Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

Judgments of 2016

588 judgments, newest first — showing 401–588.

"IN RE: THE PUNJAB TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT ACT, 2004"versus.

2016 INSC 101810 November 2016Reference answered

The Supreme Court was asked by the President, under Article 143, to opine on the constitutional validity of the Punjab Termination of Agreements Act, 2004, which sought to terminate the 1981 Punjab‑Haryana‑Rajasthan water‑sharing agreement and nullify Supreme Court decrees ordering completion of the Sutlej‑Yamuna Link

MANGANESE ORE INDIA LTD.versusSTATE OF M.P. & ORS.

2016 INSC 101710 November 2016Appeal(s) allowed

Manganese Ore India Ltd. challenged the levy of a 40% electricity duty on its ferro‑manganese plant, arguing that the plant’s activities constitute manufacturing, not "processing" as defined in Explanation (b) of Part B of the Madhya Pradesh Electricity Duty Act, 1949. The State contended that the plant fell within the

STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ORS.versusRAJIV BERRY & ORS.

2016 INSC 58910 August 2016Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined two civil appeals arising from the acquisition of land for the expansion of the Uttarakhand Secretariat. The State of Uttarakhand invoked the urgency clause under Section 17(4) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, initially dispensing with the opportunity to object under Section 5A, but later a

BALVEER SINGH & ANR.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.

2016 INSC 40110 May 2016Dismissed

The appeal arose from a dowry‑death case where the police report did not name the parents of the deceased as accused. The complainant sought cognizance against them under Sections 304‑B and 498‑A IPC. The Judicial Magistrate of First Class rejected the application and committed the case to the Sessions Court for trial

MUKUL SHARMAversusORION INDIA (P) LTD. THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR

2016 INSC 40010 May 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Mukul Sharma, entered into a sale deed with Orion India for a specified built‑up area of a building. A dispute arose over whether the term "built‑up area" included common areas such as lifts, corridors and lobbies. Initially the plaintiff understood it to include common areas, but later raised a dispute

VOHRA SADIKBHAI RAJAKBHAI & ORS.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

2016 INSC 39810 May 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, owners of agricultural land adjacent to the Mazum dam, claimed compensation for loss of fruit‑bearing trees after the State of Gujarat released 60,000 cusecs of water from the dam during heavy monsoon rains. The respondents argued that the release was necessitated by an act of God and was in the public

A. SLVAPRAKASHversusSTATE OF KERALA

2016 INSC 39710 May 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an Assistant Engineer in the Public Works Department, issued a letter dated 9 June 1992 that the prosecution termed a "stage certificate" for a Jawahar Rozgar Yojana (JRY) construction project. Payments amounting to 50% of the contract value were subsequently released to the contractor, A‑3. The trial co

EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATIONversusA. K. ABDUL SAMAD & ANR.

2016 INSC 25510 March 2016

The respondents were convicted by the Special Court for Economic Offences for failing to pay contributions under the Employees' State Insurance Corporation Act, 1948 and were sentenced to imprisonment until further order and a fine of Rs 1,000. The corporation appealed, contending that Section 85(a)(i)(b) mandates a mi

CHARANJIT KAURversusBIKRAM SINGH & ANR.

2016 INSC 25710 March 2016Disposed off

Charanjit Kaur filed a criminal complaint under Sections 498A, 406 and 1208 of the IPC alleging dowry harassment and criminal conspiracy by her husband, Bikram Singh. The trial court convicted the husband and sentenced him to one year imprisonment for each offence, with a fine of Rs.1,000. The Sessions Court dismissed

BABITA BADASARIA & ORSversusPATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS.

2016 INSC 25810 March 2016Directions issued

The Supreme Court upheld its earlier order directing demolition of the unauthorized floors of a multi‑storeyed building constructed by Saket Housing Ltd. in Patna, noting massive deviations from the sanctioned plan, including excess floors and FAR. The petitioners, owners of flats in the building, sought to have the so

INDRANI WAHIversusREGISTRAR OF COOP. SOCIETIES & ORS.

2016 INSC 25910 March 2016Disposed off

Indrani Wahi, the sole nominee of her deceased father Biswa Ranjan Sengupta under Section 79 of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act, 1983, sought transfer of his cooperative society share. The Deputy Registrar refused, contending that a married daughter did not fall within the definition of "family" under Rule 1

BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusN. JAYAMMA

2016 INSC 25610 March 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) acquired land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, but the original owner retained actual possession and later sold the parcel to N. Jayamma in 1994. Jayamma built a house and, after more than twelve years, sued for a declaration of title on the basis of adverse possession. Th

HAMANT YASHWANT DHAGEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

2016 INSC 15310 February 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Hamant Yashwant Dhage, filed a complaint and sought registration of an FIR for a cognizable offence. The Judicial Magistrate refused to register the FIR, prompting the appellant to approach the High Court via a writ petition, which also declined to direct registration. The Supreme Court, recalling its ea

STATE OF KARNATAKAversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.

2016 INSC 12109 December 2016Hearing Adjourned

The Supreme Court examined appeals filed by Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu challenging the final order of the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal. The core issue was whether Article 262(2) of the Constitution together with Section 11 and Section 6(2) of the Inter‑State River Water Disputes Act, 1956 bars the Court’s powe

M/S ALCON ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD.versusCELEM S.A. OF FOS 34320 ROUJAN, FRANCE & ANR.

2016 INSC 11209 December 2016Dismissed

The appellant, Alcon Electronics, challenged the execution in India of an English Court order that dismissed its jurisdictional plea and ordered it to pay costs of £12,229.75. The central question was whether such an interlocutory order is a conclusive foreign judgment under Section 13 of the CPC and whether it qualifi

MUTHURAMALINGAM & ORS.versusSTATE REPRESENTED BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2016 INSC 11189 December 2016Disposed off

On 10 February 1994, a group of accused assembled unlawfully in Ramanathapuram, Tamil Nadu, and attacked the family of the deceased Rajendran, killing eight persons including a one‑year‑old child. The trial court convicted the accused under various provisions of the IPC and sentenced them to life imprisonment for each

HDFC SECURITIES LTD. & ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

2016 INSC 11199 December 2016Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered an appeal by HDFC Securities Ltd. and its officers challenging the registration of an FIR and a magistrate’s order under Section 156(3) of the CrPC directing police investigation into alleged unauthorized trades. The appellants argued that the order caused irreparable injury and should be q

MAHAVIR SINGHversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2016 INSC 10149 November 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned Mahavir Singh, who was convicted by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh for murder under Section 302 IPC, overturning an acquittal by the trial court. The prosecution's case relied on the statements of several eyewitnesses, the seizure of a gun and cartridges from the accused, and alleged enmity between

STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS.versusNEELAM NAG & ANR.

[2016] 8 S.C.R. 4369 November 2016Order modified

The Supreme Court of India, in Civil Appeal No. 4715 of 2011 (State Bank of India & Ors. v. Neelam Nag & Anr.), issued a correction to its earlier judgment dated 16 September 2016. The correction clarifies that the name "Neelam Nag" in the cause title should read "Neelam Nag & Anr." and that every occurrence of the wor

REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY & ORS.versusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2016 INSC 10169 November 2016Disposed off

The case concerned the Tamil Nadu Government's decision to relax the qualifying marks in the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) by 5% for candidates belonging to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes, and other disadvantaged groups. The petitioners challenged the relaxation on grounds of lack of statut

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusSUKHBIR SINGH & OTHERS

2016 INSC 8649 September 2016Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the meaning of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The case involved land notified for acquisition in 1961, an award made in 1997, possession taken in 2000, and compensation that was deposited with th

PANKAJversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2016 INSC 8629 September 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Pankaj was convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC and Section 3 read with Section 25 of the Arms Act for allegedly shooting his brother-in-law Raj Kumar, who later died. The prosecution's case rested on the sole eye‑witness testimony of the victim's brother (PW‑8) and corroboration by

VIJAY KUMAR MISHRA AND ANR.versusHIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA AND ORS.

