Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

Judgments of 2006

1,018 judgments, newest first — showing 801–1,000.

STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.versusAMEERBI AND ORS.

2006 INSC 9697 December 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether Anganwadi workers and helpers appointed under the Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) scheme are holders of civil posts within the meaning of Articles 309, 310 and 311 of the Constitution. The workers, who are selected by a committee, receive only an honorarium and are not ap

NAGAR NIGAM, MEERUTversusAL FAHEEM MEAT EXPORTS PVT. LTD. AND ORS.

2006 INSC 9717 December 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Meerut Municipal Corporation (Nagar Nigam) issued a public advertisement inviting tenders for a contract to run its slaughter house after a one‑year licence to Al Faheem Meat Exports expired. The corporation’s advertisement was challenged by Al Faheem, and the Allahabad High Court directed that Al Faheem be allowed

RELIANCE AIRPORT DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.versusAIRPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 7917 November 2006Dismissed

Reliance Airport Developers Pvt. Ltd. (RAL) challenged the award of Delhi and Mumbai airport privatization contracts to GMR and GVK, alleging that the Empowered Group of Ministers (EGOM) improperly altered the Request for Proposal (RFP) criteria, lowered the technical qualification benchmark and relied on the report of

SHASHIKANTversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION AND ORS.

2006 INSC 7927 November 2006Dismissed

Shashikant, a railway employee, lodged an anonymous complaint with the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) alleging corruption by several officers. The CBI conducted a preliminary inquiry without registering a First Information Report (FIR) and recommended departmental action, which was carried out. Shashikant was la

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusM/S ASIAN FOOD INDUSTRIES

2006 INSC 7937 November 2006Disposed off

The Central Government issued a notification on 27 June 2006 banning the export of pulses and a subsequent notification on 4 July 2006 permitting export against irrevocable letters of credit opened before 22 June 2006. Exporters who had already obtained Let‑Export orders and complied with Section 51 of the Customs Act

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusKASHI RAM

2006 INSC 7947 November 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan charged Kashi Ram with the murder of his wife and two infant daughters, alleging that the victims were last seen alive with him on 3 February 1998 and that the house was found locked thereafter, with the bodies discovered on 6 February. The trial court convicted him based on medical evidence of s

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS AND ORS.versusVASANT MAGALAN CHOKSHI AND ORS.

2006 INSC 7957 November 2006Dismissed

Customs authorities seized 78 gold bars in 1998, alleging clandestine import and issued show‑cause notices under Sections 111(d) and 112(a) of the Customs Act. The Commissioner initially ordered confiscation of all bars, but the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal set aside that order and remanded the

PURUSHOTTAM AND ANRversusSHIVRAJ FINE ART LITHO WORKS AND ORS

2006 INSC 7967 November 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined an appeal by Purushottam (and others) against Shivraj Fine Art Litho Works concerning a suit filed by an unregistered partnership firm to recover sums owed for goods supplied before the firm’s registration. The High Court had dismissed the suit, holding it barred under Section 69(2) of the In

VASU DEV SINGH AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 7977 November 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, tenants in Chandigarh, challenged a 7 November 2002 notification issued by the Administrator under Section 3 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, which exempted buildings and rented land with monthly rent exceeding Rs.1500 from the Act's provisions. The High Court had upheld the notifica

OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LTD.versusM/S. NIPPON STEEL CORPORATION LTD.

2006 INSC 7987 November 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether the filing of an arbitration award by M/s Little & Co., acting as the arbitrator's agent, constituted statutory notice to Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. (ONGC) under Section 14(2) of the Arbitration Act, 1940, and when the limitation period for setting aside the award under Articl

DEPOT MANAGER, A.P.S.R.T.C.versusREGHUDA SIVA SANKAR PRASAD

2006 INSC 7997 November 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a long‑serving employee of the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (APSRTC), was charged with four instances of theft in 1986 and admitted to the misconduct. A departmental enquiry found him guilty and the Labour Court (Industrial Tribunal) ordered his removal from service. The High Court Si

M/S PALLAVA GRANITE INDUSTRIES (INDIA) PVT. LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 8007 November 2006Dismissed

The case concerned several Government Orders (G.O.s) relating to the lease of surplus agricultural lands in Andhra Pradesh for mining galaxy granite. The appellants argued that G.O. No.1290, which earmarked land for mining leases to private firms, created a vested right that could not be withdrawn, and that the State's

COMMERCIAL TAXES OFFICER, JODHPURversusM/S. VISHNU METALS

2006 INSC 7907 November 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Vishnu Metals, a manufacturer of stainless steel sheets, expanded its installed capacity and claimed a sales‑tax exemption under the Rajasthan Sales Tax New Incentive Scheme, 1989, on the ground that its total production—including job‑work performed for others—had increased by more than 25% of the original capacity. Th

RAMCHANDRA MAHADEV JAGPAT AND ORS.versusCHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND ORS.

2006 INSC 8017 November 2006IA disposed

The case concerned a slum‑rehabilitation scheme in Vile Parle where Mis Sigtia Construction Co. Ltd. (S) had been appointed developer by the co‑operative housing society. While S was awaiting a Letter of Intent (LOI) from the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA), slum dwellers filed writ petitions challenging S’s appoin

BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LTD.versusANIL AND ORS.

2006 INSC 8027 November 2006Disposed off

Fourteen garden workers employed by a contractor for Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. (BHEL) had their services terminated by the contractor on 1 December 1988 without complying with Section 6‑N of the Uttar Pradesh Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. They filed an individual dispute under Section 2‑A, which was referred to th

TEJ BAHADUR RAMversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

2006 INSC 5857 September 2006Dismissed

The appellant, an employee of the Uttar Pradesh State Electricity Board, filed a writ petition seeking an order to extend his retirement age so that he could remain in service until his superannuation date of 31 July 2007. He contended that Regulation 2(a) of the UP State Electricity Board (Employees' Retirement) Regul

VIJAYALASHMI RICE MILL AND ORS.versusTHE COMMERICAL TAX OFFICERS, PALAKOL AND ORS.

2006 INSC 4917 August 2006Dismissed

The appellants, rice millers, challenged the constitutionality of a 5% cess levied under the Andhra Pradesh Rural Development Act, 1996, arguing that it was neither a tax nor a fee within the constitutional entries and that no specific service was rendered to them. The State contended that the levy was a fee for rural

ABAN LOYD CHILES OFFSHORE LIMITED AND ORS.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, MAHARASHTRA

2006 INSC 4927 August 2006Case Partly allowed

The appellants, contractors for ONGC, carried out offshore oil operations and moved goods between ONGC's rigs and the shore without payment of customs duty under a customs exemption. After ONGC shifted operations to Nhava Base, the Customs Department issued show‑cause notices alleging unauthorized loading, unloading an

LATA SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANR.

2006 INSC 4077 July 2006Case Allowed

Lata Singh, a 27‑year‑old graduate, married a man of a different caste of her own free will. Her brothers filed false missing‑person and kidnapping reports, leading police to arrest her husband’s relatives. Despite a police final report and a medical opinion that Lata was mentally fit, the magistrate recorded her state

ARUN SINGH @ ARUN KUMAR SINGHversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

2006 INSC 1397 March 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Arun Singh was elected to the Nauhatta Panchayat Samiti but had earlier been dismissed from his post as a Dafadar. The State Election Commission held that his dismissal was not for misconduct and therefore he was not disqualified under Section 139(1)(f) of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 1993. The Patna High Court, howeve

NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION AND ANR.versusCOMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT AND ORS.

2006 INSC 1407 March 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) rejected an application for B.Ed. course recognition filed by a teacher‑education institution for the 2005‑2006 academic year, on the ground that essential documents (registered lease deed and approved building plan) were submitted after the statutory cut‑off date. The

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAIversusBOMBAY ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION GROUP AND ORS.

2006 INSC 1417 March 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) appealed to the Supreme Court against disparaging remarks made by the Bombay High Court in a writ petition challenging the validity of Development Control Regulation No.58 (OCR 58) under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966. The petition sought to ensur

BOMBAY DYEING AND MFG. CO.LTD.versusBOMBAY ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION GROUP AND ORS.

