Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

Judgments of 2020

571 judgments, newest first — showing 1–200.

JAIPUR VIDYUT VITARAN NIGAM LTD. & ORS.versusADANI POWER RAJASTHAN LIMITED & ANR.

2020 INSC 52131 August 2020Case Partly allowed

Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. (JVVNL) entered into a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) with Adani Power Rajasthan Ltd. (APRL) in 2010, basing the tariff on domestic coal supply. APRL later claimed additional compensation under the PPA’s change‑in‑law clause after the New Coal Distribution Policy of 2013 reduced the assu

DR. VIJAY MALLYAversusSTATE BANK OF INDIA AND ORS.

2020 INSC 52331 August 2020Dismissed

The Supreme Court had earlier held Dr. Vijay Mallya guilty of contempt for failing to disclose assets and violating injunctions, ordering punishment. Mallya filed review petitions (Nos. 2175‑2178) contending that the Court erred by stating he had not filed a reply to the banks' response, when a reply dated 30‑01‑2017 w

IN RE: PRASHANT BHUSHAN AND ANR.versusIN RE:

2020 INSC 48931 August 2020Disposed off

The Supreme Court, hearing a suo motu criminal contempt petition against senior advocate Prashant Bhushan, affirmed his conviction for scandalising the judiciary through tweets and an affidavit alleging misconduct by judges. The Court held that the defence of truth under Section 13 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 r

TAMIL NADU MEDICAL OFFICERS ASSOCIATION & ORSversusUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

2018 INSC 33231 August 2020Disposed off

The petitions challenged the validity of Regulation 9 of the Medical Council of India (MCI) Post‑Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2000, alleging that it barred State governments from reserving seats for in‑service doctors in postgraduate degree courses. The Court examined the constitutional distribution of power

MUKESH SINGHversusSTATE (NARCOTIC BRANCH OF DELHI)

2020 INSC 52431 August 2020Reference answered

Mukesh Singh challenged his conviction under the NDPS Act on the ground that the police officer who lodged the FIR was also the investigating officer, alleging that this dual role vitiated the trial. The Supreme Court examined the statutory scheme of the CrPC (ss.154, 156, 157) and the NDPS Act (ss.41‑44, 50‑53, 58, 35

SUKH SAGAR MEDICAL COLLEGE & HOSPITALversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.

2020 INSC 47431 July 2020Dismissed

The Gujarat Sukh Sagar Medical College & Hospital Trust obtained an Essentiality Certificate in 2014 to establish a medical college in Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh. Despite conditional permission for the 2016‑17 academic year, the Medical Council of India (MCI) repeatedly denied renewal of permission for three successive s

RAVINDER KAUR GREWAL & ORS.versusMANJIT KAUR & ORS.

2019 INSC 86931 July 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned a dispute over two adjoining land parcels (Khasra Nos. 935/1 and 935/2) where the predecessor of the appellants, Harbans Singh, claimed exclusive ownership based on a family settlement. A memorandum of family settlement (Exhibit P‑6) dated 10‑03‑1988 was executed by the brothers. The trial court part

SUSHIL SETHI AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERS

2020 INSC 11831 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, the Managing Director and Director of SPML Infra Ltd, were charged under IPC sections 420 and 120B for allegedly supplying sub‑standard turbines for the Nurang Hydel Power Project of Arunachal Pradesh. The FIR was lodged in 2000, a chargesheet filed in 2004, but summons were only served in 2017. The Hig

GHAT TALAB KAULAN WALAversusBABA GOPAL DASS CHELA SURTI DASS (DEAD) BY LR RAM NIWAS

2020 INSC 12331 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff, Ghat Talab Kaulan Wala Trust, sued the sevadar Baba Gopal Dass for a mandatory injunction to remove him from managing the temple and its properties. The trial court denied the injunction but ordered rendition of accounts; the first appellate court decreed in favour of the trust. The High Court set aside

UTTAR BHARTIYA RAJAK SAMAJ PANCHAYAT BANGANGA RAJAK SAMAJ CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY (PROPOSED) & ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SECRETARY & ORS.

2020 INSC 12231 January 2020Dismissed

The appellants, a slum dwellers' society and a co‑operative housing society, obtained a Letter of Intent (LOI) on 5 January 2005 to carry out a slum rehabilitation scheme on land within a Coastal Regulation Zone, subject to clearance from the Coastal Zone Management Authority. The LOI stipulated a validity of three mon

BASHEERA BEGAMversusMOHAMMED IBRAHIM & ORS.

2020 INSC 11631 January 2020Dismissed

The case concerned the alleged murder of D2 and D1 in December 1990, for which eight accused were convicted under sections 120B, 302 and 34 of the IPC. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence – a lorry purchase, broken glass, alleged iron‑rod attacks and a purported conspiracy at a hotel – but failed to prove

STATE OF ODISHA AND ORS.versusGOBINDA BEHERA

2020 INSC 11931 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent applied for a constable position in the Odisha State Police, declaring that he was not involved in any criminal case. Verification later revealed his involvement in a case under multiple IPC sections, leading to his discharge and an Original Application (OA) before the Odisha Administrative Tribunal, whi

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusYOGENDRA SINGH JADON & ANR.