2016 INSC 5869 August 2016Appeal(s) allowed

Vijay Kumar Mishra and another, who had qualified for the Subordinate Judicial Service of Bihar, applied for the District Judge Entry Level (Direct from Bar) interview but were barred by the Patna High Court on the ground of Article 233(2) of the Constitution, which it interpreted to prohibit their participation in the

GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LTD.versusESSAR POWER LIMITED

2016 INSC 5879 August 2016Appeal(s) allowed

Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. (GUVNL) appealed against the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity’s order that Essar Power Ltd. (EPL) had no contractual duty to declare its generating capacity on a 300 MW : 215 MW (58 % : 42 %) basis. The Supreme Court examined the Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) and held that the agreement

M/S. HCL LNFOSYSTEM LTD.versusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

2016 INSC 5859 August 2016Dismissed

The case concerned HCL Infosystem Ltd., a co‑accused in the National Rural Health Mission (NRHM) scam, where the sole public servant co‑accused had died before any charge was framed under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act). The issue was whether the Special Judge appointed under s.3(1) of the PC Act could

ASSOCIATION OF MANAGEMENTS OF UNAIDED PRIVATE MEDICAL & DENTAL COLLEGE & ANR. NTAL COLLEGE & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS. (INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO. 2) (FOR DIRECTIONS)

2016 INSC 3969 May 2016Disposed off

Private unaided medical and dental colleges, along with some states, sought modification of the Supreme Court's order directing that the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET) be conducted for the 2016-17 academic year. The Court examined whether the NEET regulation infringed on the constitutional rights of stat

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXversusM/S. MEGHALAYA STEELS LTD.

2016 INSC 2539 March 2016Dismissed

The appellant, the Commissioner of Income Tax, challenged the deduction claimed by M/s. Meghalaya Steels Ltd. of Rs.2,74,09,386 as subsidies (transport, interest, power, insurance) under Sections 80‑IB and 80‑IC of the Income Tax Act. The issue was whether such subsidies constitute "profits and gains derived from busin

BALWAN SINGH & ORS.versusLAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR & ANR.

2016 INSC 2509 March 2016

The appellants, dispossessed of their land on 1 July 1984, sought interest for the period until the notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was issued on 2 September 1993. The Supreme Court examined earlier decisions which held that while statutory interest under the Act is not payable, land o

SHAKUNTALA YADAV AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

2016 INSC 2519 March 2016Appeal(s) allowed

Shakuntala Yadav and others owned 1.48 acres of land in village Sahaul, Gurgaon, and applied for release of the land under Section 48 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, claiming it fell within the Lal Dora area. The High Powered Committee rejected the request, stating that possession of the land had already been taken

M/S. ANSAL HOUSING AND CONSTRUCTION LIMITEDversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS

2016 INSC 2529 March 2016Disposed off

The dispute involved Mis Ansal Housing and Construction Ltd (the developer) and the allottees regarding stamp duty liability under Sections 33 and 47A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, in connection with a bipartite agreement between the State of Uttar Pradesh and the developer and a tripartite agreement among the State,

PRATIBHA RAMESH PATELversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2016 INSC 2549 March 2016Dismissed

Petitioner Pratibha Ramesh Patel filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution challenging the constitutionality of sections 2, 12 and 15(a) of the Enforcement of Security Interest and Recovery of Debts Laws (Amendment) Act, 2012, which incorporated cooperative societies within the SARFAESI regime. The sam

REENA BANERJEE & ANR.versusGOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.

2016 INSC 11168 December 2016Disposed off

The petitioners filed a writ petition alleging deplorable conditions at Asha Kiran Home, a Delhi Government-run facility for persons with disabilities, and suggested remedial measures. The Delhi High Court directed a joint meeting, accepted the Government's report of actions taken, and disposed of the petition without

STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR & ORSversusDISTRICT BAR ASSOCIATION, BANDIPORA

2016 INSC 11118 December 2016Disposed off

The State of Jammu & Kashmir appealed against two orders of the High Court issued in a public‑interest litigation concerning the construction of a district court complex. The High Court, while hearing the PIL, directed the State to regularise 209 daily‑rated workers employed in the High Court and district courts, treat

ALL INDIA POWER ENGINEER FEDERATION & ORS.versusSASAN POWER LTD. & ORS. ETC.

2016 INSC 11148 December 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute concerned the commercial operation date (COD) of Unit‑3 of the Sasan Ultra Mega Power Project under a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) dated 7‑8‑2007. The procurers alleged that the generator had not met the PPA’s requirement of operating at least 95% of the contracted capacity for 72 consecutive hours, and t

COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER & ORS.versusSTATE BANK OF INDIA & ANR.

2016 INSC 10068 November 2016Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered whether the State Bank of India (SBI), acting on a Reserve Bank of India (RBI) directive to purchase Exim scrips (formerly replenishment licences) at a 20% premium and subsequently cancel them, was liable to purchase tax under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941. The revenue argued tha

BHUPINDER SINGH BAWAversusASHA DEVI

2016 INSC 10108 November 2016Dismissed

The tenant Bhupinder Singh Bawa occupied a two‑room premises in New Delhi under a rent deed dated 20 July 1989. The landlord Asha Devi, who acquired the property in 2002, filed an eviction petition under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, claiming a bona‑fide requirement for her son to run a sanitary

VOLUNTARY HEALTH ASSOCIATION OF PUNJABversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2016 INSC 10138 November 2016Disposed off

The Supreme Court heard two writ petitions challenging the implementation of the Pre‑conception and Pre‑natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 and its Rules. The petitioners sought directions for stricter enforcement, a centralised civil‑registration database, training of officials, and al

STATE BANK OF PATIALAversusMUKESH JAIN & ANR.

2016 INSC 10078 November 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The State Bank of Patiala had advanced a term loan of Rs.8 lakh to Mukesh Jain, who defaulted and the bank invoked the SARFAESI Act, issuing a notice under Section 13(2). Jain challenged the SARFAESI proceedings by filing a civil suit, prompting the bank to move an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC asserti

NATHIYAversusSTATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, BAGAYAM POLICE STATION, VELLORE

2016 INSC 10088 November 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The trial court convicted Nathiya and Suresh under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC for the murder of Gurunathan, relying on circumstantial evidence and alleged confessional statements. The High Court upheld the conviction, but on appeal the Supreme Court examined the evidence and found no eye‑witness, an in

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusLBS B.ED. COLLEGE AND ORS.

2016 INSC 11998 September 2016Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether the State Government of Rajasthan could influence the grant of recognition to private teacher‑training institutions under the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) Act, 1993 and its 2014 Regulations. The State argued that its recommendations were binding, while the NCTE conten

M/S HARISH CHANDRA & COMPANYversusSTATE OF U.P. THR. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER

2016 INSC 8598 September 2016Disposed off

The dispute arose from a contract for earthwork where M/s Harish Chandra & Co. claimed payment for several items and the arbitrator awarded three of the six claims. The State of U.P. challenged the award under Section 30 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, alleging the arbitrator had committed legal misconduct by exceeding t

NARAYANAPPA (D) BY LRS.versusB.S. RAMASWAMY (D) BY LRS. & ORS.

2016 INSC 5818 August 2016Dismissed

Narayanappa filed a Form‑7 application in 1974 seeking occupancy rights over Survey No. 93, which the Karnataka Land Reforms Tribunal rejected in 1981 on the ground that he was not a tenant. After the statutory cut‑off date of 30 June 1979, he later applied to amend the same Form‑7 to claim a different parcel of land (

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, AHMEDABADversusM/S. GUJARAT AMBUJA EXPORTS LIMITED

2016 INSC 5808 August 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The Commissioner of Central Excise challenged Gujarat Ambuja Exports Ltd.'s claim of a concessional customs duty rate on imported crude palm oil under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus (as amended by Notification No. 66/2004). The importer used the crude oil mainly to produce refined edible oil (about 75% of the output) and

ARVIND KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2016 INSC 5798 August 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, legal heirs of a tenure‑holder, challenged an order dated 13‑Jan‑1975 that declared 51.29 acres of their land surplus under the Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960. An appeal against that order was filed and later dismissed, but the appellants argued that the appeal had abated

AL ISMAIL HAJ TOURversusUNION OF INDIA

2016 INSC 5088 July 2016Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the validity of the Ministry of External Affairs' requirement that Private Tour Operators (PTOs) produce proof of payments for air tickets and accommodation (stipulation (vii) of Annexure A) for each year when seeking allocation of Haj quota. The petitioners, PTOs already registered under Cat

CENTRE FOR PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATIONversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2016 INSC 3008 April 2016Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined a writ petition challenging the Government's decision to allow migration of Broadband Wireless Access (BWA) spectrum to a Unified License (UL) and the imposition of a Rs 1,658 crore migration fee and a 1% spectrum usage charge (SUC) on Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd. The petitioners alleged that t

STATE OF KERALA & ORS.versusM/S. KERALA RARE EARTH & MINERALS LIMITED & ORS.