2006 INSC 1427 March 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the validity of Development Control Regulation 58 (OCR 58) under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, its 2001 amendment and a 2003 clarification, as applied to sick, closed or modernising cotton‑textile mills in Bombay. The petitioners, a public‑interest group, challenged OCR 58 on

KASTHA NIWARAK G.S.S. MARYADIT, INDOREversusPRESIDENT, INDORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

2006 INSC 747 February 2006Dismissed

The Indore Development Authority issued a circular on 31 January 1986 allowing housing cooperative societies to develop land they owned, provided they were registered, had purchased the land before the declaration of Section 50(2) of the Madhya Pradesh Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973, and handed over vacant pea

PARKASH SINGH BADAL AND ANR.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

2006 INSC 9606 December 2006Dismissed

The petitioners, including former Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal, challenged prosecutions under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and the IPC on the ground that no prior sanction under Section 197 of the CrPC was obtained and that the complaints were filed with malafide intent. The Court examined the scope of

LALU PRASAD@ LALU PRASAD YADAVversusSTATE OF BIHAR THROUGH CBI (AHD) PATNA

2006 INSC 9616 December 2006Dismissed

The appeals concerned the validity of a sanction to prosecute Lalu Prasad Yadav under Sections 13(1)(e) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The sanction had been issued under Section 19(1)(b) of the Act and Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, but was signed by the Secretary to the Government

ROTASHversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2006 INSC 9626 December 2006Dismissed

The appellant, Rohtash, was convicted under IPC s.302 read with s.34 for the murder of Moosaram, alleged to have been carried out by a group armed with iron pipes. The prosecution relied on statements of the first informant (PW‑1) and the victim's mother (PW‑6), both of whom named Rohtash as part of the attacking party

BHUPENDRA SINGH BHATIAversusSTATE OF M.P. AND ORS

2006 INSC 9636 December 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court considered a dispute where the State of Madhya Pradesh, under a new excise policy, purchased foreign liquor from a wholesaler, Bhupendra Singh Bhatia, at rates fixed by a district‑level purchase committee in April‑May 1996, pending a final decision by a state‑level committee. After the state‑level com

K.KARUNAKARANversusSTATE OF KERALA

2006 INSC 9646 December 2006Disposed off

The appellant, K. Karunakaran, was prosecuted for an alleged abuse of office. The High Court held that no sanction under CrPC Section 197 was required because the appellant was not holding the office at the time the court took cognizance of the offence. The appellant further contended that the prosecution was driven by

RAGHUNATH RAI BAREJA AND ANR.versusPUNJAB NATIONAL BANK AND ORS.

2006 INSC 9656 December 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a guarantor and director of a liquidated company, challenged the Punjab National Bank's attempt to recover a debt by filing execution petitions. The High Court transferred the third execution petition, filed in 1999, to the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) invoking inherent powers. The Supreme Court held tha

OM PRAKASH AND ORS.versusSHIV KUMAR AND ORS.

2006 INSC 9666 December 2006Dismissed

The respondents filed a suit for possession of land alleging that the appellant had obtained a fabricated Will of the deceased owner, Smt. Ram Ditti, to secure mutation of revenue records and possession. The trial court dismissed the suit, but the first appellate court and the Himachal Pradesh High Court reversed that

DR. T.A. QUERESHIversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BHOPAL

2006 INSC 9676 December 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a medical practitioner, was arrested for manufacturing and selling heroin, and the seized heroin was claimed as a loss in his income‑tax return on the ground that it formed part of his stock in trade. The assessing officer disallowed the claim, treating the amount as income from undisclosed sources, and

PUNJAB WATER SUPPLY & SEWERAGE BOARDversusRANJODH SINGH AND ORS.

2006 INSC 9686 December 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Punjab Water Supply & Sewerage Board (the Board) engaged several workers on a contractual basis for water and sewerage schemes and later terminated their services. The workers filed writ petitions seeking regularisation of their employment under a policy scheme issued by the State of Punjab. The High Court directed

B. NOHAversusSTATE OF KERALA AND ANR.

2006 INSC 7876 November 2006Dismissed

B. Noha, a Health Inspector, was accused of demanding and accepting illegal gratuities from a push‑cart owner while performing his official duties. The trial court convicted him under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced him to three years’ rigorous imprisonmen

VENKATEGOWDA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2006 INSC 7886 November 2006Case Partly allowed

The incident occurred on 4 November 1986 when five accused assaulted two injured witnesses and the deceased, who later died. The FIR was lodged the next day, and the key witnesses gave their testimony ten years later, leading to minor discrepancies in their accounts. The trial court acquitted all accused, citing the FI

DHARAMRAJ AND ORS.versusCHHITAN AND ORS.

2006 INSC 7896 November 2006Dismissed

The dispute concerned co‑tenancy rights over land recorded in Khata No. 111 in Faizabad, Uttar Pradesh. The appellants claimed ancestral rights based on a pedigree tracing back to the original ancestor Saltanati, while the respondents asserted exclusive rights as successors of Adhin, whose name was entered after a sett

JAWALA SINGH (D) BY LRS. AND ORS.versusJAGAT SINGH (D) BY LRS. AND ORS.

2006 INSC 5826 September 2006Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined two appeals challenging a Punjab and Haryana High Court order that allowed a second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, without formulating any substantial question of law. The appellants argued that the High Court erred by not stating a specific legal question in t

BOARD OF TRUSTEES, VISHAKHAPATNAM PORT TRUST AND ORS.versusT.S.N. RAJU AND ANR.

2006 INSC 5836 September 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Vishakhapatnam Port Trust (VPT) introduced a Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) under a Ministry of Surface Transport directive, allowing employees with ten years of service or age 40+ to apply. The Trust’s Chairman limited consideration to employees below 58 years, rejecting applications of two senior employees who

SOM DEV AND ORS.versusRATI RAM AND ANR.

2006 INSC 5846 September 2006Dismissed

The plaintiff, Som Dev, claimed a right of pre-emption over a half‑share of immovable property, relying on a decree dated 10‑10‑1980 that recognised a family settlement whereby co‑owner Sheo Ram had relinquished his share in favour of the plaintiff and his brother. The defendants argued that the decree created a new ri

CHANIversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2006 INSC 4026 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court considered an appeal by Channi, who had been convicted under the IPC and whose sentence was partially altered by the Allahabad High Court. Channi applied for release on probation under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, alternatively under Section 360 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, but t

STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ANR.versusALAGAR

2006 INSC 4036 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Tamil Nadu detained Alagar under Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Slum Grabbers Act, 1982, on the ground that he was a 'goonda'. The Madras High Court set aside the detention order, hol

V.K. RATHEESHversusSTATE OF KERALA

2006 INSC 4046 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

V.K. Ratheesh was tried for murder (IPC 302) and the trial court acquitted him, finding serious discrepancies in the prosecution's evidence. The Kerala High Court set aside the acquittal, deeming the discrepancies trivial, and convicted him under IPC 304(1) with a seven‑year sentence. On appeal, the Supreme Court exami

STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ANR.versusMULA SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD.

2006 INSC 4056 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The cooperative society Mula Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. entered into a turnkey contract for a paper plant with Pentagon Engineering, which required a 10% retention amount to be secured by a bank guarantee. State Bank of India issued a document on 4 September 1985 that purported to indemnify the society against losse

KULDEEP SINGHversusGOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

2006 INSC 4066 July 2006Dismissed

The Government of NCT of Delhi invited applications for L‑52 liquor licences for 2004‑05, but later announced a policy to stop issuing fresh licences. The appellants, who had applied before the policy change, claimed that they had an accrued right and a legitimate expectation to be granted licences, especially after so

GUNWANTBHAI MULCHAND SHAH AND ORS.versusANTON ELIS FAREL AND ORS

2006 INSC 1366 March 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiffs, successors of a predecessor who had entered into a 1964 agreement to purchase a property, filed a suit on 4 April 1994 for specific performance of that agreement and a perpetual injunction, after a public notice and objections in November 1993. The defendants contended that the suit was barred by limita

G. AMALORPAVAM AND ORS.versusR.C. DIOCESE OF MADURAI AND ORS.

2006 INSC 1376 March 2006Dismissed

The respondents filed a suit for possession, arrears of rent and damages which was decreed by the trial court. The appellants appealed to the first appellate court, which dismissed the appeal, and a second appeal to the Madras High Court was also dismissed. The appellants contended that the appellate courts had failed

N.KHOSLAversusRAJLAKSHMI (DEAD) AND ORS.

2006 INSC 1386 March 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The father of the parties gifted three plots of his ancestral property to his three daughters, but later revoked the gift and paid each daughter Rs.10,000 in cash. After the father's death, the sons partitioned the entire property among themselves, leading the daughters to claim the gifted plots. The dispute was referr

H.P. PYAREJANversusDASAPPA (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ORS.

2006 INSC 736 February 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff, H.P. Pyarejan, entered into a sale agreement with five co‑owners, advancing a loan on condition that all would execute the deed. Only four signed, and the plaintiff sued for specific performance including the fifth defendant. The trial court and first appellate court dismissed the suit, finding no eviden

RABINDRA MAHTO AND ANR.versusSTATE OF JHARKHAND

2006 INSC 166 January 2006Dismissed

The appellants, members of a Mahto clan, attacked two men who were ploughing a field they claimed as their own, using swords, knives and lathis, resulting in the deaths of Sohrai Puran and Ram Mohan Puran and injuries to others. An FIR was lodged the next day and sent to the magistrate a day later; the defence argued t

SANKAR DASTIDARversusSHRIMATI BANJULA DASTIDAR AND ANR.