2020 INSC 12431 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh filed a criminal appeal against Yogendra Singh Jadon and Harshvardhan Singh Jadon, alleging that they obtained cash credit facilities from District Cooperative Kendriya Bank through their father, the former President of the bank, without proper documentation, constituting fraud and conspirac

SUBED ALI AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF ASSAM

2020 INSC 56630 September 2020Dismissed

The State of Assam prosecuted Subed Ali and others for the murder of two men who were returning from a market on bicycles. The accused were alleged to have intercepted, assaulted, and killed the victims; one died on the spot and the other later in hospital. Five persons were originally charged, but two were acquitted o

SATISH @ SABBEversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2020 INSC 56730 September 2020Disposed off

The petitioners, Satish and Vikky, were convicted of kidnapping for ransom and sentenced to life imprisonment. They applied for premature release on probation under Section 2 of the Uttar Pradesh Prisoners Release on Probation Act, 1938, but the State repeatedly rejected their pleas without applying the statutory three

B.B.M. ENTERPRISESversusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR.

2020 INSC 47230 July 2020Disposed off

B.B.M. Enterprises obtained an arbitral award on 16 September 2009 for Rs. 1.38 crore plus interest and costs. The award was executed, but the award‑challenging petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was filed on 2 April 2010, well beyond the 120‑day limitation period. The District Judg

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.versusSATINDER KAUR @ SATWINDER KAUR & ORS.

2020 INSC 44730 June 2020Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a claim for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 after Satpal Singh, a Qatari resident, died in a road accident in India in 1998, leaving his widow Satinder Kaur and three minor children as dependants. The Court held that the deceased's income should be calculated from his 1984 emp

AHMAD ALI QURAISHI AND ANR.versusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2020 INSC 11230 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, who are neighbours of the complainant, were involved in a long‑standing property dispute with the complainant's father. On 19 July 2016 a quarrel occurred, after which the police recorded proceedings under Sections 151, 107 and 116 of the CrPC and directed both parties to maintain peace. Six weeks later

N. MOTILAL & ORS.versusFAISAL BIN ALI & ANR.

2020 INSC 11430 January 2020Dismissed

The appellants, tenants of a shop under a 20‑year lease dated 27‑08‑1990, challenged the rent increase ordered by the Rent Controller after the new owners of the premises filed an application under Section 4 of the Telangana Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960. The landlords sought to fix a fair rent

OM PRAKASHversusSURESH KUMAR

2020 INSC 11130 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Om Prakash, owned a three‑room shop in Hamirpur and had evicted the respondent, Suresh Kumar, a cloth‑merchant tenant since 1969, on the ground that the premises were needed for reconstruction. The Rent Controller ordered eviction, which the High Court affirmed, but noted that the landlord was not averse

URMILA DEVI & ORS.versusBRANCH MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. & ANR.

2020 INSC 10730 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The claimants filed a claim under the Motor Vehicles Act after the husband/father suffered a road accident, and the Motor Vehicle Accidental Claim Tribunal ordered the National Insurance Company to pay Rs.2,47,500. The insurer appealed to the Patna High Court, challenging its liability to pay, and the claimants filed a

CHAIRMAN/MANAGING DIRECTOR, U.P. POWER CORPORATION LTD. & OTHERSversusRAM GOPAL

2020 INSC 10930 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Ltd. (UPPCL) cancelled the results of a 1978 recruitment for Class IV posts after discovering irregularities, terminating all appointees including Ram Gopal and Shyam Behari Lal. Shyam Behari Lal obtained relief from the Allahabad High Court on equitable grounds, which was later set

STATE OF ODISHA & ORS.versusM/S. JINDAL STEEL AND POWER LTD. & ORS.

2020 INSC 10830 January 2020Disposed off

The State of Odisha entered into a dispute with M/s Jindal Steel and Power Ltd (JSPL) over the transport of iron ore that JSPL had purchased, processed and stored within the leasehold area of the mining company, Sarda Mines Pvt Ltd (SMPL). After the environmental clearance for SMPL expired, the State refused a transit

CHOWGULE AND COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITEDversusGOA FOUNDATION & ORS.

2020 INSC 11030 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether mining leaseholders in Goa, whose second renewal leases were set aside, could transport iron ore that had been mined before the cut‑off date of 15 March 2018. The Court held that paragraph 154.6 of the Goa Foundation‑II judgment only prohibited mining after that date and did not bar t

TOFAN SINGHversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2020 INSC 62029 October 2020Directions issued

The Supreme Court considered whether officers invested with powers under Section 53 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) are 'police officers' within the meaning of Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and whether a statement recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act can be use

THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.versusHEEM SINGH

2020 INSC 62129 October 2020Appeal(s) allowed

Heem Singh, a Rajasthan police constable, was dismissed after a departmental enquiry found him guilty of misconduct for allegedly committing murder while on leave. He had been acquitted of the murder charge in a criminal trial because key witnesses turned hostile and the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasona

CHUNTHURAMversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2020 INSC 61629 October 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Chunthuram and co-accused Jagan Ram were convicted for the murder of Laxman under IPC sections 302 and 34. The Supreme Court examined the prosecution's evidence, finding that the recovered weapons were never forensic‑linked to the crime, the chemical analysis report was missing, and a shirt forensic repor

THOMAS LAWRENCEversusTHE STATE OF KERALA & ORS.

2020 INSC 61729 October 2020Disposed off

The petitioner, Thomas Lawrence, filed a PIL alleging mass destruction of wetlands and a 10‑acre pond within the Technopark campus in Thiruvananthapuram. The National Green Tribunal (NGT) on 19 December 2018 directed the District Collector to take action within a month. The Collector, on 30 April 2019, issued an order

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.versusAMIT SHRIVAS

2020 INSC 56529 September 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Amit Shrivas claimed a compassionate appointment after his father, a work‑charged driver, died in service; the father had become a permanent employee after 15 years but was still paid from the contingency fund. The 2008 Madhya Pradesh policy excluded work‑charged/contingency employees from compassionate a

DR. ASWATHY R. S. KARTHIKA & ORS.versusDR. ARCHANA M. & ORS.