2016 INSC 3018 April 2016Dismissed

The State of Kerala granted mining leases for beach‑sand minerals but later stayed them pending an environmental impact study and subsequently rejected the applications, citing its 2007 industrial policy that such minerals be exploited only by State or Central public‑sector undertakings. The respondents filed revision

RICHA MISHRAversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND ORS.

2016 INSC 1478 February 2016Appeal(s) allowed

Richa Mishra, an Excise Sub‑Inspector, applied for the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police and cleared all stages of the competitive examination, but was omitted from the final list because she exceeded the upper age limit of 25 years prescribed in the Chhattisgarh Police Executive (Gazetted) Service Recruitment an

SURJEET SINGH BHAMRAversusBANK OF INDIA & ORS.

2016 INSC 1468 February 2016Dismissed

The appellant, a Branch Manager of Bank of India, was served a charge‑sheet for alleged loan‑disbursement irregularities and was punished by reduction of basic pay. He had applied for voluntary retirement under the Bank's Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 2000, before the scheme's deadline, but the bank accepted his applica

CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA & ORS.versusCENTRAL BANK OF INDIA SC/ST EMPLOYEES WELFARE ASSOCIATION & ORS.

2016 INSC 328 January 2016Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court had earlier held that there is no reservation in promotion by selection for Group‑A posts (salary up to Rs 5700) in banks, only a concession, but the judgment also contained a contradictory paragraph stating that reservation applies to posts with salary less than Rs 5700 (pre‑revised) and thus directe

USMANGANJADAMBHAIVAHORAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

2016 INSC 308 January 2016

The accused filed an application under Section 408 of the CrPC seeking transfer of a criminal trial from one Additional Sessions Judge to another after the trial had already commenced. The Principal Sessions Judge rejected the petition, holding that he lacked jurisdiction to transfer a case once trial began. The High C

ROBUST HOTELS PVT. LTD. & ORS.versusEIH LIMITED & ORS.

2016 INSC 11077 December 2016Disposed off

EIH Ltd. entered into a Technical Services Agreement with Balaji Hotels (BHEL) for operating a hotel, and paid Rs 15.21 crore as financial accommodation. BHEL later obtained financial assistance from IFCI and TFCI, which sold the hotel unit to Robust Hotels under SARFAESI proceedings despite an interim injunction that

ZORAWAR SINGH AND ANR.versusGURBAX SINGH BAINS AND ORS.

2016 INSC 12077 November 2016Proceedings closed/dropped

The Supreme Court, recalling its earlier directions in Zorawar Singh v. Gurbax Singh Bains (2015) 2 SCC 572, noted that the State had filed a report under Section 173 of the CrPC after conducting a thorough investigation as directed, and that the Chief Secretary’s inquiry report showed compliance with the Court’s manda

PRAMOD JAIN AND OTHERSversusSECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA

2016 INSC 10037 November 2016Dismissed

The appellants Pramod Jain and others made a hostile public offer to acquire 25% of Golden Tobacco Ltd. and later sought to withdraw the offer, alleging that SEBI’s undue delay in approving their draft letter of offer allowed the target company to siphon assets and erode its net worth, defeating the offer’s purpose. SE

TIN PLATE DEALERS ASSOCIATION PVT. LTD. & ORS.versusSATISH CHANDRA SANWALKA & ORS.

2016 INSC 9597 October 2016Disposed off

The dispute involved the Sanwalka group, who alleged oppression by the Gupta group after the latter took control of Tin Plate Dealers Association Pvt. Ltd. The Sanwalka group filed a company petition under ss.397/398 of the Companies Act, 1956 challenging the forfeiture of their shares, the issuance of bonus shares out

UNION OF INDIA & ANR.versusM/S MEGHMANI ORGANICS LTD. & ORS.

2016 INSC 9607 October 2016Directions issued

The Supreme Court examined the interpretation of Rule 7 of the Customs Tariffs (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Anti‑Dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995, to determine whether the Designated Authority (DA) could claim confidentiality for its own reasons or findings.

SALAM SAMARJEET SINGHversusHIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL.& ANR.

[2016] 9 S.C.R. 7717 October 2015Directions issued

The petitioner, Salam Samarjeet Singh, was the sole candidate to clear the written examination for the District Judge (Entry Level) post under the Manipur Judicial Service Rules, 2005, but was declared unsuccessful in the viva‑voce because the High Court, shortly before the interview, resolved that a minimum of 40% mar

GIRISH RAGHUNATH MEHTAversusINSPECTOR OF CUSTOMS AND ANOTHER

2016 INSC 8577 September 2016Dismissed

The appellant, Girish Raghunath Mehta, was convicted under the NDPS Act for selling 30 kg of opium poppy straw to a co‑accused who lacked a licence. The contraband was seized from the co‑accused during a raid, and the appellant’s statement under Section 67 of the Act admitted the sale. The appellant challenged the conv

MIS. ALKALI MANUFACTURERS ASSN. OF INDIAversusDESIGNATED AUTHORITY, D.A.D.A.S. & ORS.

2016 INSC 11627 January 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The Mis. Alkali Manufacturers Association of India filed a petition under the Anti‑Dumping Rules alleging that caustic soda imported from China and Korea was being dumped, leading to injury to the domestic industry. The Designated Authority (DA) investigated, found dumping, and imposed provisional anti‑dumping duties,

PARDEEP SHARMAversusCHIEF ADMINISTRATOR HARYANA URBAN DEV. AUTHORITY & ANR

2016 INSC 267 January 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was allotted a plot by HUDA but failed to pay the balance instalments, leading to non‑delivery of possession. He filed a complaint before the District Consumer Forum seeking possession, and during the proceedings accepted a 10% refund of the amount paid, a fact he did not disclose. The Forum ordered re‑al

SUDIP KR. SEN @ BILTUversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.

2016 INSC 277 January 2016Dismissed

The appellants were convicted for the murder of Saikat Saha under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC, based primarily on the testimony of a single eyewitness, PW‑6, who described how the accused acted in concert to kill the victim. The appellants challenged the conviction, arguing that the sole witness's evide

K.S. SANJEEV (DEAD) BY LRS. ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF KERALA AND ANR.

2016 INSC 227 January 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, owners of land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, were awarded Rs 11,000 per cent as compensation by the Land Acquisition Officer. They contended that a comparable parcel of land (document A‑4) had been sold for Rs 17,250 per cent on 27‑Oct‑1986, and that this sale should be considered for e

RANDHIR @ RANDHIR PAL & ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

2016 INSC 9566 October 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The victim Laxman was shot and killed inside his shop on 26 November 2002, with six accused alleged to have entered the shop armed and assaulted him. Five other accused (A2, A4, A7, A8, A11) were alleged to have been standing outside the shop, preventing people from entering or moving along the street. The prosecution

NARENDRAversusK. MEENA

2016 INSC 9526 October 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant husband filed a petition for divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, alleging cruelty by his wife who made false accusations of an extra‑marital affair, threatened suicide, and insisted that he separate from his parents. The Family Court found these acts amounted to mental cruelty

HIRAL P. HARSORA AND ORS.versusKUSUM NAROTTAMDAS HARSORA AND ORS.

2016 INSC 9556 October 2016Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the definition of "respondent" in Section 2(q) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, which limited it to an "adult male person". The Court held that this restriction bore no rational relation to the Act's purpose of protecting women from all forms of domestic violence a

COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAX, U.P.versusM/S. A.R. THERMOSETS (PVT.) LTD.

2016 INSC 8546 September 2016Dismissed

The appellant, Commissioner of Commercial Tax, Uttar Pradesh, challenged the High Court's decision that bitumen emulsion manufactured by the respondent falls under Entry 22 of Schedule II of the VAT Act, which taxes "bitumen" at 4%. The respondent had earlier sought clarification on the tax rate and was taxed at 12.5%

DHARIWAL INDUSTRIES LTD.versusKISHORE WADHWANI & ORS.

2016 INSC 8536 September 2016Disposed off

Dhariwal Industries Ltd filed a complaint under Sec. 200 CrPC alleging several IPC offences. After the police investigation and filing of a charge‑sheet, the accused applied for discharge under Sec. 239 CrPC. The appellant sought, orally, permission to be heard alongside the Assistant Public Prosecutor at the charge‑fr

L. NARAYANA SWAMYversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.

2016 INSC 8566 September 2016Dismissed

The petitioners alleged that certain public officials abused their positions to facilitate a land transaction and sought quashing of the criminal proceedings initiated under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The High Court had dismissed the petition, holding that the order directing investigation under Section 156(3) C

LUDOVICO SAGRADO GOVEIAversusCIRILA ROSA MARIA PINTO AND ORS.