2006 INSC 9505 December 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Respondent No.1, Shrimati Banjula Dastidar, sued her brother Sankar Dastidar for declaration of title to a residential house. The brother had locked a room containing her almirah on 16 March 1987, and an inventory of the goods was later made. In the same proceeding she filed a counter‑claim on 24 June 1992 for damages

RAMCHANDRA MURARILAL BHATTAD AND ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 9515 December 2006Dismissed

The Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA) invited bids for a Convention and Exhibition Centre and the appellant submitted the highest bid, but the Authority later cancelled all bids and re‑tendered, awarding the contract to another bidder. The appellant challenged the cancellation, arguing that the A

SARBANANDA SONOWALversusUNION OF INDIA

2006 INSC 9545 December 2006Case Allowed

The petitioners challenged the Foreigners (Tribunal) Amendment Order, 2006 which made the 1964 Foreigners (Tribunals) Order inapplicable to Assam, arguing that it contravened Articles 14, 21 and 355 of the Constitution and sought to nullify the Supreme Court's earlier judgment in Sarbananda Sonowal v. Union of India (2

SUBHASH HARNARAYANJI LADDHAversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2006 INSC 9555 December 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased Yadav Navkar allegedly entered into a sale agreement for his land with the appellants, but a forged General Power of Attorney was later executed by accused No.1, leading to a sale deed in favour of the appellants. After Navkar went missing, his wife filed a report, a FIR was lodged under Sections 364 and 3

SALIM SAHABversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2006 INSC 9565 December 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Salim assaulted his father‑in‑law’s brother Saleem with a pair of scissors during a heated quarrel, causing injuries that led to Saleem’s death. The trial court convicted Salim under Section 324 IPC (grievous hurt) and sentenced him to five years’ rigorous imprisonment. On appeal, the High Court upgraded the conviction

HORI LAL AND ANR.versusSTATE OF U.P

2006 INSC 9575 December 2006Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined a land‑dispute‑related shooting in which members of an unlawful assembly opened fire, killing Hori Lal and Smt Ram Shree and injuring others. The appellants challenged the conviction on grounds that the FIR was ante‑timed, the prosecution failed to prove a common object, the medical evidence

KULWINDER SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2006 INSC 9585 December 2006Dismissed

The appellant, Kulwinder Singh, was convicted along with three others for the murder of Rajbir Singh, allegedly hired by Nirpal Singh, Nardev Singh and their father Pargat Singh in a land‑dispute motive. The prosecution’s case rested on the statements of eyewitness PW‑3, the extra‑judicial confession recorded by PW‑7,

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, JABALPURversusOM PRAKASH DUBEY

2006 INSC 9595 December 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Municipal Corporation of Jabalpur appointed a large number of daily‑wage workers without following the recruitment rules prescribed under the Madhya Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act. Several labour disputes arose and the High Court, exercising contempt jurisdiction, directed the corporation to prepare a gradation

AMIN CHAND PAYARELALversusINSPECTING ASSTI. COMMISSIONER, INCOME TAX AND ORS.

2006 INSC 5795 September 2006Dismissed

Amin Chand Payarelal filed income‑tax returns for assessment years 1959‑60 to 1965‑66 after the extended period allowed under Section 139(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and paid interest on the delayed filing. The Assessing Authority, an Inspecting Assistant Commissioner, levied a penalty under Section 271(1)(a). The

HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPN. AND ANR.versusCHANDER BHAN AND ANR.

2006 INSC 5805 September 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Hindustan Petroleum Corporation advertised for open‑category retail outlet dealers and issued a letter of intent to Chander Bhan (respondent No.1) for a site he claimed was readily available in Gurgaon. Subsequently the Haryana Urban Development Authority allotted a plot at Sector 53, Gurgaon to the corporation for a C

RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPN.versusINDAG RUBBER LTD.

2006 INSC 5815 September 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation entered into an agreement with Indag Rubber Ltd. for a retreading plant and material, guaranteeing that retreaded tyres would achieve 46,000 km or 95% of the life of new tyres. The corporation alleged that the tyres failed to meet this guarantee and claimed compensation, w

M/S. CRAWFORD BAYLEY AND CO. AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 3955 July 2006Dismissed

Crawford Bayley & Co., a firm of advocates, challenged the termination of its tenancy in a bank‑owned building and the subsequent show‑cause notice issued by an Estate Officer under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971. The firm argued that Section 3 of the Act and its second proviso, whic

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, DELHIversusCARRIER AIRCON LTD.

2006 INSC 3965 July 2006Dismissed

The Commissioner of Central Excise challenged Carrier Aircon Ltd's classification of its chillers under tariff heading 84.18 (refrigerating or freezing equipment) instead of heading 84.15 (air‑conditioning machines). The Revenue argued that because more than 90% of the chillers were used as integral parts of central ai

BUNNILAL CHAUDHARYversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2006 INSC 3975 July 2006Disposed off

The case arose from a dispute over the balance payment for a she‑buffalo which led to a violent confrontation in which Bunnilal Chaudhary (A‑1) stabbed the victim Shambhu Raut on the left side of the chest, causing his death. The trial court convicted all ten accused of murder under Section 302 read with Section 149 IP

ASSISTANT ENGINEER, C.A.D. KOTAversusDHAN KUNWAR

2006 INSC 3985 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a temporary work‑charged employee, was terminated in the early 1980s and, after an eight‑year gap, filed a claim for reinstatement and back wages under Section 10(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Labour Court awarded 30% back wages and ordered reinstatement, but the High Court dismissed the

M/S. INDIAN DRUGS AND PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.versusDEVKI DEVI AND ORS.

2006 INSC 3995 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Mis Indian Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd., a public sector undertaking, gave contract work to the widows and dependents of employees who died in harness after a union demand, without any compassionate appointment scheme. The contracts were later terminated in 1998 due to the company's severe financial distress, prompting

STATE OF GOAversusM/S. WESTERN BUILDERS

2006 INSC 4005 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Goa challenged an arbitral award granted to Mis. Western Builders. After the award, the State filed a petition under the Arbitration Act, 1940, which was dismissed on the ground that the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 governed the matter. The State then sought condonation of delay under Section 14

SHRI BALASAHEB K. THACKERAY AND ANR.versusSHRL VENKAT @ BABRU AND ANR.

2006 INSC 4015 July 2006

The complainant filed a private defamation complaint under IPC s.500 read with s.34 against the editor, printer and publisher of a newspaper. The trial court issued process, but a petition under CrPC s.482 was dismissed by the High Court. While the appeal was pending before this Court, the complainant died. The appella

RAJINDERversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2006 INSC 3685 June 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Rajinder was convicted for the death of his nephew Subhash, who died from a thigh wound inflicted by a firearm. The trial court and High Court upheld a conviction under Section 302 IPC (murder) and Section 27 of the Arms Act. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined the distinction between murder and culpabl

SEEMA ARSHAD ZAHEER AND ORS.versusMUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI AND ORS.

2006 INSC 2925 May 2006Dismissed

The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai issued show‑cause notices under Section 351 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, demanding demolition of several structures alleged to be unauthorized. The occupants filed suits in the City Civil Court and obtained a temporary injunction restraining the Corporation

SUNNY KAPOORversusSTATE (UT OF CHANDIGARH)

2006 INSC 2935 May 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased businessman Satish Kumar Mehra was found dead near Udyog Bhavan, Chandigarh, and rickshaw pullers including Sunny Kapoor were charged with murder under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC. The trial court convicted them based largely on circumstantial evidence and alleged extra‑judicial confessions to a social

RAM BACHAN RAI AND ORS.versusRAM UDAI RAI AND ORS.

2006 INSC 2945 May 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, judgment debtors, sought to set aside an ex parte decree dated 3 May 1976 and later faced an execution application filed by the decree holders on 5 April 1991. The executing court held that the 12‑year limitation period under Article 136 of the Limitation Act began from the dismissal of a civil revision

NAYINI NARASIMHA REDDYversusDR. K. LAXMAN AND ORS.

2006 INSC 2955 May 2006Dismissed

In the 2004 Musheerabad Assembly election, the appellant N. Narasimha Reddy lost by 240 votes and the respondent Dr. K. Laxman filed an election petition challenging the result. The petition sought summons of several voters as witnesses, alleging that their testimony was essential to prove that the appellant could not

MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, SUJANPURversusSURINDER KUMAR KUMAR

2006 INSC 2965 May 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Municipal Council, Sujanpur terminated Surinder Kumar, a daily‑waged worker appointed in violation of its recruitment rules and allegedly as a supervisor. The Labour Court held that Kumar was a workman who had completed the requisite 240 days of work and ordered his reinstatement with full back wages. The High Cour

ANIL KUMAR TULSIYANIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANR.