2020 INSC 47029 July 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, members of the Hindu Nadar community, sought to have the shortfall in the 1% reservation granted to their community (effective from 21‑Nov‑2009) adjusted in future vacancies without disturbing earlier appointments. They argued that Rule 15(a) of the Kerala State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1958, whic

SHREE CHOUDHARY TRANSPORT COMPANYversusINCOME TAX OFFICER

2020 INSC 46829 July 2020Dismissed

Shree Choudhary Transport Company (the appellant) entered into a contract to transport cement for a consignor and hired independent truck operators to perform the work. The appellant received freight charges from the consignor after TDS was deducted, but failed to deduct TDS on payments to the truck operators where eac

THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER & ANR.versusMOHAN BREWERIES AND DISTILLERIES LIMITED

2020 INSC 44629 June 2020Disposed off

Mohan Breweries purchased empty bottles from unregistered dealers for bottling its beer and IMFL. The revenue argued that the purchase turnover of these bottles was liable to purchase tax under Section 7-A of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, while the assessee claimed exemption based on earlier Clarification

SONU @ SUNILversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2020 INSC 40929 May 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Sonu @ Sunil was convicted along with four others for the robbery and murder of Bharosilal in September 2008, based largely on circumstantial evidence, the recovery of a mobile phone from his possession, and the testimony of a witness (PW‑5) who claimed to have overheard a conspiracy. The prosecution alle

BCH ELECTRIC LIMITEDversusPRADEEP MEHRA

2020 INSC 37929 April 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, Pradeep Mehra, served as Chief Operating Officer of BCH Electric Limited for 12 years and, upon resignation in June 2012, claimed gratuity of Rs.1.83 crore based on the company's gratuity scheme which did not impose a statutory ceiling. The employer paid only Rs.10 lakh, the ceiling prescribed under Sec

DINESH KUMAR GUPTA AND OTHERSversusHIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF RAJASTHAN OTHERS

2020 INSC 37629 April 2020Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined multiple writ petitions challenging the seniority and appointment of judicial officers in Rajasthan's District Judge cadre after the 2010 Judicial Service Rules came into force. The petitioners argued that officers promoted ad‑hoc to Fast Track Courts should retain seniority from their initia

MEDICAL COLLEGE VELLORE ASSOCIATIONversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2020 INSC 37429 April 2020Disposed off

The petitioners, a group of unaided minority medical and dental colleges, challenged the validity of the NEET (National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test) notifications issued by the Medical Council of India and Dental Council of India, arguing that the uniform entrance examination violated their fundamental rights under A

G H QUIPPO CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT LIMITEDversusJANARDAN NIRMAN PVT. LIMITED

2020 INSC 38029 April 2020Appeal(s) allowed

Quippo Construction Equipment Ltd entered into four rental agreements with Janardan Nirman Pvt Ltd, each containing an arbitration clause under the Construction Industry Arbitration Association (CIAA). One agreement stipulated Kolkata as the place of arbitration, but the sole arbitrator conducted proceedings in Delhi a

PILCOMversusWEST BENGAL-

2020 INSC 37529 April 2020Dismissed

PILCOM, a joint committee of the cricket boards of Pakistan, India and Sri Lanka that organised the 1996 World Cup, made payments from its London bank accounts to the International Cricket Council and various non‑resident cricket associations. The Income Tax Officer issued a show‑cause notice under s.194E for failure t

SHRIPAL BHATI AND ANR.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

2020 INSC 10229 January 2020Dismissed

The New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (NOIDA) appointed respondent No.4 as Project Engineer (Electrical) on deputation from the U.P. Power Corporation in February 2014 and later absorbed him in May 2015. The appellants, who were Assistant Project Engineers, challenged the appointment and absorption, arguing th

MUKESH KUMARversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2020 INSC 10329 January 2020Dismissed

Mukesh Kumar, a death‑row convict in the Nirbhaya gang‑rape case, filed a mercy petition under Articles 72 and 161 of the Constitution, which was rejected by the Lieutenant Governor on 15 January 2020 and by the President on 17 January 2020. He challenged the rejection before the Supreme Court, alleging that relevant m

SUSHILA AGGARWAL AND OTHERSversusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI) AND ANOTHER

2020 INSC 10629 January 2020Directions issued

The Supreme Court examined two questions referred to a larger bench: whether an order of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) must be limited to a fixed period, and whether such bail terminates when the accused is summoned or when charges are framed. Relying on the Constitution Benc

MOHANDAS AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

2020 INSC 10529 January 2020Dismissed

The appellants, owners of several plots in Gondia, challenged the reservation of their land for a shopping complex and vegetable market under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966. The original Development Plan came into force on 24‑08‑1984, and a declaration under Section 126(4) was published on 03‑09‑1

MRS RITIKA SHARANversusMR SUJOY GHOSH

2020 INSC 61528 October 2020Disposed off

The parties, married in 2009, have been living apart since 2016, with the mother, Mrs. Ritika Sharan, caring for their son Sattik while employed in Singapore. The father, Mr. Sujoy Ghosh, obtained interim orders from the Family Court restraining the mother from taking the child out of Bengaluru and granting him visitat

DHARMENDRA KUMAR SINGHversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2020 INSC 61428 October 2020Disposed off

The appellants, holders of mining leases in Sonbhadra, Uttar Pradesh, sought extension of their leases for periods during which mining was prohibited by orders of the National Green Tribunal and subsequent state notifications. The State argued that neither the Uttar Pradesh Mining Minerals (Concession) Rules, 1963 nor

MAHESHWAR TIGGAversusTHE STATE OF JHARKHAND

2020 INSC 56428 September 2020Appeal(s) allowed

Maheshwar Tigga was convicted by the trial court and the Jharkhand High Court for rape, voluntarily causing hurt and wrongful restraint under Sections 376, 323 and 341 IPC, based on the prosecutrix’s allegation that he assaulted her when she was a minor. The Supreme Court examined whether the prosecutrix was indeed a m

UNION OF INDIAversusASHOK KUMAR SHARMA AND OTHERS

2020 INSC 51728 August 2020Disposed off

The Union of India challenged a High Court order that quashed an FIR registered under the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) for the alleged sale of unlicensed drugs, holding that prosecution for offences under Chapter IV of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 must be initiated only by persons named in Section 32 of the A

M/S. RADHA EXPORTS (INDIA) PVT. LIMITEDversusK.P. JAYARAM & ANR.