2016 INSC 8556 September 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a successful purchaser at a sealed‑tender sale, sought to enforce a sale certificate issued after the execution of an award under the Multi‑State Co‑operative Societies Act, 1984. The respondents, borrowers, had defaulted on a loan and the property was sold after multiple failed public auctions. The High

STATE OF HLMACHAL PRADESHversusRAJIV JASSI

2016 INSC 3846 May 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Himachal Pradesh appealed the High Court's acquittal of Dr. Rajiv Jass, who was convicted by a trial court for murdering his pregnant wife by forcibly administering organophosphorus poison. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence, including multiple ante‑mortem injuries on the victim, the accused

PRABHAKAR VITHAL GHOLVEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2016 INSC 3896 May 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Prabhakar Vithal Golve, was convicted under Section 302 IPC for the fatal assault of a deceased man, allegedly triggered by a minor grievance over a telephonic message. The prosecution failed to establish any motive for the killing, and the evidence showed that the assault was a spontaneous reaction to t

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, RAIGADversusM/S. ISPAT METALLICS INDUSTRIES LTD. & ORS

2016 INSC 3856 May 2016Dismissed

Mis. Ispat Industries Ltd (IIL) and its sister concern Mis. Ispat Metallics Industries Ltd (IMIL) jointly procured iron ore pellets under a tripartite agreement with the supplier. IIL availed CENVAT credit on the entire quantity and later transferred the pellets to IMIL, reversing the credit and issuing debit notes for

SATYENDRA KUMAR & ORS.versusRAJ NATH DUBEY & ORS.

2016 INSC 3886 May 2016Dismissed

The appeal concerned a land‑inheritance dispute where the petitioners sought to set aside an order of the Consolidation Officer that rejected their claim to a share of land. The petitioners argued that earlier judgments in a separate proceeding involving the same parties, but concerning a different parcel of land, shou

MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIAversusKALINGA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES (KIMS) & ORS.

2016 INSC 3906 May 2016Disposed off

The Medical Council of India (MCI) inspected Kalinga Institute of Medical Sciences (KIMS) after it sought to admit an additional 50 MBBS students for the 2015-16 academic year. The inspection uncovered serious deficiencies, and the MCI recommended that the Central Government deny the extra seats. The Central Government

SANTOSH DEVIversusUNION OF INDIA. & ORS.

2016 INSC 3876 May 2016Disposed off

Raj Singh, a Territorial Army (TA) enrollee since 1995, was disembodied on 31 March 2008 and died on 4 August 2008 while in that disembodied state. His wife filed a writ petition seeking family pension, which was denied by the Armed Forces Tribunal on the ground that he had not completed the fifteen years of embodied s

STANDARD CHARTERED BANKversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ETC.

2016 INSC 2986 April 2016Appeal(s) allowed

Standard Chartered Bank filed three complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against ABG Shipyard Ltd. and several of its directors for the dishonour of cheques issued to repay a Rs.200 crore loan. The Metropolitan Magistrate issued summons to the company and the directors, but the Bombay High Cou

SUSANTA DAS & ORS.versusSTATE OF ORISSA

2016 INSC 186 January 2016Dismissed

The appellants, five accused persons, were convicted for the murder of Padma Lochan Jena and grievous hurt to two others under Section 302 IPC read with Section 149 IPC. The prosecution proved that all five were present at the scene, armed with deadly weapons, and acted with a common object of revenge stemming from a c

PREM SAGAR MANOCHAversusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI)

2016 INSC 196 January 2016Appeal(s) allowed

In the Jessica Lal murder investigation, the police sought a forensic opinion on two .22 cartridges. The appellant, Deputy Director of the State Forensic Science Laboratory, reported that the cartridges were .22 caliber and likely from a pistol, but could not give a definitive opinion on whether they were fired from th

DARSHAN SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2016 INSC 176 January 2016Dismissed

The dispute arose between two families over irrigation rights and escalated into a violent clash in a court premises on 17 February 1995, resulting in two deaths and several injuries. Darshan Singh, the appellant, was charged with murder (IPC s.302) of Santa Singh and voluntarily causing hurt (IPC s.324) to others, but

STATE OF A.P.versusPATCHIMALA VIGNESWARUDU@ VIGGANNA @ GANAPATHI

2016 INSC 156 January 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Andhra Pradesh prosecuted Patchimala Vigneswarudu for the murder of his wife, alleging he strangled her after a night out, motivated by strained marital relations and suspicion of venereal disease transmission. The trial court convicted him under Section 302 IPC, but the High Court acquitted him, holding t

PRABHU CHAWLAversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.

2016 INSC 8515 September 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court heard appeals by Prabhu Chawla and Jagdish Upasane challenging a Rajasthan High Court order that dismissed their petitions under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., on the ground that the same relief could be obtained through a revision petition under Section 397. The Court examined a conflict between two ear

LARSEN & TOUBRO LIMITEDversusADDITIONAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES & ANR.

2016 INSC 8525 September 2016Disposed off

Larsen & Toubro Ltd., a contractor, executed works contracts and assigned portions of the work to registered sub‑contractors who paid sales tax on their own turnover. The issue was whether the payments made to these sub‑contractors should be included in L&T's total turnover for computing turnover tax under Section 6‑B

SWAMI ACHYUTANAND TIRTH & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2016 INSC 5755 August 2016Disposed off

Petitioners filed a public‑interest writ seeking a mandamus directing the Union and several State governments to curb the sale of adulterated and synthetic milk, relying on a 2011 FSSAI report that 68.4% of milk samples nationwide were non‑conforming. The respondents argued that the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006

JAYAM & CO.versusASSISTANT COMMISSIONER & ANR.

2016 INSC 11905 August 2016Case Partly allowed

The case concerned dealers who claimed Input Tax Credit (ITC) under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. The dispute arose when the State amended Section 19 by inserting sub‑section (20), which required reversal of ITC if goods were sold at a price lower than the purchase price shown in the tax invoice. The amendm

AJAY GUPTAversusRAJU @ RAJENDRA SINGH YADAV

2016 INSC 4995 July 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff was required to file a suit by 31 December 2010, the last day of the court's winter vacation. 1 January 2011, a Saturday, was a non‑working day for judges but the registry remained open. The suit was filed on 3 January 2011. The trial court and the High Court held that the filing was within the limitation

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOCHIversusTRANS ASIAN SHIPPING SERVICES (P) LTD.

2016 INSC 5035 July 2016Dismissed

The Commissioner of Income Tax, Kochi appealed against Trans Asian Shipping Services (P) Ltd, which had elected to compute its income under the Tonnage Tax Scheme (TTS) of Chapter XIIG of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The dispute centered on whether income from slot‑charter arrangements, where the company did not own or fu

SUDHAKARANversusCORP. OF TRIVANDRUM & ANR.

2016 INSC 5015 July 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a tenant of a premises in Trivandrum, held a licence to operate a hardware shop that was originally granted with the landlord's written consent in 2001. When the licence expired, the corporation refused renewal because the landlord did not provide fresh consent. The Tribunal for Local Self Government Ins

MAHIPAL SINGH RANA, ADVOCATEversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2016 INSC 4925 July 2016Disposed off

Advocate Mahipal Singh Rana threatened a civil judge in Etah on two occasions, leading the Allahabad High Court to convict him of criminal contempt under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and impose two months' imprisonment, a fine, and a ban on appearing in Etah courts until he purged the contempt. The High Court also

MUKHTIAR SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2016 INSC 4985 July 2016Dismissed

Mukhtiar Singh, a revenue patwari, demanded Rs.600 from a complainant for a copy of a land record and was caught red‑handed when a police‑laid trap involving phenolphthalein‑treated currency notes was executed. The trial court convicted him under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988,

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusVISHAV PRIYA SINGH

2016 INSC 4955 July 2016Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined several writ petitions filed by army personnel who had been tried by Summary Courts Martial (SCM) convened by Commanding Officers (CO) of units other than the units to which they belonged. The Delhi High Court had held that only the CO of the accused's own unit could convene an SCM, while the

SURINDERJIT SINGH MAND & ANR.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

2016 INSC 4935 July 2016Dismissed

The case concerned the arrest and alleged illegal detention of Neeraj Kumar between 24‑06‑1999 and 28‑06‑1999 by two Deputy Superintendents of Police, Surinderjit Singh Mand and P.S. Parmar. The prosecution, after obtaining sanction under Section 197 of the CrPC for the later arrest on 28‑06‑1999, sought to take cogniz

SHYAM LALversusDEEPA DASS CHELA RAM CHELA GARIB DASS

2016 INSC 4965 July 2016Appeal(s) allowed

Shyam Lal held an agricultural lease from 29 May 1996 to 28 May 2005, but the lease was not registered. After the lease expired he continued to occupy the land and filed a suit for injunction to restrain the landlord from ousting him. The landlord cross‑claimed a mandatory injunction for vacation, arguing that the tena

SUBRAYA M.N.versusVITTALA M.N. & ORS.