2006 INSC 2975 May 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, the State of Uttar Pradesh, challenged the Allahabad High Court's order granting bail to the respondent, an advocate charged with murder under IPC s.302 read with s.201. The High Court had allowed bail despite the offence being non‑bailable and the gravity of the crime, which involved the shooting of a c

LT. GOVERNOR, NCT AND ORS .versusVED PRAKASH @ VEDU

2006 INSC 2985 May 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Lt. Governor of the NCT and other officials initiated externment proceedings against Ved Prakash @ Vedu under Section 47 of the Delhi Police Act, 1978, alleging that his movements caused alarm and danger and that witnesses were unwilling to testify due to fear. An order directing his removal from Delhi for two year

SANJA Y SITARAM KHEMKAversusSTTE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 2995 May 2006Dismissed

The petitioner, a jewellery businessman, alleged that two respondents conspired against him, leading to false criminal cases and defamatory media coverage. He filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court seeking investigation, compensation, and other reliefs, which the High Court dismissed on the ground that each pra

ASHOK KUMAR AND ORS.versusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2006 INSC 3005 May 2006Dismissed

The deceased Kumararaja and the appellants were co‑parceners disputing ownership of a piece of agricultural land. On the day of the incident the deceased went to plough the land, was threatened by the appellants, and asked two villagers (PW‑I and PW‑II) to accompany him. While the deceased was ploughing, the appellants

N. BIRENDRA SINGHversusL. PRIYOKUMAR SINGH AND ORS.

2006 INSC 3015 May 2006Disposed off

The petitioners, who had been regularised as Assistant Engineers with retrospective effect from their ad‑hoc appointments, challenged a seniority list prepared by the State of Manipur that did not reflect their seniority. A Single Judge of the Gauhati High Court quashed the final seniority list and directed that senior

STANDARD CHARTERED BANKversusANDHRA BANK FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD. & ORS

2006 INSC 2915 May 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerns the ownership of Rs. 50 crore 9% tax‑free bonds (the "suit bonds") issued by Nuclear Power Corporation Ltd. (NPCL). Andhra Bank Financial Services Ltd. (ABFSL) sold the bonds to Standard Chartered Bank (SCB) on 26‑27 February 1992, and SCB paid consideration and received a Banker's Receipt. Canbank Mu

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusSATYPRAKASH AND ORS.

2006 INSC 2025 April 2006Dismissed

The Union of India appealed a High Court order that had granted relief to several OBC candidates, including the petitioner, who were denied appointments despite being recommended by the UPSC for the 174 OBC‑reserved vacancies. The respondents argued that OBC candidates selected on merit (i.e., without resorting to the

T. ARUNTPERUNJOTHIversusSTATE THROUGH S.H.O., PONDICHERRY

2006 INSC 2035 April 2006

The Supreme Court considered the appeal of T. Arunthperunjothi, who had been convicted under Section 304B of the IPC for the alleged dowry death of his wife Davamani, who committed suicide in 1994. The prosecution alleged that the husband or his relatives had demanded dowry and harassed the deceased, relying on stateme

STA TE OF CHHATTISGARHversusLEKHRAM

2006 INSC 2055 April 2006

The State of Chhattisgarh prosecuted Lekhram for abduction and rape of a married minor, Sushila Bai. The trial court, relying on a school register entry and oral testimony, held that she was a minor at the time of the offence and convicted Lekhram under Section 376 IPC, sentencing him to three years' rigorous imprisonm

NAGARATHINAM AND ORS.versusSTATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2006 INSC 2065 April 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, owners of a brick kiln, were charged with murder, rioting and related offences after a violent clash at a village panchayat meeting that left two persons dead. The trial court convicted them under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC, while the High Court acquitted them of the 149 charge and convicted

DHANESHWAR MAHAKUD AND ORS.versusSTATE OF ORISSA

2006 INSC 2075 April 2006Dismissed

Six Mahakud family members were tried for murder, rioting and causing hurt under IPC sections 148, 149, 302 and 323. The High Court acquitted two of them but upheld the conviction of the remaining four for murder. The appellants argued that, because the prosecution could not show that each of them individually caused t

STATE OF HARYANAversusRANBIR @ RANA

2006 INSC 2085 April 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The accused, Ranbir, was seized with a plastic bag containing 2 kg of charas after a police search of the bag he was carrying. He was convicted under Section 20 of the NDPS Act, but the High Court set aside the conviction on the ground that Section 50, which mandates a search in the presence of a magistrate or gazetted

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, NEW DELHIversusNARENDER SINGH

2006 INSC 2095 April 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved Constable Narender Singh, who confessed to theft of firearms while in police custody and was later discharged in the criminal trial due to lack of other evidence. He was dismissed from service in a departmental proceeding based on that confession. The Central Administrative Tribunal and the Delhi High

RANJIT SINGHversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 2105 April 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an Inspector of Central Excise and Customs, was investigated by the CBI for possessing assets disproportionate to his known income. Although the CBI later filed a closure report and the departmental Enquiry Officer exonerated him, the Disciplinary Authority disagreed with the enquiry findings, issued a s

M.V. BIJLANIversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 2115 April 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a junior engineer, was charged with non‑maintenance of an ACE‑8 register and alleged failure to supervise copper‑wire work. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated five years after he handed over charge and continued for seven years, culminating in his removal from service. The enquiry officer treated th

T. MADHAVA KURUPversusT.C. MADHAVA KURUP (D) BY LRS. AND ORS.

2006 INSC 2125 April 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the succession of a "Tavazhi" (customary joint family) property in Kerala after the death of the last female member. The trial court held that the two surviving male members became co‑owners and allowed a partition suit filed by the heirs of one of them; the High Court reversed, treating the property

GURSEWAK SINGHversusAVTAR SINGH AND ORS.

2006 INSC 2135 April 2006Appeal(s) allowed

In the 2003 election for Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Ralla, Gursewak Singh was declared winner over Avtar Singh. Avtar Singh filed an election petition seeking a recount, leading to a High Court examination of the ballot papers which revealed serious irregularities and a lack of proper segregation. The High Court dismis

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT OF INDIA AND ORS.versusKRISHNAJI PARVETESH KULKARNI

2006 INSC 2145 April 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents had purchased Indira Vikas Patras (IVPs) from post offices and subsequently lost the certificates. The post offices refused to issue duplicate certificates, relying on Rule 7(2) of the Indira Vikas Patra Rules, 1986, which bars replacement of lost, stolen, mutilated, defaced or destroyed certificates. T

NARINDER MOHAN ARYAversusUNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ORS.

2006 INSC 2155 April 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an inspector with United India Insurance, was dismissed after a departmental inquiry found him guilty of antedating an insurance cover note following a fire. He appealed, but the appellate authority upheld the dismissal. Simultaneously, a civil suit by the consignor concluded that the cover note was not

STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR.versusSHREYAS PAPERS PVT. LTD. AND ORS

2006 INSC 155 January 2006Dismissed

The State of Karnataka appealed against Shreyas Papers Pvt. Ltd., which had purchased the land, building, plant and machinery of a defaulting company after the Karnataka State Industrial Investment and Development Corporation took over those assets under the State Financial Corporation Act. The Commercial Tax Officer i

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusKALI DASS BA TISH AND ANR.

2006 INSC 145 January 2006Disposed off

The Union of India appealed against two High Court judgments that had entertained writ petitions filed by K.D. Batish and Ram Kishore Prasad, who had been recommended for appointment as Judicial Members of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) but were not appointed after the Intelligence Bureau report on their ant

STATE OF UTTARANCHAL AND ANR.versusDINESH KUMAR SHARMA

2006 INSC 9444 December 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, Dinesh Kumar Sharma, a Subordinate Agricultural Services officer, claimed promotion and seniority from the 1995-96 vacancy year, although his substantive appointment order was issued on 19 November 1999. The High Court directed the State to reconsider his claim, but the Supreme Court held that under the

MUSTAFIKHANversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2006 INSC 9454 December 2006Dismissed

The appellant, a junior engineer supervising irrigation tank construction under a government employment guarantee scheme, was alleged to have fabricated muster rolls showing payments to fictitious labourers, thereby misappropriating Rs 6,764.10. Evidence showed that the same 21 labourers were recorded as working simult

P.K. SREEKANTAN AND ORS.versusP. SREEKUMARAN NAIR AND ORS.

2006 INSC 9464 December 2006Disposed off

The State acquired 2.8 hectares of land for a market and fixed a compensation award of Rs.45,08,111. Several claimants, including P.K. Sreekantan, filed applications under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 seeking a reference to a court for enhancement of compensation. The Reference Court, however, also rule

RAMJI RAI AND ANR.versusJAGDISH MALLAH (DEAD) THROUGH L.RS. AND ANR.

2006 INSC 9474 December 2006Dismissed

Ramji Rai and another filed a suit for a permanent injunction to restrain the respondents from interfering with their possession of a disputed land and from obstructing the construction of a boundary wall. The trial court decreed in their favour, but the appellate court set aside the decree on the ground that the appel

AVTAR SINGH AND ORS.versusGURDIAL SINGH AND ORS.