2020 INSC 51828 August 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents, K.P. Jayaram and another, filed a petition under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) claiming they were financial creditors of M/s. Radha Exports (India) Pvt. Ltd. for a loan of Rs.2.10 crore advanced between 2002 and 2005, alleging that part of the loan was converted into share

COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX,versusM/S. ADANI GAS LTD.

2020 INSC 51328 August 2020Dismissed

The Commissioner of Service Tax appealed against M/s. Adani Gas Ltd. challenging the taxability of charges collected for supplying pipelines and measurement (SKID) equipment to gas consumers. The issue was whether Section 65(105)(zzzzj) of the Finance Act, 1994 applied, i.e., whether the supply of such tangible goods f

PRANEETH K. AND ORS.versusUNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION (UGC) AND ORS.

2020 INSC 51928 August 2020Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a batch of writ petitions challenging the University Grants Commission (UGC) guidelines dated 06 July 2020, which required all Indian universities to complete final year examinations by 30 September 2020 amid the COVID‑19 pandemic. Petitioners argued that the guidelines were ultra‑violet of A

PARMINDER KAUR @ P.P. KAUR @ SONIversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2020 INSC 46728 July 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Parminder Kaur, a single woman living with her child and mother, was convicted under IPC sections 366A and 506 for allegedly enticing a minor girl to illicit intercourse with her tenant boy and for threatening the victim’s brother. The prosecution’s case rested on the testimony of the minor victim and he

GOPAL PRASADversusBIHAR SCHOOL EXAMINATION BOARD AND OTHERS

2020 INSC 40828 May 2020Matter referred to larger bench

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

CANARA BANKversusP. SELATHAL AND ORS. ETC.ETC.

2020 INSC 23428 February 2020Appeal(s) allowed

Canara Bank had granted a term loan secured by mortgage of property belonging to a partnership firm and a guarantor. The Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) passed an ex‑parte decree against the guarantor and the firm, which the guarantor unsuccessfully tried to set aside. Fifteen years later the guarantor’s successors filed

MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION CO. LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHER

2020 INSC 23028 February 2020Disposed off

Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. (MSEDCL) appealed against the Maharashtra State Electricity Regulatory Commission’s (MERC) order quashing several pre‑1999 circulars that imposed "take‑or‑pay" and minimum off‑take obligations on captive power plant (CPP) holders and directing MSEDCL to refund amounts

BANK OF INDIAversusM/S. BRINDAVAN AGRO INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.

2020 INSC 23228 February 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Bank of India debited Rs.27.41 lakh from the respondent Brindavan Agro Industries as 50% of processing and TEV study charges before the loan was sanctioned. The respondent filed a complaint under Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, seeking a full refund, and the State and National Consumer Di

DISTRICT BAR ASSOCIATION, DEHRADUN THROUGHITS SECRETARYversusISHWAR SHANDILYA & ORS.

2020 INSC 23728 February 2020Dismissed

The District Bar Association of Dehradun challenged a High Court order directing Bar Associations to withdraw a long‑standing Saturday strike by advocates in Dehradun, Haridwar and Udham Singh Nagar, and to initiate disciplinary action against those who persisted. The petitioners argued that the right to strike is prot

KASHMIRA DEVIversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ORS.

2020 INSC 9928 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The victim, Urmila (Guddi), was married into a family that repeatedly demanded additional dowry and subjected her to physical and mental cruelty. After returning to her parental home due to harassment, she was burnt under suspicious circumstances and later died, leading to three dying declarations—two recorded while th

SUKHWINDER SINGHversusJAGROOP SINGH & ANR.

2020 INSC 10028 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff entered into an agreement of sale on 03‑01‑2004 with defendant No.1 for a plot of land at Rs 1,40,000, paying Rs 69,500 as earnest money. The plaintiff sued for specific performance and to set aside a later sale deed dated 11‑06‑2004 executed by defendant No.1 in favour of defendant No.2 (the appellant).

CHANDESHWAR SAWversusBRIJ BHUSHAN PRASAD & ORS.

2020 INSC 9528 January 2020Disposed off

In a Bihar Panchayat election for the post of Mukhia, the petitioner alleged that his valid votes were being rejected while invalid votes for the returned candidate were accepted. The Election Tribunal, after hearing evidence, ordered a recount and later declared the election of the returned candidate void, directing a

DR. VIJAYAKUMARAN C.P.V.versusCENTRAL UNIVERSITY OF KERALA & ORS.

2020 INSC 9328 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

Dr. C.P.V. Vijayakumaran, an associate professor on probation at Central University of Kerala, faced multiple complaints of sexual harassment by female students. An Internal Complaints Committee, constituted under UGC Regulations, conducted a formal inquiry, found him guilty, and recommended disciplinary action. The Ex

KIRPAL SINGH & ORS.versusKAMLA DEVI & ORS.