2016 INSC 4945 July 2016Case Partly allowed

The suit sought partition of three parcels of land that were part of the joint family of the deceased Narayana. The defendant claimed that the first two parcels had been relinquished by the plaintiffs through a village panchayat resolution and receipts, while the third parcel was his self‑acquired property. The trial c

ANIL KUMAR GUPTAversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2016 INSC 4975 July 2016Disposed off

The petition arose from a tragic incident on 1 February 2011 when over two lakh candidates gathered for an ITBP recruitment drive in Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh, and, after the drive was postponed, many climbed onto the roof of the Himgiri Express. The train, travelling at 75 kmph, struck a low foot‑over‑bridge whose clear

GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LIMITEDversusTARINI INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. & ORS.

2016 INSC 5005 July 2016Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether a tariff fixed under a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) is immutable and beyond the review of the State Electricity Regulatory Commission (SERC). The Court held that tariff determination is a statutory function of the SERC under Section 86(1)(b) of the Electricity Act, 2003 and is subje

SAI BHASKAR IRON LTD.versusA.P. ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION & ORS.

2016 INSC 5025 July 2016Dismissed

The petitioners challenged the Andhra Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission’s Regulation 45‑B, which prescribes a formula for calculating the fuel surcharge adjustment (FSA) and excludes agricultural consumption until metering is completed. They argued that the regulation was ultra vires the Andhra Pradesh Electric

M/S GANGOTRI ENTERPRISES LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2016 INSC 3755 May 2016Appeal(s) allowed

M/s Gangotri Enterprises Ltd entered into two contracts with North Central Railway: a 2005 earth‑work contract that was later terminated, and a 2006 Anand Vihar works contract for which it furnished a performance bank guarantee. After completing the 2006 work, the contractor sought the return of the guarantee, but the

MD. ZAMIL AHMEDversusSTATE OF BLHAR AND ORS.

2016 INSC 3775 May 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, the younger brother of a constable killed in duty, was appointed as a constable on compassionate grounds to support the deceased's widow and children. He served satisfactorily for fifteen years, during which he continued to maintain the family. The State later terminated his services, contending that a b

MUDDASANI SAROJANAversusMUDDASANI SAROJANA

2016 INSC 3735 May 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff purchased a property from Buchamma, the sole surviving sister of the deceased Balaiah, under a registered sale deed dated 25‑04‑1981. After the widow Yashoda's death, the plaintiff took possession, but Defendant No.3 (Sarojana) evicted him, claiming to be Yashoda's adopted daughter and thus an heir. The p

ALIGARH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusMEGH SINGH & ORS.

2016 INSC 3835 May 2016Disposed off

The Aligarh Development Authority (ADA) initiated acquisition of land belonging to Megh Singh under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, invoking the emergency clause and taking possession, but no award was ever passed. Megh Singh challenged the acquisition, and the Allahabad High Court quashed the acquisition on the ground

VIJAY LATKA & ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

2016 INSC 3745 May 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants challenged a land acquisition notification issued under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, alleging that despite an award being passed in 2005, they had not received any compensation. The High Court dismissed their writ petition on the ground that the award had already been passed. On appeal, the Supreme Co

R. RACHAIAHversusHOME SECRETARY, BANGALORE

2016 INSC 11825 May 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, including R. Rachaiah, were originally charged under Section 306 IPC for abetting suicide and later, at the close of trial, the prosecution sought and the trial court framed an alternative charge of murder under Section 302 IPC. The court failed to follow the mandatory procedures of Sections 216 and 217

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.versusMIS. RUCHI PRINTERS

2016 INSC 3765 May 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh ordered Mis. Ruchi Printers to print 37,07,726 copies of two booklets, with delivery deadlines of 8 February 2008 for the first half and 25 February 2008 for the balance. The State later extended the deadline to 31 March 2008 but expressly stated that no booklets would be accepted after that

NARAYANversusBABASAHEB & ORS.

2016 INSC 2965 April 2016Dismissed

The plaintiffs, children of a deceased father, filed a partition suit in 1989 seeking to set aside two sale deeds executed by their mother, the natural guardian, in 1982 and 1988. The mother had sold the ancestral property without court permission, allegedly in contravention of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act,

COMMISSIONER, DELHI VALUE ADDED TAXversusM/S. ABB LTD.

2016 INSC 2975 April 2016Dismissed

The Commissioner of Delhi Value Added Tax appealed against the Delhi High Court's order that exempted M/s ABB Ltd. from VAT on sales made to the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) under Sections 7(a) and (c) of the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004. The issue was whether the import of goods and their inter‑state movemen

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR.versusANAND ARYA AND ORS.

2016 INSC 1395 February 2016Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined an appeal by the Government of NCT of Delhi and the Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC) against a High Court order that required demolition of the Millennium Bus Depot, which had been constructed on land shown as a river flood plain in the Master Plan 2021 (MPD‑2021). The Court noted that the H

SURESH NARAYAN KADAM & ORS.versusCENTRAL BANK OF INDIA & ORS.

2016 INSC 1425 February 2016Dismissed

The Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) built ten residential buildings and leased the land to the Central Bank of India for 90 years, with the bank allocating the flats to its Class III and IV employees at its absolute discretion, not as a condition of service. The bank later decided to redevelo

RE-INHUMAN CONDITIONS IN 1382 PRISONSversusRE-INHUMAN CONDITIONS IN 1382 PRISONS

2017 INSC 9555 February 2016

The Supreme Court entertained Writ Petition (Civil) No. 406 of 2013 concerning inhuman conditions in 1,382 Indian prisons. Relying on earlier decisions, the Court affirmed that prisoners are persons entitled to fundamental rights, including dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution. It examined the persistent proble

RAM SARAN VARSHNEY AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER

2016 INSC 1415 February 2016Disposed off

The case arose from an FIR filed by Sonia Gupta under IPC §§498A, 506 and the Dowry Prohibition Act §§3,4, alleging harassment by her parents‑in‑law and other relatives. Four police investigations produced three closure reports, after which a fourth investigating officer filed a charge‑sheet despite a stay order, and t

M/S. V. L. S. FINANCE LTD.versusS. P. GUPTA AND ANR.

2016 INSC 1435 February 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, V.L.S. Finance Ltd., challenged a series of orders that allowed the withdrawal of prosecution under Section 321 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) and permitted the accused to contest that withdrawal by filing applications under Section 91 Cr.P.C. The Court examined whether the Assistant Public

MALATI SARDARversusNATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED & ORS.

2016 INSC 125 January 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased Diganta Sardar was killed in a bus accident in Hooghly, West Bengal, and his widow filed a claim for compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT) in Kolkata, where the insurer had its business office. The Tribunal awarded Rs.16,12,200 as compens

DAMODAR LALversusSOHAN DEVI AND OTHERS

2016 INSC 85 January 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The landlord, Damodar Lal, sought eviction of his tenants on the ground that they had made unauthorised structural alterations to the rented premises. Both the trial court and the first appellate court found that material alteration had occurred and dismissed the tenants’ appeal. The tenants appealed to the High Court,

SRI AUROBJNDO ASHRAM TRUST AND ORS.versusR. RAMANATHAN AND ORS.