2006 INSC 9484 December 2006Dismissed

The dispute concerned a parcel of land in village Nardu, alleged to be either private property of the appellants or a public street (shamlat deh). The trial court held the appellants had title and dismissed the respondents' injunction suit; the appellate court and the High Court reversed, finding the land to be public

ABHISHEK KUMARversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 9494 December 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Abhishek Kumar applied for an appointment on compassionate grounds after his father, a government employee, died in February 2001. The District Magistrate of Kamal refused the appointment, citing lack of vacancy, and the Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed his writ petition by relying on Rule 9 of the Haryana Compa

BEENA PHILIPOSE AND ANR.versusSTATE OF KERALA

2006 INSC 5774 September 2006Disposed off

The appellants, Beena Philipose and her father, were convicted for forging university mark‑sheets to secure admission to a medical college, offences punishable under Sections 420, 471, 120B, 466 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code. The Sessions Judge sentenced them to one year and three years of imprisonment respectively;

A.GEETHAversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ANR.

2006 INSC 5784 September 2006Dismissed

The appellant, A. Geetha, challenged the preventive detention of her husband under the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1982, alleging that the detaining authority failed to consider a representation and that the likelihood of his release on bail was remote because of an NDPS case. The High Court dism

STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR.versusPASTOR P. RAJU

2006 INSC 4904 August 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Pastor P. Raju was arrested and remanded to judicial custody after an FIR was lodged under Section 153B IPC for allegedly urging Hindus to convert to Christianity. He filed a petition under Section 482 of the CrPC seeking to quash the criminal proceedings, contending that a prior sanction under Section 196(1A) CrPC was

POPULAR MUTHIAHversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2006 INSC 3834 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from a 1992 murder where the charge sheet omitted two alleged participants, Popular Muthiah and Murugan, although eye‑witnesses identified them. Only Nallakannu (Muthu) was tried, convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment. On appeal, the Madras High Court, exercising its appellate jurisdiction, direct

M.S. NARAYANAN MENON @ MANIversusSTATE OF KERALA AND ANR.

2006 INSC 3844 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a share broker, was charged under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for the dishonour of a cheque issued to a member of the Cochin Stock Exchange. He contended that the cheque was given as security, not in discharge of any debt, and that he had discharged the initial evidential burden under S

HEERALAL YADAVversusSTATE OF M.P. AND ORS.

2006 INSC 3854 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased Gokul Singh was brutally assaulted and later died; a dying declaration identifying several assailants was recorded by Dr. A.S. Khan after the victim regained consciousness following glucose and saline administration. The trial court convicted three accused under IPC sections 302 and 34 based on this declar

STATE OF TAMIL NADUversusRAVI @NEHRU

2006 INSC 3864 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Tamil Nadu charged Ravi @ Nehru under Section 376 IPC for raping a five‑year‑old girl. The victim recounted being taken to the accused's bedroom, stripped, and having his penis pressed against her genitalia, after which she fled crying. Medical examination of the girl revealed a ruptured hymen, while exami

A.N. ROY, COMMISSIONER OF POLICE AND ANR.versusSURESH SHAM SINGH

2006 INSC 3874 July 2006Case Partly allowed

The State of Maharashtra issued a 1999 notification conferring on the Commissioner of Police, Brihan Bombay, the powers of a District Magistrate for purposes of sections 18 and 20 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, to enable raids and evictions of brothels. The High Court struck down the notification as ult

K. MADALAIMUTHU AND ANR.versusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS.

2006 INSC 3884 July 2006Disposed off

The appellants, directly recruited District Registrars in the Tamil Nadu Registration Service, challenged a seniority list that placed them below officers who had been temporarily appointed as District Registrars under Rule 10(a)(i)(1) of the Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Services Rules, 1955, and later regularized.

A.P. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSIONversusK. SUDHARSHAN REDDY AND ORS.

2006 INSC 3894 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether the 5% weightage marks granted to Telugu‑medium candidates in Andhra Pradesh recruitment could be used for determining their seniority. Earlier judgments had held the weightage unconstitutional but protected the appointments already made. The respondents argued that the protection did

UMED SINGHversusARYA SAMAJ SEWA SADAN

2006 INSC 3904 July 2006Dismissed

Umed Singh was a monthly tenant of a residential building that later became the property of Arya Samaj Sewa Sadan, a society, by will. The society filed an ejectment suit under s.13(3)(a)(i) of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973, alleging non‑payment of rent and a bona‑fide need to run a public

A.P. FOODSversusS. SAMUEL AND ORS.

2006 INSC 3914 July 2006Case Partly allowed

A.P. Foods, a non‑profit public‑sector establishment run by the Andhra Pradesh Nutrition Council, was challenged by its employees who demanded bonus under the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965. The Labour Commissioner held the Act inapplicable, but the employer later paid ex‑gratia and subsequently stopped it, prompting a wri

U.P STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATIONversusBABU RAM

2006 INSC 3924 July 2006Disposed off

The respondent, Babu Ram, was employed on a temporary basis by the U.P. State Road Transport Corporation and was terminated in 1983. After a fifteen‑year gap, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court in 1998, which held the termination illegal and ordered reinstatement with back wages. The corporation challenged th

DEVINDER SINGH AND ORSversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

2006 INSC 3934 July 2006Dismissed

The appellants, Devinder Singh and others, filed a civil suit seeking a declaration that they were owners in possession of a parcel of land and that the authorities' orders declaring the land surplus and allotting it were null and void. The respondents contended that the suit was barred by Section 26 of the Haryana Cei

MUKESH ALIversusSTATE OF ASSAM AND ANR.

2006 INSC 3944 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an Assistant Conservator of Forest in Assam, was suspended in 1994, reinstated, and later faced disciplinary charges in 1997. An enquiry report in 2000 found him not guilty and the proceedings were dropped. The Supreme Court had earlier issued prospective directions on 15 Jan 1998 and 12 May 2001 to revi

LINGEGOWD DETECTIVE & SECURITY CHAMBER PVT. LIMITEDversusMYSORE KIRLOSKAR LIMITED AND ORS.

2006 INSC 2894 May 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Lingegowd Detective & Security Chamber Pvt Ltd supplied security personnel to Mysore Kirloskar Ltd. The Authority under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 ordered Lingegowd to pay minimum wages to its workmen by treating them as engaged in a scheduled employment. Lingegowd challenged the order in a writ petition; a Single Jud

LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusSMT. S. SINDHU

2006 INSC 2904 May 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) issued a 20‑year life insurance policy to K, who paid premiums for three years before the policy lapsed and later died. LIC paid the statutory paid‑up value of Rs 1,13,750 as per the policy’s non‑forfeiture clause, but the claimant, Smt. S. Sindhu, sought the full sum assur

HARI SHANKAR SINGHANIA AND ORS.versusGAUR HARI SINGHANIA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 1974 April 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Three brothers dissolved their partnership in 1987 but later disagreed over the division of immovable assets. After numerous letters seeking an amicable settlement, the last correspondence was dated 29 September 1989. The appellants filed a petition under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 on 8 May 1992 to refer t

PUNJAB STATE INDUSTRIAL DEV. CORPN. LTD.versusP.N.F.C. KARAMCHARI SANGH AND ANR.

2006 INSC 1984 April 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd (PSIDC) promoted Punjab National Fertiliser & Chemical Ltd (PNFC), which was wound up under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985. PNFC failed to pay wages to its workers, who approached the Punjab Chief Minister, who issued a note requestin

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., SHIMLAversusTILAK SINGH AND ORS.

2006 INSC 1994 April 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant insurer had issued a statutory third‑party motor insurance policy for a scooter sold by respondent No.5 to respondent No.1 in March 1989, but no notice of the transfer was given to the insurer. The scooter was involved in an accident on 31 October 1989, after the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 came into force,

HARIHAR NATH AND ORS.versusSTATE BANK OF INDIA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 2004 April 2006Dismissed

The appellants, directors of Nalanda Ceramic & Industries Ltd., had secured a loan from State Bank of India by mortgaging the company's assets and providing personal guarantees. The bank filed a title mortgage suit against the company and the directors, but the High Court later ordered the winding up of the company. Th

KARNATAKA POWER CORPORATION LIMITED AND ANR.versusK. THANGAPPAN AND ANR.

2006 INSC 2014 April 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute arose from a 1979 settlement under Section 12(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act, whereby a workman who had been on the nominal muster roll was to be appointed to a vacancy when one arose. The workman failed to report for duty in 1979 and his name was removed; after nearly two decades he made representations

THE ASSOCIATED CEMENT COMPANIES LTD.versusGOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ANR.