2020 INSC 9728 January 2020Dismissed

The case concerned land owned by Jaipal Singh that was declared surplus under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953, and subsequently sold to Mohan Singh in 1974 and later to the present appellant. While the surplus‑land proceedings were pending, the Haryana Ceiling of Land Holdings Act, 1972 came into force, r

BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITEDversusR. CHANDRAMOULEESWARAN AND OTHERS

2020 INSC 9228 January 2020Dismissed

The three oil companies (Bharat Petroleum, Indian Oil and Hindustan Petroleum) held long‑term leases on land, constructed petrol pumps and then sub‑let the premises to dealers. The landlords filed ejectment suits and the companies sought orders under Section 9 of the Madras City Tenants’ Protection Act, 1921 for the sa

ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITEDversusM/S. J.K. CEMENT WORKS

2020 INSC 9628 January 2020Dismissed

The cement manufacturer M/s J.K. Cement Works insured its coal stock under a Standard Fire and Special Perils policy that covered "Flood and Inundation". Heavy rains on 29-30 August 2003 caused water to accumulate and wash off some coal, and the insurer's surveyor affirmed the loss was payable, but the insurer later re

ARNAB MANORANJAN GOSWAMIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2020 INSC 66527 November 2020Disposed off

The appellant, a news‑channel editor, was arrested in November 2020 in connection with an FIR under Sections 306 and 34 of the IPC alleging his role in the suicide of a contractor who claimed unpaid dues. He filed a petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution and Section 482 of the CrPC seeking quashing of the

INDIAN COMMODITY EXCHANGE LIMITEDversusNEPTUNE OVERSEAS LIMITED & ORS.

2020 INSC 66327 November 2020Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined proceedings initiated by the Forward Markets Commission (later merged with SEBI) against Neptune Overseas Ltd (NOL) and its director Kailash Ramkishan Gupta for alleged trading irregularities. A detailed show‑cause notice dated 21 June 2011 was served only on Gupta, and the respondents argued

GAJENDRA SHARMAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2020 INSC 66227 November 2020Disposed off

Gajendra Sharma, a home loan borrower, challenged the Reserve Bank of India's (RBI) notification dated 27 March 2020 that allowed a six‑month moratorium on loan repayments but continued to levy interest, claiming it was ultra vires and violated his right to life under Article 21. The Union of India, invoking powers und

MADRAS BAR ASSOCIATIONversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2020 INSC 66627 November 2020Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the constitutionality of the Tribunal, Appellate Tribunal and other Authorities (Qualification, Experience and other Conditions of Service of Members) Rules, 2020 (the 2020 Rules) and the mechanisms for appointment, tenure, and service conditions of members of 19 tribunals. It held that the R

SATYAMA DUBEY & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2020 INSC 61227 October 2020Disposed off

The Supreme Court heard a batch of writ petitions and intervention applications filed under Article 32 seeking a fair investigation into the gang‑rape and murder of a 19‑year‑old girl in Hathras, Uttar Pradesh, and alleging illegal cremation of the victim. The State Government had already ordered the Central Bureau of

THE STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.versusDAVINDER SINGH & ORS.

2020 INSC 51227 August 2020Directions issued

The State of Punjab enacted Section 4(5) of the Punjab Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes (Reservation in Services) Act, 2006, reserving 50% of SC quota for Balmikis and Mazhabi Sikhs. The High Court struck down this provision, relying on E.V. Chinnaiah, and the Supreme Court dismissed a related SLP. In a three‑Judg

NAZIR MOHAMEDversusJ. KAMALA AND ORS.

2020 INSC 51127 August 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined two second appeals filed under Section 100 of the CPC concerning a suit for declaration of title and possession of a property. The High Court had entertained the appeals despite the absence of a substantial question of law, and had allowed the respondent's claim to possession while dismissing

ERUDHAYA PRIYAversusSTATE EXPRESS TRANSPORT CORPORATION LTD.

2020 INSC 46627 July 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a 23‑year‑old software engineer, was injured in a bus‑accident caused by the negligent driving of a State Express Transport Corporation bus, sustaining a permanent disability of 31.1%. She filed a claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) award

SHAILENDRA SWARUPversusTHE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE

2020 INSC 46527 July 2020Appeal(s) allowed

Modi Xerox Ltd. made foreign exchange remittances in 1985 and was served a show‑cause notice under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (FERA) against the company and its directors. One of the directors, Shailendra Swarup, contended that he was a part‑time, non‑executive director and had no responsibility for the

CHAIRMAN-CUM-MANAGING DIRECTOR, MAHANADI COALFIELDS LIMITEDversusSRI RABINDRANATH CHOUBEY

2020 INSC 40727 May 2020Disposed off

The appellant, Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd., sought to withhold the gratuity of its former employee, Sri Rabindranath Choubey, who had superannuated while a disciplinary inquiry was pending, and to impose dismissal after the inquiry concluded. The respondent argued that gratuity becomes payable on superannuation and that d

BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD ETC.versusM/S ICEBERG INDUSTRIES LTD. AND OTHERS ETC.

2020 INSC 37127 April 2020Dismissed

The Bihar State Electricity Board (BSEB) disconnected the high‑tension electricity supply to Iceberg Industries Ltd. after the company failed to pay the Annual Minimum Guarantee (AMG) and other charges, despite the company’s request for payment in instalments and a stay order from the Consumer Grievances Redressal Foru

AISHWARYA ATUL PUSALKARversusMAHARASHTRA HOUSING & AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS.