2016 INSC 95 January 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents filed a suit under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking removal of the trustees of the Sri Aurobindo Ashram Trust, alleging that the trustees failed to act against an objectionable biography of Sri Aurobindo. The High Court held the suit within the ambit of Section 92 and refused to revoke

A. AYYASAMYversusA. PARAMASIVAM & ORS.

2016 INSC 9484 October 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a partner in a hotel partnership, filed an application under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking to refer a civil suit filed by the other partners to arbitration. The respondents argued that serious allegations of fraud and mis‑appropriation of funds made the dispute non‑arbit

BHAGWAN JAGANNATH MARKAD & ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2016 INSC 9474 October 2016Case Partly allowed

The case involved the murder of Bibhishan Vithoba Khadle and injuries to six others during a politically motivated assault by a group of accused. The trial court acquitted all accused, rejecting eye‑witness testimony on the ground of contradictions, alleged interest, and procedural defects. The High Court reversed the

RAJA AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2016 INSC 9464 October 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were charged with gang rape, abduction and robbery under Sections 376(g), 366, 392 read with 34 of the IPC based on the testimony of a prosecutrix who alleged she was abducted, assaulted and robbed. The trial court acquitted them, but the Karnataka High Court reversed the acquittal and convicted them. On

R.K. ROJAversusU.S. RAYUDU AND ANOTHER

2016 INSC 4914 July 2016

R.K. Roja was elected to the Nagiri Assembly Constituency and a respondent filed an election petition challenging her election. The appellant filed an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC to have the petition rejected, first as a counter‑affidavit and later as a formal application. The High Court declined to

U. SUBHADRAMMA & ORS.versusSTATE OF A.P. REP. BY PUB. PROSECUTOR & ANR.

2016 INSC 4884 July 2016Appeal(s) allowed

Ramachandraiah was charged under IPC sections 409, 468 and 471 for misappropriating Rs. 6,57,355.90. He died in 1991 while the trial was pending; the trial court nevertheless recorded a finding that he alone had committed the offence, though he could not be convicted. The State then invoked Clause 3 of the Criminal Law

ANITA INTERNATIONALversusTUNGABADRA SUGAR WORKS MAZDOOR SANGH - AND OTHERS

2016 INSC 4894 July 2016Dismissed

Deve Sugars Ltd. was ordered to be wound up and its assets were taken over by an Official Liquidator. The State Bank of Mysore sought to recover a debt under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 and obtained leave from the Company Court (High Court, Madras) on 10 March 2000, subject t

HEMANT MADHUSUDAN NERURKARversusSTATE OF JHARKHAND AND ANOTHER

2016 INSC 3724 May 2016Disposed off

An inspection of Tata Steel's Growth Shop and Fabrication Yard revealed violations of the Factories Act, 1948 and Bihar Factories Rules, including lack of overtime slips, absence of leave books for contract labour, and several canteen deficiencies. Cognizance was taken against the occupier, Heman Madhusudan Nerurkar, a

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusMOHINUDDIN JAMAL ALVI & ANR.

2016 INSC 3704 May 2016Disposed off

Four persons were tried under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (TADA) and the Explosive Substances Act, 1908. Two were acquitted and two were convicted; the State of Rajasthan appealed the acquittals while the convicted appealed their convictions. The central issue was whether the prior ap

J. RAMESH KAMATH & ORS.versusMOHANA KURUP & ORS.

2016 INSC 3714 May 2016

The Supreme Court examined a criminal complaint filed by members of the All Kerala Chemists and Druggists Association alleging that the Association's former President, Secretary and Treasurer misappropriated its funds. After investigation, a charge‑sheet was filed under Sections 406, 408, 409, 477A and 120B IPC. The ac

STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERSversusCALCUTTA CLUB LIMITED

2019 INSC 11114 May 2016Matter referred to larger bench

The State of West Bengal appealed against Calcutta Club Limited, which had been held not liable for sales tax on food and drink supplied to its permanent members. The club argued that the doctrine of mutuality made such supplies a non‑sale, while the State contended that the 46th Constitution Amendment (Article 366(29A

COMMON CAUSEversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2017 INSC 7004 April 2016

The Supreme Court examined whether mining leaseholders, whose operations were suspended for lack of environmental clearances, retained a subsisting right to mine. It held that a lease remains subsisting unless a State Government order declares it lapsed, and that the lease period may be deemed extended under Rule 24A(6

STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.versusM/S. SHREYANS INDUS LTD. ETC.

2016 INSC 2434 March 2016Dismissed

The State of Punjab appealed against the High Court’s decision that the Commissioner of Excise and Taxation could not extend the three‑year limitation period for passing a sales‑tax assessment after that period had expired. The assessee, M/s Shreyans Indus Ltd., had filed returns for assessment years 2000‑01 to 2003‑04

ANANT PRAKASH SINHA @ ANANT SINHAversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ANR.

2016 INSC 2484 March 2016

The wife (informant) filed an FIR under Sections 498A, 323 and 34 IPC against her husband and mother‑in‑law. The charge‑sheet, however, named only the husband for offences under 498A and 323. While the trial was pending, she filed an application under Section 216 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) seeking to add

M/S. SPORTS & LEISURE APPAREL LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NOIDA

2016 INSC 2444 March 2016Disposed off

MIS Sports & Leisure Apparel Ltd, a manufacturer of knitted garments, purchased excise‑duty‑paid yarn but did not claim MODVAT credit and produced fabrics wholly consumed in garment production. Under the 2002 Union Budget, Notification Nos. 14/2002‑CE and 15/2002‑CE offered two schemes: a concessional duty rate for tho

JAYA BISWAL & ORS.versusBRANCH MANAGER, IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE

2016 INSC 1374 February 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant family filed a claim for compensation after their 26‑year‑old son, a truck driver, died in an accident that occurred while he was attempting to stop an unmanned vehicle during the course of his employment. The Employees' Compensation Commissioner awarded Rs 10,75,253 with interest, but the High Court redu

THE STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION & ANR.versusTHE STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION & ANR.

2016 INSC 1364 February 2016Case Partly allowed

The Kerala Public Service Commission (PSC) was approached by examinees seeking, under the Right to Information Act, scanned copies of their answer sheets, the tabulation sheet containing interview marks, and the names of the examiners who evaluated their papers. The State Public Information Officer and the Appellate Au

RAMAKANT DWIVEDIversusRAFIQ AHMAD & ORS.

2016 INSC 34 January 2016Dismissed

The appellant, Ramakant Dwivedi, sought renewal of a minor‑minerals lease on 27 April 2013 based on a Government order dated 26 February 2013. The Allahabad High Court, in a PIL, held that the renewal violated two earlier judgments—Nar Narain Mishra v. State of U.P. (2013) and Sukhan Singh v. State of U.P. (2014)—which

PRIVATE LIMITEDversusTHE WORKMEN OF NARENDRA & COMPANY

2016 INSC 54 January 2016Case Partly allowed

The Labour Court ordered reinstatement of workmen of Narendra & Co. with 50% back wages, but the High Court Single Judge limited back wages to January 1995, finding the industry had ceased to operate then. The Division Bench of the High Court, disagreeing, extended back wages to January 1999, reasoning that there was n

SULEKHAN SINGH & CO. & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2016 INSC 34 January 2016Dismissed

The appellants, Sulekhan Singh & Co. and others, were granted mining leases in Uttar Pradesh after the State issued a Government Order (G.O.) on 31 May 2012 requiring all minor‑mineral leases to be awarded by e‑tendering under Chapter IV of the U.P. Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules, 1963. The High Court quashed the le

SADDIK @ LALO GULAM HUSSEIN SHAIKH & ORS.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2016 INSC 9393 October 2016Dismissed

The appellants, including Sadik @ Lalo Gulam Hussein Shaikh, were convicted for the murder of Rajubhai Ramubhai Vasava after an altercation over biryani payment escalated into a violent assault involving knives and sticks. The trial court and the Gujarat High Court held that the deceased suffered three stab wounds suff

B.A. UMESHversusREGISTRAR GENERAL, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

2016 INSC 12043 October 2016Disposed off

B.A. Umesh, an ex‑police constable, was convicted of murder, rape and robbery and sentenced to death by the Sessions Court, a decision affirmed by the Karnataka High Court and the Supreme Court. He filed review petitions contending that the trial court had not fixed a separate date for hearing on sentencing, alleging a

SYEDA RAHIMUNNISAversusMALAN BL (DEAD) BY L.RS. & ANR. ETC.

2016 INSC 9383 October 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Syeda Rahimunnisa and Syed Hyder Hussaini, sued the respondents (legal heirs of Haji Mian) for eviction and damages, asserting a landlord‑tenant relationship. The respondents counter‑claimed title to the land by adverse possession and filed three related suits. The trial court and the first appellate co

RE- INHUMAN CONDITIONS IN 1382 PRISONS (JI)versus.