2006 INSC 84 January 2006Dismissed

The Associated Cement Companies Ltd. challenged the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act’s amendment that introduced two different tax rates for cement depending on whether the price included packing material (16%) or excluded it (20%). The appellants argued that this differential treatment violated Article 14 of the C

RAJ KUMAR AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2006 INSC 94 January 2006Dismissed

The petitioners were Border Security Force (BSF) personnel who, relying on a 1995 government circular, resigned under Rule 19 of the BSF Rules in the hope of receiving pension benefits, although they had not completed the qualifying service required under the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972. After the mist

T. SUBRAMANIAMversusTHE STATE OF TAMIL NADU

2006 INSC 104 January 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, T. Subramaniam, an executive officer of a temple, was accused of accepting a bribe of Rs.200 while allegedly facilitating the grant of a patta for temple land. He explained that the money was received on behalf of a third party, PW‑6, as payment of lease‑rent arrears due to the temple, and that the compl

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusRASHID BABUBHAI MULANI

2006 INSC 114 January 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Rashid Babubhai Mulani, a talathi, demanded Rs 1,000 to delete a mortgagee's name from revenue records; the complainant paid Rs 300 after a trap was laid. Mulani accepted the marked notes and later claimed the payment was repayment of a government loan, supported by a purported notice sent by registered post. The High

KALLU @ MASIH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2006 INSC 124 January 2006Dismissed

On 5 July 1993, an unlawful assembly of twenty‑seven persons, armed with swords, spears and other weapons, attacked Sadruddin and four female members of his family at his house. The victim and several injured witnesses positively identified the four appellants as the assailants. The trial court acquitted all twenty‑sev

R. JANAKIRAMANversusSTATE REPRESENTED BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CBI, SPE, MADRAS

2006 INSC 134 January 2006Dismissed

The appellant, an Assistant Engineer of Southern Railway, was found with Rs.2,94,615 in cash during a CBI raid and was charged under Sections 5(1)(e) and 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act for possessing assets disproportionate to his known income. He claimed the cash represented loans of Rs.2,50,000 from two mon

NARMADA PD. YADAVversusSTATE OF M.P. AND ORS.

2006 INSC 7863 November 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Head Constable, was charged with illegally detaining a person and demanding a bribe of Rs.1,000 for the return of the person's belongings. The disciplinary authority dismissed him, but the appellate authority reduced the penalty to a two‑year demotion to Constable, a decision affirmed by the State Admi

BALDEV SINGH AND ORS. ETC.versusMANOHAR SINGH AND ANR. ETC.

2006 INSC 4893 August 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff filed a declaratory suit claiming ownership of certain land, alleging that sale deeds in his parents' names were benami transactions. The defendants denied the claim and later sought to amend their written statement to raise a limitation defence, assert that the parents had sufficient income to pay the pr

R. KALAVATHIversusTHE STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS.

2006 INSC 3793 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a detention order issued under Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1982, which labeled the detenu as a "goonda" on the basis that he habitually committed crimes. The petition challenging the detention alleged that the grounds relied on a single incident and

CHIEF ENGINEER, RANJIT SAGAR DAM AND ANR.versusSHAM LAL

2006 INSC 3803 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined an appeal by the Chief Engineer, Ranjit Sagar Dam (appellants) against a Labour Court order that reinstated workman Sham Lal and awarded back wages. The central questions were whether the burden of proof to show that a workman had worked at least 240 days in the year preceding termination res

SURENDRANAGAR DISTT. PANCHAYAT AND ANR.versusGANGABEN LALJIBHAI AND ORS.

2006 INSC 3813 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The employer, Surendranagar District Panchayat, terminated several daily‑wage workers and claimed that none had worked continuously for 240 days in the preceding year, a condition required under Section 25‑F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for retrenchment. The workers contended they had met the 240‑day requiremen

M/S. YASHWITH CONSTRUCTIONS (P) LTD.versusM/S. SIMPLEX CONCRETE PILES INDIA LTD. & ANR.

2006 INSC 3823 July 2006Dismissed

A dispute arose under an arbitration agreement between Yashwith Constructions and Simplex Concrete Piles. The Managing Director of the respondent appointed an arbitrator, who later resigned; the MD then appointed a substitute arbitrator pursuant to the agreement. The petitioner applied to the Chief Justice of the High

SAHEBRAO AND ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2006 INSC 2843 May 2006Dismissed

Sahebrao and Bhausaheb, husband and brother-in-law of Sangita, repeatedly demanded additional dowry (Rs 10,000 and a tape recorder) after her marriage, subjecting her to mental and physical cruelty. Within four months of marriage Sangita complained of harassment, was beaten, and eventually committed suicide. Her father

RAVI RAO GAIK WAD AND ORS.versusRAJAJINAGAR YOUTH SOCIAL WELFARE ASSON. AND ORS.

2006 INSC 2853 May 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants filed writ petitions seeking a declaration that they were deemed to have been granted licences for operating video‑game businesses under Clause 4(8) of the Licensing and Controlling of Place of Public Amusement (Bangalore City) Order, 1989. Respondent No. I filed a separate public‑interest petition that

NAVDEEPversusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

2006 INSC 2863 May 2006Disposed off

Navdeep, a government teacher, was terminated after an enquiry found she had tampered with her B.Sc. mark sheet to meet eligibility percentages for a teaching post. The enquiry officer concluded that marks in Economics were reduced and marks in Computer Application increased, indicating intentional falsification, thoug

ADITYAPUR INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 2873 May 2006Dismissed

The Adityapur Industrial Area Development Authority (the Authority) challenged a notice issued by the Income Tax Department requiring the bank to deduct TDS on interest earned on its fixed deposits, arguing that its income was exempt under Article 289 of the Constitution and Section 10(20) of the Income Tax Act as a lo

INDERPREET SINGH KAHLON AND ORS.versusSTA TE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

2006 INSC 2883 May 2006Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the termination of over 150 civil and judicial officers appointed by the Punjab Public Service Commission during the tenure of its chairman, who was alleged to have taken bribes and corrupted the selection process. The appellants argued that their services were dismissed without due process,

MALIK MAZHAR SULT AN AND ANR.versusU.P. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION AND ORS.

2006 INSC 1933 April 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission was directed to recruit 347 Civil Judges (Junior Division) starting in November 2002, but the examination was delayed until March 2004. The advertisement set the upper age limit as 35 years on 1 July 2004 and also claimed that candidates within the age on 1 July 2001 and 1 Ju

CHAIRMAN, NEYVELI LIGNITE CORPN. LTD.versusC. GOVINDA PADAYACHI AND ANR.

2006 INSC 1943 April 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Chairman, Neyveli Lignite Corp., acquired land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and paid compensation to the respondent, C. Govinda Pada Yachi, as determined by the Collector and later enhanced by a reference court. The High Court directed the appellant to deposit the enhanced amount, allowing the re

JOSEPH ANTONY LAZARUS (DEAD) BY LRS.versusA.J. FRANCIS

2006 INSC 1953 April 2006Dismissed

Mrs. Solomon Lazarus executed a Will in 1979 bequeathing her house property to her son Joseph Antony Lazarus and another son, Cecil Lazarus. Joseph Antony Lazarus applied for probate without disclosing other interested heirs, and probate was initially granted but later revoked on a petition by his sister A.J. Francis.

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.versusA.P. PAPER MILLS LTD.

2006 INSC 1963 April 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Maharashtra issued tender notices for the sale of forest bamboo units, requiring a 10% earnest money deposit. A.P. Paper Mills submitted its tender on the deadline of 15 July 1987 and deposited the earnest money. The tender notice stipulated that an offer remains valid for 45 days and cannot be withdrawn d

STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.versusRAJKUMAR SHARMA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 1353 March 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission advertised 544 Junior Engineer posts for the Hill Cadre of the undivided state and published a select list in 2000. After the creation of the new State of Uttaranchal, the Uttar Pradesh Government forwarded the list to Uttaranchal, which refused to appoint the candidates, cit

SOUTH BENGAL STATE TRANSPORT CORPN.versusSWAPAN KUMAR MITRA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 683 February 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Swapan Kumar Mitra, a bus driver of South Bengal State Transport Corporation, was removed from service after a departmental inquiry that relied on the District Magistrate's report and the inquiry officer's findings, despite being acquitted in a criminal trial for the same accident. He challenged the removal via a writ

M/S BSES LTD. (NOW RELIANCE ENERGY LTD.)versusM/S FENNER INDIA LTD: AND ANR.

2006 INSC 693 February 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Mis BSES Ltd. (now Reliance Energy Ltd.) awarded a captive power plant contract and issued four work orders to M/s Fenner India Ltd., which furnished four unconditional, irrevocable bank guarantees from State Bank of India. Under a "wrap‑around" agreement, BSES was entitled to encash the guarantees for any breach of th

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, JAIPURversusSHANKARLAL

2006 INSC 703 February 2006Disposed off

The respondent sought a writ under Article 226 directing the Municipal Corporation of Jaipur to regularise his plot of land based on a 1989 resolution of the Jaipur Development Authority (JDA). The corporation contended it was not bound by the predecessor authority's decision, and raised pleas of delay, laches and the

SUBE SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 673 February 2006Disposed off

Petitioner Sube Singh alleged that police illegally detained and tortured him and his family while trying to locate his son, who had killed a constable. He filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking directions to stop the alleged atrocities and compensation as a public law remedy for violation of Article 21. The Co

VIDYAWATI GUPTA AND ORS.versusBHAKTI HARI NAY AK AND ORS.