2020 INSC 36927 April 2020Disposed off

Aishwarya Atul Pusalkar, the wife of respondent No.8, sought a writ directing the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) to re‑house her in two flats (Nos. 601 & 602) of the redeveloped building, which she claimed as her matrimonial home. The High Court dismissed the writ, holding that the matter wa

COMMERCIAL TAXES OFFICERversusM/S. BOMBAY MACHINERY STORE

2020 INSC 36827 April 2020Dismissed

The Commercial Taxes Officer challenged the exemption claimed by M/s Bombay Machinery Store under Section 6(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, arguing that the State’s circulars imposed a 30‑day time‑limit after which goods retained by a carrier were deemed to be constructively delivered, converting the inter‑state

RE : VIJAY KURLE & ORS.versusRE:

2020 INSC 37327 April 2020Directions issued

The Supreme Court entertained a suo motu contempt petition filed against Vijay Kurle, Rashid Khan Pathan and Nilesh Ojha for circulating letters containing scandalous and scurrilous allegations against two Supreme Court judges. The Court examined whether it could initiate contempt proceedings without the consent of the

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (PORT) KOLKATAversusM/S STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD.

2020 INSC 36727 April 2020Dismissed

The Steel Authority of India Ltd. (SAIL) imported plant equipment under two contracts that also included fees for basic design, engineering, and foreign supervision. The customs authorities added these fees to the assessable value of the equipment under Rule 9(1)(e) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988, treating the co

STATE OF GUJARATversusMANSUKHBHAI KANJIBHAI SHAH

2020 INSC 36627 April 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Gujarat appealed the discharge of Mansukhbhai Kanjibhai Shah, a trustee of Sumandeep Charitable Trust which runs a deemed university, under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The charge sheet alleged that Shah demanded Rs 20 lakhs to allow a student to appear for examinations, constituting a corrupt p

ARUN KUMAR GUPTAversusSTATE OF JHARKHAND & ANR.

2020 INSC 22827 February 2020Dismissed

Two former judicial officers of Jharkhand challenged orders of compulsory retirement issued by the High Court’s Screening and Standing Committees, alleging that the committees ignored later service records, that promotions should erase earlier adverse entries, and that the retirements were not in public interest. The S

MARUTI TUKARAM BAGAWE AND ORS.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

2020 INSC 22927 February 2020Case Partly allowed

The Maharashtra Government, under a 1995 Service Career Development Scheme, granted Group C and D employees the pay‑scale of the next promotional post after 12 years of service. In 2004 it issued a resolution extending the Deputy Accountant scale to Junior Clerks, which was later withdrawn by a 2008 resolution after se

THE CHIEF REGIONAL OFFICER THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTDversusPRADIP AND ANR

2020 INSC 9127 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The Oriental Insurance Company appointed Pradip as an Assistant on the basis of a caste certificate claiming he belonged to the Dhangad Scheduled Tribe, whereas he actually belonged to the Dhangar community, a non‑ST group. The Scrutiny Committee invalidated his claim, but Pradip filed a writ petition seeking protectio

SKODA AUTO VOLKSWAGEN INDIA PRIVATE LIMITEDversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ORS.

2020 INSC 66126 November 2020Dismissed

Skoda Auto Volkswagen India Private Ltd sought to quash an FIR registered under Sections 34, 471, 468, 467, 420, 419 and 406 IPC for alleged installation of defeat devices in its vehicles. The High Court refused to quash the FIR, granting only protection against arrest. The petitioner argued that the police could not i

MANOHAR LAL JAT & ORS. ETC.versusTHE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. ETC.

2020 INSC 66026 November 2020Dismissed

The Rajasthan government created 554 Tax Assistant posts and filled 80% through direct recruitment (DR) and 20% through promotion of departmental staff (DP). Advertisements for DRs were issued on 25‑01‑2011 and for DPs on 24‑05‑2011; however, DP appointment letters were issued before those of DRs. The seniority list pu

M. RAVINDRANversusTHE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE

2020 INSC 60826 October 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, accused under the NDPS Act, was remanded to judicial custody on 4 August 2018. After the statutory period of 180 days elapsed on 31 January 2019, he filed an application for default bail under Section 167(2) of the CrPC on 1 February 2019, offering to furnish bail. While the bail application was being he

RAVEEN KUMARversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2020 INSC 60626 October 2020Dismissed

The appellant Raveen Kumar was stopped by police near the HP‑J&K border and charas weighing 1 kg 230 g was seized from his van. The trial court acquitted him, relying on a prosecution reply to a bail application that suggested prior knowledge of the appellant, deeming the seizure not a "chance recovery". The High Court

RAJESH DHIMANversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2020 INSC 60726 October 2020Dismissed

The appellants, Rajesh Dhiman and Gulshan Rana, were stopped by police while riding a motorcycle and a search of a backpack on Dhiman yielded 3.1 kg of charas. The trial court acquitted them, holding that the prosecution had not proved the charge beyond reasonable doubt, especially because the complainant (PW‑8) was al

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERSversusAGRICAS LLP AND OTHERS ETC.

2020 INSC 50826 August 2020Disposed off

The Union of India amended the import policy for peas and other pulses, shifting them from a free to a restricted category and imposing quantitative import limits through notifications and a trade notice issued under the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 (FTDR Act). Importers challenged the validity

V. SUKUMARANversusSTATE OF KERALA & ANR.

2020 INSC 51026 August 2020Appeal(s) allowed

V. Sukumaran, who had worked for over seven years as a Casual Labour Roll (CLR) employee in the Kerala Fisheries Department, later entered government service through a regular recruitment process and retired as an Upper Division Clerk. He claimed that his CLR service should be counted as qualifying service for pension

NARASAMMA & ORS.versusA. KRISHNAPPA (DEAD) THROUGH LRS.