2017 INSC 9553 October 2016Directions issued

The Supreme Court examined a writ petition highlighting severe overcrowding in 1,382 Indian prisons, with occupancy exceeding 150% of permissible limits, and the failure of prison authorities to implement earlier court directions. The Court noted the absence of a juvenile custody manual under the Juvenile Justice (Care

JOSE @ PAPPACHANversusTHE SUB-LNSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOYILANDY & ANOTHER

2016 INSC 9413 October 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Jose @ Pappachan, was convicted under IPC s.302 for the death of his wife, Neena, alleged to be a homicide by strangulation and hanging, while also being acquitted of IPC s.498A. The prosecution relied on circumstantial testimony of three witnesses and a post‑mortem report that was inconclusive about hom

BENSONversusSTATE OF KERALA

2016 INSC 9443 October 2016Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Benson, was convicted in twelve separate theft cases under Sections 379 and 414 of the IPC, each tried and sentenced individually. He petitioned for the subsequent sentences to run concurrently with the sentence already being served (Crime No.8). The Supreme Court examined Section 427(1) of the Criminal

VIKAS YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

2016 INSC 9433 October 2016Disposed off

The appellants Vikas Yadav, Vishal Yadav and Sukhdev Yadav were convicted of murder, kidnapping and related offences (IPC ss.302, 364, 34, 201) and sentenced to life imprisonment with additional fixed‑term sentences. The State appealed for enhancement of the life sentence to death; the High Court instead imposed a fixe

WORKMEN RASTRIYA COLLIERY MAZDOOR SANGHversusBHARAT COKING COAL LTD. & ANR.

2016 INSC 9373 October 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The Rashtriya Colliery Mazdoor Sangh, representing 14 workmen of BCCL's Balihari Colliery, obtained a 1996 Industrial Tribunal award directing their regularisation without back wages. The Jharkhand High Court in 2004 modified the award, stipulating that the employer must give preference to these workmen when hiring reg

RAJENDRA KUMAR MESHRAMversusVANSHMANI PRASAD VERMA AND ANR.

2016 INSC 9423 October 2016Appeal(s) allowed

Rajendra Kumar Meshram was elected to the Madhya Pradesh Legislative Assembly from the Deosar constituency. A petition was filed by the opposing candidate alleging that Meshram's nomination was improperly accepted because he failed to furnish the electoral roll of the constituency where he was a registered voter (Singr

SATISH SHETTYversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2016 INSC 4363 June 2016Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the appeal of Satish Shetty, convicted under IPC sections 498A (cruelty) and 306 (abetment of suicide) for the death of his wife, who had left a ten‑month‑old son and was twenty weeks pregnant. The High Court had set aside the trial court’s acquittal, invoking the presumption under Evidence A

BIJENDER @PAPU AND ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

2016 INSC 4393 June 2016Disposed off

Five accused were convicted under IPC sections 325 read with 149, 148A, 308/149 and 323/149 for causing grievous hurt and related offences. The trial court sentenced them to three years rigorous imprisonment for the major offence and imposed fines; the High Court enhanced the sentence for the two appellants to five yea

BHAGWAN SAHAI AND ANR.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2016 INSC 4383 June 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, two brothers and their female relatives, were charged with offences arising from an alleged unlawful assembly in which they allegedly injured several persons and their father later died. The trial court held the incident to be a free fight and convicted them individually; the High Court set aside some c

INDIRA DEVI AND ORS.versusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2016 INSC 4403 June 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from a land dispute between the victim, Shriram, and his brothers. The victim alleged that three women (the appellants) and two men assaulted him, resulting in gunshot, axe, and other injuries, leading to an FIR under IPC sections 147, 148, 307, 149 and Section 25 of the Arms Act. The trial court convict

DR. RINI JOHAR & ANR.versusSTATE OF M.P. & ORS.

2016 INSC 4413 June 2016Case Allowed

Dr. Rini Johar, a doctor, and a senior advocate were arrested in November 2012 on a FIR alleging fraud under IPC sections 420 and 34 and the Information Technology Act. The arrest was carried out without complying with Sections 41 and 41‑A of the CrPC, nor the D.K. Basu guidelines, and the petitioners were taken to Bho

SARLA PERFORMANCE FIBERS LIMITED ETC.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, SURAT-II

2016 INSC 4373 June 2016Appeal(s) allowed

Sarla Performance Fibers Ltd., a 100% export‑oriented unit (EOU), was assessed excise duty and penalty for removing partially oriented yarn to the domestic tariff area (DTA) without permission of the Development Commissioner. The Central Excise Commissioner ordered duty under the proviso to Section 3(1) of the Central

M/S RAVI PRAKASH REFINERIES (P) LTD.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2016 INSC 3633 May 2016Case Partly allowed

M/s Ravi Prakash Refineries (P) Ltd. sold Sunflower De‑oiled Cake (SF DOC) in inter‑State trade and claimed a reduced central sales tax rate of 2% by producing Form C under Notification No. FD 119 CSL 2002(2). The assessing officer initially accepted the claim, but a later officer reopened the assessment, asserting tha

POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD.versusPUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LTD. AND OTHERS

2016 INSC 11733 March 2016

Power Grid Corporation, a transmission licencee, constructed the 400 kV Barh‑Balia double‑circuit line but the switchgear and protection system at the Barh end, which were to be installed by NTPC, were not completed. Power Grid sought a tariff from CERC effective 1 July 2010, which CERC granted despite the line not bei

RAM LAXMANversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2016 INSC 11723 March 2016

The Supreme Court examined the convictions of Ram Laxman and Sanju under IPC sections 302, 149 and 148, which had been upheld by the High Court while other co‑accused were acquitted. The trial and appellate courts relied almost entirely on the testimony of a single eye‑witness, the informant Ganesh (PW‑10), whose credi

SARDAR NIRMAL SINGH (DEAD) THR. LRS.versusBHATIA SAFE WORKS & ANR.

2016 INSC 11713 March 2016Disposed off

The appellant sought to enforce an auction sale of a plot in Kanpur that had been conducted to recover land revenue under the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948. The auction was held a day after notice, the successful bidder deposited the required 25% by cheque and later by bank draft, both of which were rejected, and

STATE TRADING CORPN. INDIA LTD.versusNEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL

2016 INSC 1253 February 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the method of fixing the rateable value of lands and buildings under Section 63 of the New Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1994. The appellant, State Trading Corporation, argued that the High Court erred by relying on Bye‑law 12 of the old Punjab Municipal Act to assess rent, especially for

MIRZA ALI RAZA & ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

2016 INSC 1283 February 2016Disposed off

The case arose from the selection of candidates for the 36th Combined Competitive Examination in Bihar, where the reservation policy of 1978 was later superseded by a 1990 resolution that was subsequently quashed by the Supreme Court. Four general‑category candidates challenged the selection, and the State Government,

STATE OF U.P. & ORS.versusRAVINDRA KUMAR SHARMA & ORS.

2016 INSC 1293 February 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants obtained disability certificates from a Medical Board under the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Rules, 1996 and were selected for a BTC training course reserved for physically handicapped candidates. A complaint by the Bhartiya Viklang Sangh al

SECURITIES & EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIAversusBURREN ENERGY INDIA LTD. & ORS.

2016 INSC 10892 December 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) appealed against the Securities Appellate Tribunal’s order that had set aside the Adjudicating Officer’s finding of a violation of Regulation 22(7) of the SEBI (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations, 1997. Burren Energy India Ltd acquired 100% of

GURPAL SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2016 INSC 10902 December 2016Case Partly allowed

The appellant and his son were involved in a family land dispute with their brother (the informant). After a verbal altercation, the appellant fetched a 12‑bore DBBL gun and fired at the informant, killing him, and subsequently shot at the informant's wife and two friends, killing one and injuring another. The trial co

GURCHARAN SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2016 INSC 10922 December 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved the suicide of Surjit Kaur and her two daughters, who died after ingesting aluminium phosphide. A suicide note blamed the appellant Gurcharan Singh, his wife Ajit Kaur and a co‑accused for depriving the victims of their share in family property and subjecting them to harassment. The trial court and th

HINDUSTAN LEVER LTD.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2016 INSC 8462 September 2016Dismissed

Hindustan Lever Ltd., a tea manufacturer, claimed exemption from entry tax on packing materials used for tea under a 1993 notification and a reduced rate under a 1998 notification. The issue was whether packing material could be classified as "raw materials, component parts or inputs" within Entry 80 of Schedule I of t

C.B.I. BANK SECURITIES & FRAUD CELLversusRAMESH GELLI & ORS.

