.

2005 INSC 2453 May 2005Dismissed

Surinder Singh, who owned half of a property with his sister, entered into a sale agreement with Kapur Singh claiming authority to sell his sister's share as well. The sister denied such authority, leading the respondents to sue for specific performance. The trial court dismissed the suit, but the Punjab & Haryana High

VIVEKA NAND SETHIversusCHAIRMAN, J. AND K., BANK LTD. AND ORS.

2005 INSC 2503 May 2005Case Partly allowed

Viveka Nand Sethi, a cashier‑clerk of Jammu & Kashmir Bank, failed to resume duties after his leave expired and did not submit a proper medical‑leave application with a valid certificate despite repeated notices and memoranda. The Bank invoked clause 2 of the bipartite settlement (voluntary cessation of employment) and

GLOBAL ENERGY LTD . .AND ANR.versusM/S. ADANI EXPORTS LTD. AND ORS.

2005 INSC 2513 May 2005Dismissed

The West Bengal State Electricity Board issued a notice inviting tenders (NIT) for the sale of surplus power, requiring a Rs 30 lakh earnest money deposit from all bidders except Central/State Government organisations and public sector undertakings (PSUs). Global Energy Ltd., lacking the requisite Category F licence (i

PRAMOD KUMAR JAISWAL AND ORS.versusBIBI HUSN BANO AND ORS.

2005 INSC 2463 May 2005Dismissed

The appellants, tenants of a building, argued that having acquired the rights of some co‑owner landlords in 1988 extinguished their lease under the doctrine of merger, invoking Section 111(d) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, and therefore the order directing them to deposit fair rent under the Bihar Buildings (Le

ANGREJ KAURversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2005 INSC 2523 May 2005Disposed off

Constable Surjit Singh of the Border Security Force was reported missing during the 1971 Indo‑Pak war and was declared dead, with a family pension granted to his wife, Angrej Kaur. In 2004 the petitioner learned, through newspaper reports and identification by former Pakistani detainees, that her husband might be alive

D. PARRY (INDIA) LTD.versusASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, CHENNAI

2005 INSC 2473 May 2005Appeal(s) allowed

E.I.D. Parry (India) Ltd., a sugar manufacturer, purchased sugarcane at a statutory minimum price and an additional price under Clause 5‑A of the Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966. The additional price could be determined only after the sugar year ended, so the company paid an advance on that price, recorded only the min

REKHA MUKHERJEEversusASHIS KUMAR DAS AND ORS.

2005 INSC 1153 March 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Rekha Mukherjee, the owner of a property, filed a title suit for eviction against Ashis Kumar Das and others. The respondents filed a suit for specific performance of three sale agreements, which the appellant later cancelled; the trial court dismissed the specific‑performance suit. The respondents obtained a partial r

COAL INDIA LTD. AND ORS.versusIMENK SOU AND ORS.

2005 INSC 1143 March 2005Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained several Special Leave Petitions arising from a writ petition before the Gauhati High Court, wherein the High Court had directed the Secretary, Ministry of Coal and senior officers of Coal India Ltd. to appear personally and produce original documents. The Union of India, through the Solici

RAMESH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2005 INSC 1163 March 2005Disposed off

The wife filed a complaint in Trichy alleging offences under Sections 498‑A, 406 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against her husband, his relatives and the husband’s sister, Gowri Ramaswamy. The accused filed petitions under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashment on grounds of frivolous allegations, l

SUSHANTA TAGORE AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 1173 March 2005Disposed off

The petitioners, residents of Santiniketan, filed a public interest litigation seeking to restrain the construction of residential and commercial complexes, especially on the ecologically sensitive 'Khoai' area, alleging violation of the Visva‑Bharati Act, 1951 and directions of the West Bengal Pollution Control Board.

KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND ANR.versusS.G. KOTTURAPPA AND ANR.

2005 INSC 1183 March 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) appointed the respondents as Badli conductors, a day‑to‑day temporary position governed by the KSRTC Cadre and Recruitment Regulations, 1982. After repeated misconduct, the corporation terminated their services, removed them from the select list and forfeited any f

V. SUBRAMANI AND ANR.versusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2005 INSC 1193 March 2005Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the appeal of Subramani and another against their conviction for murder under Section 302 IPC. The appellants claimed they acted in private defence while protecting themselves and their property during a violent altercation that resulted in the death of Vadivel. The Court reiterated that the

M/S. O.K. PLAY (INDIA) LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, DELHI-III, GURGAON

2005 INSC 613 February 2005Dismissed

O.K. Play (India) Ltd., a toy manufacturer, classified activity desks, chairs, play tables, swings, slides, fun fliers, rockers and a play pool as "toys" under Central Excise Tariff Heading 95.03 and cleared them without duty. The Central Excise Department, after approving the classification list, issued show‑cause not

THE PRESIDENT, POORNATHRAYISHA SEVA SANGHAM, THRIPUNITHURAversusK. THILAKAN KAVENAL AND ORS.

2005 INSC 623 February 2005Disposed off

The writ petition filed by Respondent No. 1 under Article 226 challenged the Cochin Devaswom Board’s permission to an appellant society to use the Oottupura of the Sri Poornathrayisha Temple, alleging excessive charges and secret receipt‑sharing. The Kerala High Court entertained the petition and issued directions that

ABDUL RAIS AND ORS.versusMADHYA PRADESH WAKF BOARD AND ORS.

2005 INSC 23 January 2005Disposed off

Abdul Rais and others applied to the Madhya Pradesh State Wakf Tribunal for a declaration that land listed as wakf in the Official Gazette was actually their private property. The Wakf Board opposed, arguing the appellants had no title and that the application was barred by the one‑year limitation under Section 6 of th

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