2020 INSC 50926 August 2020Dismissed

The plaintiff, A. Krishnappa, sued the defendant’s wife, Smt. Narasamma, for possession of a schedule property, claiming full ownership and seeking removal of a temporary structure. The defendant relied on an unregistered sale agreement dated 10‑10‑1976 and a General Power of Attorney dated 08‑08‑1988 to assert title,

STATE OF M.P. & ORS.versusRAKESH SETHI & ANR.

2020 INSC 50626 August 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The Madhya Pradesh High Court struck down Rule 55A of the State Motor Vehicles Rules, which imposed fees for reserving specific vehicle registration numbers, holding it ultra vires the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. The State appealed, arguing that under Sections 65(1) and 211 of t

MOHD. INAMversusSANJAY KUMAR SINGHAL & ORS.

2020 INSC 44526 June 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Mohd. Inam, challenged a vacancy declaration made by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer under Section 12(1)(b) of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972, alleging that only his family members occupied the premises and therefore the vacancy provision was

DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, RAILWAY PROTECTION FORCE AND ORS.versusRAJENDRA KUMAR DUBEY

2020 INSC 65625 November 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned a Sub‑Inspector of the Railway Protection Force, Rajendra Kumar Dubey, who was compulsorily retired on 5 December 2007 for gross neglect of duty relating to theft of railway property. Dubey challenged the retirement in a writ petition, and the Bombay High Court set aside the order, reinstating him wi

ANWAR ALI AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2020 INSC 56325 September 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants Anwar Ali and another were convicted by the Himachal Pradesh High Court for murder and related offences based on circumstantial evidence, overturning a trial court acquittal. The trial court had found material contradictions in the prosecution's version of the recovery of a knife, rope, and other items,

RAJ PAL SINGHversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, HARYANA, ROHTAK

2020 INSC 50525 August 2020Dismissed

The appellant owned land that was leased to a college; the lease expired in 1967 and the Haryana Government issued a notification for compulsory acquisition on 15 May 1968, later making an award on 29 September 1970. The dispute centered on when capital gains under Section 45 of the Income‑Tax Act, 1961 accrued – wheth

SITABAI SHANTARAM TALAWNEKAR & ORS.versusCUSTODIAN OF EVACUEE PROPERTY & ORS.

2020 INSC 22225 February 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute concerned the "Conde‑Mayem" property in Goa, declared evacuee property and administered by the Custodian of Evacuee Property. The appellants were in possession as tenants of the Custodian, while Respondent No.2 sought declaration as a tenant (or deemed tenant) under Sections 7 and 8‑A of the Goa, Daman and

LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIAversusMUKESH POONAMCHAND SHAH

2020 INSC 22425 February 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) issued a notice to show cause under Regulation 39(4) of its 1960 Staff Regulations seeking removal of employee Mukesh Poonamchand Shah after his conviction by a Special CBI Judge for offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act and the Indian Penal Code. Shah challenged

NARAYAN YADAV (D) THR. LRS.versusTHE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

2020 INSC 22125 February 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants purchased mortgaged land at an auction on 15 June 1983 after the original owner defaulted on a loan. The writ petitioners, who claimed to be bona‑fide purchasers under earlier registered deeds, filed an application under Section 28 of the Bihar & Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1914 to set aside the

PUNJAB AND SIND BANK AND ORS.versusMRS. DURGESH KUWAR

2020 INSC 22525 February 2020Disposed off

Mrs. Durgesh Kuwar, a Chief Manager (Scale IV) of Punjab and Sind Bank, was transferred from the Indore branch to a small rural branch at Sarsawa after she reported serious irregularities in liquor contractor accounts and alleged sexual harassment by the Zonal Manager. She contended that the transfer was retaliatory, v

B. K. RAVICHANDRA & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2020 INSC 65324 November 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, B.K. Ravichandra and others, sought to recover possession of three parcels of land that had been requisitioned by the Union of India under the Defence of India Act, 1962 and deemed to be covered by the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Properties Act, 1952. The High Court, despite finding the

TEJ BAHADURversusSHRI NARENDRA MODI

2020 INSC 65524 November 2020Dismissed

Tej Bahadur, a former Border Security Force officer dismissed in 2017, filed an election petition challenging Narendra Modi's election to the Lok Sabha from Varanasi, alleging his own nomination was wrongly rejected and the election was vitiated. He had filed two nomination papers in April 2019 but failed to attach the

WG. CDR. ARIFUR RAHMAN KHAN AND ALEYA SULTANA AND ORS.versusDLF SOUTHERN HOMES PVT LTD. (NOW KNOWN AS BEGUR OMR HOMES PVT. LTD.) AND ORS.

2020 INSC 50324 August 2020Case Partly allowed

The case involved 339 flat buyers who purchased apartments in DLF's Westend Heights project. The developer failed to hand over possession within the contractually stipulated 36 months, causing a delay of two to four years. The buyers sought compensation beyond the Rs 5 per square foot per month stipulated in the Apartm

R. PALANISAMY & ORS.versusTHE REGISTRAR GENERAL, HIGH COURT OF MADRAS & ORS.

2020 INSC 46424 July 2020Dismissed

Twenty-two employees (record clerks and office assistants) filed a writ petition seeking promotion to the post of Junior Bailiff without the required SSLC qualification, relying on a 2009 High Court order and arguing that the vacancies arose before the Tamil Nadu Government Servants (Conditions of Service) Act, 2016. T

NISHA PRIYA BHATIAversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2020 INSC 35524 April 2020Disposed off

Ms. Nisha Priya Bhatia, a Director in the Research and Analysis Wing (R&AW), complained of sexual harassment against senior officers, after which her identity was publicly disclosed and she attempted suicide. The government declared her "exposed" and "unemployable" and ordered her compulsory retirement under Rule 135 o