2016 INSC 11802 May 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The CBI Bank Securities & Fraud Cell appealed against the Mumbai High Court’s judgment in criminal revision applications involving Ramesh Gelli and others. The appeal contested the accuracy of statutory citations in paragraph 25 of the High Court’s order, which incorrectly referred to Section 46 of the Banking Regulati

PATEL RAVJIBHAI BHULABHAJ (D) THR. LRS.versusRAHEMANBHAI M .. SHAIKH (D) THR. LRS. & ORS.

2016 INSC 11812 May 2016Dismissed

The parties executed a deed on 30‑December‑1960 titled a conditional sale for Rs 10,000, containing a clause that if the plaintiffs repaid the amount within five years the defendants would return possession of the land, and after five years the plaintiffs would have no right to claim it back. The plaintiffs later sued

MODERN DENTAL COLLEGE AND RESEARCH CENTRE & ORS.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.

2016 INSC 2672 May 2016Dismissed

The appellants, a group of private unaided medical and dental colleges, challenged the Madhya Pradesh Niji Vyavasayik Shikshan Sanstha (Pravesh Ka Vinimayan Avam Shulk Ka Nirdharan) Act, 2007 and the accompanying admission and fee fixation rules, alleging that the provisions on common entrance test (CET), fee regulatio

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GUJARAT CENTRALversusSAURASTHRA CEMENT & CHEM. INDUSTRIES LTD.

2016 INSC 3582 May 2016Disposed off

The case concerned the assessment of M/s Saurashtra Cement for AY 1981-82. The Assessing Officer issued a draft assessment on 13‑03‑1984 and forwarded it to the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner (IAC) under Section 1448. The IAC gave directions on 31‑08‑1984, after which the final assessment order was passed on 01‑09‑1

UTTAMversusSAUBHAG SINGH & ORS.

2016 INSC 2362 March 2016

Uttam filed a suit for partition of a property claiming a one‑eighth share as a coparcener, asserting that the land was ancestral. The trial court decreed in his favour, but the first appellate court reversed, holding that the grandfather’s death in 1973, leaving a widow (a Class I heir), invoked the proviso to Section

SHAKUNTLA DEVIversusSTATE OF H.P. AND OTHERS

2016 INSC 2352 March 2016

The State of Himachal Pradesh acquired land for a road widening project and, to expedite the process, entered into negotiated settlements for compensation. A Negotiated Award dated 11‑09‑2008 fixed the land value and barred any enhancement under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, while a Supplementary Negotiated A

ESTATE OFFICER, U.T. CHANDIGARH AND OTHERSversusRAJAN SOI AND OTHERS

2016 INSC 2302 March 2016

The writ petitioners challenged the cancellation of a plot allotted to Milkhi Ram, claiming they were ready to pay the due amount. The High Court dismissed their petition, directing the Estate Officer to reconsider the matter in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Jasbir Singh Bakshi. The Estate Officer appealed,

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusGOLOO RAIKWAR AND ANR.

2016 INSC 2392 March 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh appealed against a High Court order that reduced the conviction of Golu Raikwari and co‑accused from murder (s.302 IPC) to culpable homicide not amounting to murder (s.304 Part I IPC) and cut their life sentences to ten years rigorous imprisonment. The deceased, Hari Choudhary, was attacked

SHAHID KHANversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2016 INSC 2382 March 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the murder of Ashok Kumar, for which accused Nos. 2‑5 were convicted under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution’s case hinged on the testimony of two alleged eyewitnesses, PW 25 (Mirza Majid Beg) and PW 24 (Mohamed Shakir), who claimed to have seen the assaila

GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LIMITEDversusEMCO LIMITED & OTHERS

2016 INSC 1242 February 2016Appeal(s) allowed

Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd (GUVNL) entered into a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) with EMCO Ltd for a 5 MW solar project, the tariff being fixed by the Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission (GERC) in its first tariff order of 29 Jan 2010, which assumed the benefit of accelerated depreciation under Section 32 of th

KUNDAN LAL & ANR.versusKAMRUDDIN & ANR.

2016 INSC 10871 December 2016Dismissed

The plaintiff, Kamruddin, sued for possession of a 120‑sq‑yd property (Khasra No. 270) alleging he was a tenant of the Punjab Wakf Board since April 1990. He claimed the defendants illegally occupied the land while he was away during communal riots. The defendants argued they had taken possession from a person named Sh

RAMVILAS (DEAD) THR. LRS. & ANR.versusKARIM KHAN & ANR.

2016 INSC 10851 December 2016Dismissed

The respondent-plaintiff obtained a loan from the appellants and executed a deed titled a Sale Deed on 14‑06‑1972, which was later alleged to be a mortgage by conditional sale. The parties also signed an agreement that the sale would be cancelled and the land returned if the loan (Rs.5,000) was repaid by 14‑06‑1973; th

KHOKAN GIRI @ MADHABversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2016 INSC 10861 December 2016Dismissed

The appellant, Khokan Giri, was convicted along with three others for the murder and robbery of an elderly couple in Kolkata, based largely on the confessional statement of an accomplice, Raju Rao, who became an approver. The appellant challenged the conviction, arguing that the High Court gave undue weight to the appr

CARDAMOM MARKETING CORPORATION AND ANR.versusSTATE OF KERALA & ORS.

2016 INSC 8441 September 2016Dismissed

Cardamom Marketing Corporation and another, registered dealers under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act and Kerala Value Added Tax Act, challenged a 2002 government notification that levied an additional court fee on appeals and revisions before tribunals, directing the proceeds to the Kerala Legal Benefit Fund. They arg

LOK PRAHARIversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2016 INSC 5661 August 2016Case Allowed

The Supreme Court entertained a public‑interest writ filed by Lok Prahari, a society of retired civil servants, challenging the Uttar Pradesh Ex‑Chief Ministers Residence Allotment Rules, 1997 which allowed former chief ministers to occupy government bungalows for life. The petition argued that the Rules contravened th

MADINA BEGUM & ANR.versusSHIV MURTI PRASAD PANDEY & ORS.

2016 INSC 5671 August 2016Transferred to High Court

Madina Begum filed a suit for specific performance of a sale agreement that lacked a fixed calendar date for completion. The respondents contended the suit was barred by the three‑year limitation under Article 54 of Schedule I of the Limitation Act, 1963. The Supreme Court held that where no specific date is fixed, the

MUMTAZ @ MUNTYAZversusSTATE OF U.P. (NOW UTTARAKHAND)

2016 INSC 4831 July 2016Disposed off

The appellants Mumtaz alias Muntyaz and Dilshad alias Pappu were convicted under Sections 302 and 34 IPC for setting fire to the victim Pawan Kumar, who later died of burn injuries. The prosecution relied on eyewitness testimony and a dying declaration recorded by a Sub‑Divisional Magistrate, which was endorsed by a do

LILAWATI AGARWAL ETC.versusTHE STATE OF JHARKHAND ETC.

2016 INSC 2941 April 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appeal concerned the interpretation of Section 30(2) of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984, which provides for an enhanced solatium of 30% of market value. The award in the present case was passed on 30 September 1985, after the amendment came into force. The High Court had held that the principle laid down

STATE OF M.P.versusUDAIBHAN

2016 INSC 2271 March 2016Case Partly allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh prosecuted three accused—Rajaram, Udaibhan and Hakim Singh—for assaulting a complainant and his brother with weapons, resulting in multiple grievous injuries. The trial court convicted them under Section 307 IPC (attempt to murder) and Section 307/34, imposing ten years’ rigorous imprisonmen

VIJAY PRAKASH JARATHversusTEJ PRAKASHJARATH

2016 INSC 2281 March 2016Appeal(s) allowed

Tej Prakash Jarath filed a suit in 1992 against his relatives. The defendants filed written statements on 11 November 1992 and, after issues were framed in October 1993, filed a counter‑claim on 17 June 1996. The trial court allowed the counter‑claim, but the Uttarakhand High Court set it aside, relying on Rohit Singh

KHURS!DA BEGUM (D) BY LRS. & ORS.versusMOHAMMAD FAROOQ (D) BY LRS. & ANR.

2016 INSC 1151 February 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a dispute over a 1976 registered gift deed in which Hazi Azimuddin gifted his one‑third undivided share in a free‑hold commercial property in Jaipur to his minor son. The property was occupied by tenants, and the donor had assigned the right to collect rent to the donee. The defendants, the d

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