2006 INSC 713 February 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants filed a civil suit in the Original Side of the Calcutta High Court without attaching an affidavit, as required by the 2002 amendments to Section 26, Order IV and Order VI Rule 15 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court held the suit non‑est and set aside the interim

SHIVA NATH PRASADversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

2006 INSC 723 February 2006Dismissed

The case arose from a criminal complaint alleging that the deceased Priyamvada Devi Birla (PDB) and her husband Madhav Prasad Birla (MPB) had created five mutual trusts intended for charitable institutions, which were later allegedly revoked and the assets misappropriated through a forged will in favour of R.S. Lodha.

SARAT CHANDRA MISHRA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF ORLSSA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 23 January 2006Dismissed

The appellants, government employees, challenged a 1990 corrected seniority list issued by the State of Orissa, which had been upheld by the Orissa Administrative Tribunal in its order of 9 March 1992, confirming the 1984 list. Only one special leave petition was filed against that Tribunal order, and the Supreme Court

RAKESH KUMAR MISHRAversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

2006 INSC 33 January 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a police officer supervising a dacoity case, ordered a warrantless search of the residence of Respondent No.2, the father of a suspect, which led to a complaint alleging harassment. The Judicial Magistrate took cognizance of offences under IPC sections 342, 389, 469, 471 and 1208, and the appellant sough

STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANR.versusMOHAMMED AYUB NAZ

2006 INSC 43 January 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a government servant in Rajasthan, was absent from duty for about three years without permission, claiming illness. A disciplinary enquiry found him wilfully absent and terminated his service under Rule 86(3) of the Rajasthan Service Rules, which mandates removal for such misconduct. The Rajasthan High

STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.versusPROJECT UCHCHA VIDYA, SIKSHAK SANGH AND ORS.

2006 INSC 53 January 2006Disposed off

The State of Bihar launched a scheme to establish "Project Schools"—including at least one girls' high school in each block of backward areas—through circulars and a three‑man committee. Disputes arose over whether the identified schools were taken over by the State, whether they should be treated as nationalised schoo

ASHWIN S. MEHTA AND ANR.versusCUSTODIAN AND ORS.

2006 INSC 63 January 2006Disposed off

The Supreme Court heard appeals by Ashwin S. Mehta and other family members, who were notified persons under the Special Courts (Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions in Securities) Act, 1992, seeking release of residential flats and commercial premises that had been attached. The Special Court had allowed the Cus

STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.versusKGSD CANTEEN EMPLOYEES WELFARE ASSOCIATION AND ORS.

2006 INSC 73 January 2006Disposed off

The Karnataka Government ran a Secretariat canteen through a committee and appointed workers on an ad‑hoc basis. The workers claimed they were state employees entitled to regularisation and pay parity with government staff. The Karnataka High Court, treating the canteen as a Government Hospitality Organisation, ordered

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusSHAMBHU DAYAL NAGAR

2006 INSC 7822 November 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Assistant Sub-Inspector Shambhu Dayal Nagar was trapped after agreeing to accept a bribe of Rs.3500 from complainant Badan Singh. The money, smeared with phenolphthalein powder, was recovered from the accused's upper right pocket of his uniform shirt and the powder transfer was demonstrated by a pink colour change in a

JAGMODHAN MEHATABSING GUJARAL AND ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2006 INSC 7832 November 2006Disposed off

The appellants were charged with large‑scale theft of electricity after a surprise raid by State Electricity Board officials uncovered meter tampering and bypassing that concealed consumption of substantial power. They were convicted under Sections 39 and 44 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910, sentenced to three month

USHA AGARWALversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 7842 November 2006Dismissed

Sandip Agarwal, director of a company that enjoyed duty‑free import benefits under the DEEC scheme, was found to have diverted the imported goods to the domestic market, constituting smuggling. He was detained under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (C

RANBAXY LABORATORIES LTD.versusMUNICIPAL COUNCIL, ROPAR

2006 INSC 7852 November 2006Disposed off

Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd had been paying octroi duty on commercial heavy chemicals under Entry 40(a) of the Punjab Municipal Committee Act for 13 years. The Municipal Council of Ropar sought to re‑classify the same chemicals under Entry 40(e), which carries a higher rate, without any change in circumstances and without

COMMISSIONER OF TRADE TAX, U.P., LUCKNOWversusMIS. MODIPAN FIBRES COMPANY

2006 INSC 4862 August 2006Dismissed

Mis. Modipan Fibres Company claimed exemption under Uttar Pradesh Notification No. 1093/1991 for the turnover of goods sold in excess of its base production. The Assessing Authority allowed exemption only on sales made after the base production was achieved, while the company argued that exemption should apply to the e

KERALA STATE SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY MUSEUMversusRAMBAL COMPANY AND ORS.

2006 INSC 4872 August 2006Disposed off

The Kerala State Science & Technology Museum, a state‑owned society, entered into a construction contract with Rambal Company (Respondent No. I). After alleged breach, the museum terminated the contract and later issued a demand notice under Section 34 of the Revenue Recovery Act, 1968 for Rs 22,10,303. The respondent

M/S RAPTI COMMISSION AGENCYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

2006 INSC 4882 August 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an agent purchasing mentha oil in Uttar Pradesh for principals outside the state, was detained by the State Revenue for not deducting tax under Section 8‑E of the Uttar Pradesh Trade Tax Act, 1948. The agent filed a writ petition challenging the constitutional validity of Section 8‑E, arguing that the tr

MORINDA COOPERATIVE SUGAR MILLS LTD.versusMORINDA COOP. SUGAR MILLS WORKERS UNION

2006 INSC 3782 July 2006Dismissed

The Morinda Co‑op. Sugar Mills Workers Union filed a suit seeking a declaration that its members were entitled to a variable dearness allowance (VOA) under para 317(ii) of the Third Wage Board Report and an injunction restraining the mill from withdrawing the allowance. The mill contended that the suit was not maintain

HARYANA STATE ELECTRONICS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.versusMAMNI

2006 INSC 2752 May 2006Modified

The respondent was engaged on an ad‑hoc basis as a Junior Technician for successive 89‑day periods from 1990 to 1992, each appointment ending with a one‑ or two‑day gap before the next. She was terminated on 7 August 1992 and later raised an industrial dispute. The Labour Court ordered her reinstatement with back wages

ANIL RISHIversusGURBAKSH SINGH

2006 INSC 2772 May 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff filed a suit seeking a declaration that a sale deed dated 26‑03‑1991 was forged and therefore void. The defendant denied the allegation. The trial court, on the plaintiff's application, reframed the issue to question the validity of the deed, and the High Court upheld this reframing, holding that the defe

I. I. T.KANPURversusUMESH CHANDRA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 2782 May 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, appointed the respondent as Senior Pilot Instructor (Glider) with a superannuation age of 60 years. The respondent claimed that his post was an academic one and therefore his retirement age should be 62 years, obtaining a writ order from the Allahabad High Court in

NAGAR MAHAPALIKA (NOW MUNICIPAL CORPN.)versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

2006 INSC 2792 May 2006Case Partly allowed

The Uttar Pradesh Municipal Corporation (Nagar Mahapalika) appointed several workers as apprentices on an ad‑hoc basis before the State sanctioned the temporary posts for which they were purportedly hired. After the sanctioned period ended, the workers were terminated. The Labour Court held that, because they had worke

PREM SINGH AND ORS.versusBIRBAL AND ORS.

2006 INSC 2802 May 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned a sale deed executed in 1961 that purportedly showed a minor as a major, allegedly obtained by fraud. The minor later sued in 1979 to set aside the deed and claim a share in the land. The trial court dismissed the suit as barred by limitation, but the appellate court held the deed void and said limit

A. JITENDRANA THversusJUBILEE HILLS COOP. HOUSE BLD. SOC. AND ANR.

2006 INSC 2812 May 2006Disposed off

The appellant, whose mother had been provisionally allotted a plot by Jubilee Hills Cooperative Society, sought the same plot or an alternative after the society cancelled the provisional allotment for non‑payment and allotted the land to another member (S). The appellant obtained an award from the Assistant Registrar

U.O.I. AND ORS.versusBASHIR AHMED

2006 INSC 2822 May 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Bashir Ahmed, a former sepoy, served 9 years 7 months and 27 days, including a two‑year reserve liability, but did not meet the service length required for pension under the Army Instructions applicable at the time (15 years in colours and 2 years in reserve). The High Court, relying on a certificate of service that er

DUDHGANGA VIKAS SEWA SANTHA MARYADITversusDISTT. COLLECTOR-KOLHAPUR AND ORS.

2006 INSC 2832 May 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Dudhganga Vikas Sewa Santha Maryadit, invested in the shares of the Kolhapur District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. on 30‑12‑2002 and became a member of that federal society. An election for office‑bearers of the federal society was scheduled for April 2006, but the appellant's name was omitted from the

BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD. AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 1332 March 2006Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether the provision of telephone services by telecom operators constitutes a sale of goods, a service, or a composite contract of both, and consequently whether State governments can levy sales tax under Entry 54 of List II. The petitioners argued that the transaction is purely a service, i

STATE OF KARNATAKAversusPARAMJIT SINGH AND ORS.

2006 INSC 1342 March 2006Disposed off

The State of Karnataka and the Union of India appealed against a Karnataka High Court judgment that had struck down the proviso to Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 on the ground that it allowed tribunals to impose imprisonment or fine without prescribing a trial procedure, violating Articles 20 and 21 of

UNION PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSIONversusGIRISHJAYANTILAL VAGHELA AND ORS

2006 INSC 582 February 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Girish Jayanti Lal Vaghela was appointed as a Drugs Inspector on a six‑month renewable contract from 1996, without a public advertisement or selection under the recruitment rules. When the UPSC advertised a regular selection in 2001, the upper age limit of 30 years (relaxable by five years for government servants) appl

MILK PRODUCERS ASSOCIATION, ORISSA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF ORISSA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 592 February 2006Dismissed

The Milk Producers Association and other milk‑selling families (the appellants) had illegally occupied government land in Bhubaneswar and were ordered to vacate. The State, through the Chief Minister, had earlier promised to rehabilitate them in villages outside the city, but later withdrew the promise because the vill

S.N. CHANDRASHEKAR AND ANR.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 602 February 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants challenged the State of Karnataka's sanction permitting Respondent No.6 to convert a residential plot in Jayanagar into a commercial restaurant complex under Section 14‑A of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961. Although the Residents' Welfare Association eventually issued a no‑objection cer

R.K. PARVATHARAJ GUPTAversusK.C. JAYADEVA REDDY

2006 INSC 612 February 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, owner of agricultural land, had taken a bank loan and entered into a sale agreement with the respondent, who was to discharge the loan by depositing the mortgage amount and execute a sale deed. The appellant served a notice on 24 April 1984 demanding the respondent deposit the full amount and execute the

B.H.E.L. AND ANR.versusB.K. VIJAY AND ORS.

2006 INSC 622 February 2006Case Partly allowed

The respondent, B.K. Vijay, was appointed as a Safety Officer in BHEL's Jhansi factory and, although placed in the non‑executive SA‑II cadre, was given the status of a Senior Executive under Rule 5 of the U.P. Factories (Safety Officers) Rules, 1984. He filed a writ petition seeking to be treated as a Senior Executive

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, RAIPURversusM/S. HIRA CEMENT

2006 INSC 632 February 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Commissioner of Central Excise appealed against the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal’s dismissal of his appeal challenging the exemption granted to M/s Hira Cement, a small‑scale industry (SSI), under Notification No.1193‑CE dated 28‑Feb‑1993. The issue was whether Hira Cement’s use of the brand nam

THE CHAIRMAN RAILWAY BOARD AND ANR.versusT. VITTAL RAO AND ORS.

2006 INSC 652 February 2006Dismissed

The respondents, who were Train Superintendents, were placed in the supervisory category by a Railway Board circular dated 2 August 1984, which removed their entitlement to overtime allowance. On 11 April 2001 the Board issued another circular withdrawing the 1984 circular and stating that the practice followed during

RAM SARANversusI.G. OF POLICE, CRPF AND ORS.

2006 INSC 662 February 2006Dismissed

Ram Saran was appointed as a Constable in the Central Reserve Police Force by falsifying his date of birth on a school certificate. After 27 years of service, a departmental enquiry found him guilty of furnishing false information to secure appointment, a violation of Section 11(1) of the CRPF Act and Rule 14 of the CC

PHILOMINA JOSEversusFEDERAL BANK LTD. AND ORS.

2006 INSC 572 February 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Philomina Jose and others, sought to exercise their right of redemption under Order 34 Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) after sale decrees were passed in 1985 and 1989. The Kerala High Court dismissed their petitions, holding that the mortgage debt merged into the sale decree and that the ame

MOHD. YOUSUFversusSMT. AFAQ JAHAN AND ANR.

2006 INSC 12 January 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Mohd. Yousuf filed an application before the Chief Judicial Magistrate alleging forgery and fraud, prompting the magistrate to direct the police to register an FIR and investigate under Section 156(3) of the CrPC. The police filed a charge‑sheet, after which Afaq Jahan (respondent No. I) moved the High Court under Sect

MUIR MILLS UNIT OF N.T.C. (U.P) LTD.versusSWAYAM PRAKASH SRIVASTAVA AND ANR.

2006 INSC 9381 December 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Muir Mills Unit of N.T.C. (U.P.) Ltd. appointed Swayam Prakash Srivastava as a Legal Assistant on a one‑year probation. After the probation period the mill terminated his services for unsatisfactory performance. Srivastava raised an industrial dispute; the Labour Court held he was a workman and ordered reinstatement wi

PRAKASHversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2006 INSC 9391 December 2006Dismissed

The appellant Prakash, along with co‑accused Badrilal and Dinesh, chased the unarmed deceased Ramprasad with lathis. Prakash struck Ramprasad's leg, causing him to fall, after which Badrilal delivered a fatal blow to the head, leading to death from multiple skull fractures. The trial court convicted all three under Sec

STATE BANK OF HYDERABADversusTOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL

2006 INSC 9401 December 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The State Bank of Hyderabad sued the Town Municipal Council for an injunction concerning a plot it had purchased at public auction. During the proceedings the bank sought leave to amend its plaint, which was initially allowed by the appellate court. The High Court set aside that order, relying on the proviso added to O

M/S. SIEMENS LTD.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 9411 December 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Siemens Ltd., a multi‑location company, owned a factory within the Bombay Municipal Corporation (BMC) limits and another outside those limits. The BMC issued a show‑cause notice demanding payment of municipal cess on goods supplied from the factory outside its jurisdiction. Siemens filed a writ petition under Article 2

STATE OF KERALA AND ORS.versusUNNI AND ANR.

2006 INSC 9421 December 2006Disposed off

The State of Kerala prosecuted licensees Unni and others for selling toddy whose ethyl alcohol content exceeded the limits prescribed in Rule 9(2) of the Kerala Abkari Shops (Disposal in Auction) Rules, invoking Sections 56 and 57 of the Abkari Act. The High Court had upheld the rule, but the Supreme Court examined whe

M/S ASHOKA SMOKELESS COAL IND. P. LTD. AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 9431 December 2006Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the constitutionality of Coal India Ltd.'s electronic auction (E‑Auction) scheme for allocating coal to non‑core sector consumers. The petitioners argued that coal is an essential commodity and that the scheme's variable pricing, lack of a fixed price, and inclusion of core‑sector entities vi

REGIONAL MANAGER, SBI.versusMAHATMA MISHRA

2006 INSC 7731 November 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Mahatma Mishra was appointed by the State Bank of India as a temporary messenger for a fixed period of 88 days in 1982 and was terminated thereafter. He claimed that the termination violated Section 25‑H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and sought reinstatement with full back wages. The Labour Court held the termin

MANISH RATAN AND ORS.versusSTATE OF M.P. AND ORS

2006 INSC 7741 November 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Manish Ratan and others were accused of dowry harassment and ill‑treatment of their wife, who lived in Jabalpur. The complainant lodged a FIR at Datia police, alleging that the offences occurred at Jabalpur, and the case was tried by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Datia. The appellants challenged the jurisdiction, argu

VITHALversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2006 INSC 7751 November 2006Dismissed

The appellant Vithal was convicted of murder (IPC s.302) for allegedly pouring kerosene on the deceased Vishwanath and setting him alight, causing 98% burn injuries. Four dying declarations of the deceased were recorded by police officers and an executive magistrate; all named the appellant and were consistent. The tri

STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.versusHARIHAR BHOLE NATH

2006 INSC 7761 November 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Harihar Bhole Nath, a Deputy Inspector General of Registration, was charged in 1993 with misconduct causing financial loss to the Government and was suspended by order of the Governor. Although the suspension was stayed, he retired on 31 March 1993. A departmental enquiry was later initiated on 4 January 1997, after hi

MANAGEMENT OF KSRTC TH. CHIEF LAW OFFICERversusR. KRISHNA REDDY

2006 INSC 7771 November 2006Dismissed

The Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) had a settlement with its employees that tied the rate of Dearness Allowance (DA) to the rates sanctioned by the State Government and required any merger of DA with basic pay to be considered for calculating gratuity. The State Government issued a Government Order

MATHURA PRASADversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 7781 November 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Mathura Prasad, a casual labourer, was shortlisted for regularisation and his service card was sent for verification, where it was deemed fake. A departmental inquiry was held, but the inquiry officer’s report did not clearly state whether the card was genuine. The disciplinary authority sent a demi‑official letter ask

SHEKHAR GHOSHversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2006 INSC 7791 November 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a railway employee, was promoted from Khalasi to Junior Clerk and later Senior Clerk, but was later repatriated to his original post of Khalasi on the basis of a complaint by four colleagues alleging irregular promotion. The authorities claimed a mistake in the service record and reverted him without con

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