YUM! RESTAURANTS (MARKETING) PRIVATE LIMITEDversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI

2020 INSC 35324 April 2020Disposed off

YUM! Restaurants (Marketing) Private Ltd., a wholly‑owned subsidiary of YRIPL, claimed that its advertising, marketing and promotion activities were carried out on a non‑profit, mutual‑concern basis and therefore its surplus should be exempt from tax. The Supreme Court examined the doctrine of mutuality, which requires

MOHD. ASIF NASEERversusWEST WATCH COMPANY THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR

2020 INSC 36324 April 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The landlord, Mohd. Asif Naseer, purchased a shop and sought its release under Section 21(1)(a) of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Building (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972, claiming a bona‑fide need for personal use and having given six months' notice to the tenant. The tenant contested, alleging that no v

BASIR AHMED SISODIYAversusTHE INCOME TAX OFFICER

2020 INSC 35224 April 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a trader, was assessed for AY 1998-99 and the Assessing Officer added Rs.2,26,000 as "cash credit" under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, treating it as bogus entries because the appellant could not initially substantiate purchases from unregistered marble dealers. The appellant appealed, and the additi

UNION OF INDIA & ANR.versusEXCHANGE CENTRE

2020 INSC 35424 April 2020Dismissed

The UAE Exchange Centre, a UAE company, obtained RBI permission under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act to operate liaison offices in India for limited functions such as receiving remittance data, printing cheques/drafts and couriering them to beneficiaries. The Authority for Advance Rulings held that income from the

ANEESH KUMAR V.S. & ORS.versusSTATE OF KERALA & ORS.

2020 INSC 36524 April 2020Dismissed

The Kerala Public Service Commission (KPSC) published a first Ranked List (RL‑I) for Sub‑Inspector of Police (Trainee) in September 2013 and later issued several advices from it, the last on 11 November 2015. The appellants, empanelled in RL‑I, sought appointment to 93 Non‑Joining Duty (NJD) vacancies reported on 12 Ju

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

2020 INSC 36224 April 2020Appeal(s) allowed

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

ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD & ANRversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2020 INSC 35824 April 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh bought a transit marine insurance policy from Bajaj Allianz to cover the transport of a Bell‑430 helicopter from Canada to Bhopal. After the helicopter arrived in a knocked‑down condition at New Delhi, it was stored and assembled for a planned flight to Bhopal; damage to the window and tail

SHIVAKUMAR & ORS.versusSHARANABASAPPA & ORS.

2020 INSC 34924 April 2020Dismissed

The plaintiffs filed a suit claiming ownership of several properties on the basis of a Will dated 20‑05‑1991 executed by the deceased Sri Sangappa and sought to declare a trust created by the defendants void. The defendants challenged the genuineness of the Will, pointing to numerous irregularities such as the use of d

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusEXIDE INDUSTRIES LIMITED & ANR.

2020 INSC 35024 April 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India challenged the constitutional validity of clause (f) inserted by the Finance Act, 2001 into Section 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which made deductions for leave‑encashment payable only on actual payment. Exide Industries argued that the clause violated the assessee's right to choose a mercantile

M/S. TRIPOWER ENTERPRISES (PRIVATE) LIMITEDversusSTATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS.

2020 INSC 36024 April 2020Case Partly allowed

The borrower defaulted on a loan secured by a mortgage offered by the guarantor, leading State Bank of India to initiate SARFAESI proceedings and eventually auction the secured assets, which were purchased by Tripower Enterprises. The bank sought the return of original title documents deposited with the Debt Recovery T

SUJATA KOHLIversusREGISTRAR GENERAL, HIGH COURT OF DELHI & ORS.

2020 INSC 36424 April 2020Dismissed

The appellant, a member of the Delhi Higher Judicial Service (DHJS), challenged the constitutional validity of Rule 27 of the Delhi Higher Judicial Service Rules, 1970 and the High Court's Full Court resolutions that introduced a five‑year "very good" (A) Annual Confidential Report (ACR) grading requirement for promoti

INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIAversusJ.R. WILLIAM SINGH

2020 INSC 8724 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) and its Employees' Association entered into a settlement on 10 January 1984 that provided time‑bound promotions for Class III and IV employees, while Clause 1(v) reserved promotion decisions for Jamadars, Drivers, Electricians and similar posts to the President of

GURSHINDER SINGHversusSHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ANR.

2020 INSC 8424 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant insured his tractor under a commercial vehicle package policy and, after the tractor was stolen on 28‑10‑2010, lodged an FIR the same day but submitted a claim to the insurer only on 15‑12‑2010. The insurer rejected the claim on the ground of delayed notice, leading the appellant to obtain relief from the

SANJAY MARUTIRAO PATILversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2020 INSC 8524 January 2020Dismissed

The appellant, a Sepoy in the Indian Army, was tried by a Summary Court Martial for three misconduct charges under Section 63 of the Army Act and pleaded guilty, receiving a reduction in rank. Later, the Army authorities served a show‑cause notice under Section 20 read with Rule 17 of the Army Rules, alleging fraudulen

STATE OF KERALA ETC.versusRAJESH ETC.

2020 INSC 8824 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Kerala prosecuted several accused for possession of large quantities of hashish oil, a commercial quantity under the NDPS Act. The High Court granted post‑arrest bail to the accused without recording the mandatory findings required by Section 37 of the NDPS Act. The State appealed, arguing that bail could

BELI RAMversusRAJINDER KUMAR & ANR.

2020 INSC 56023 September 2020Dismissed

The plaintiff Beli Ram, owner of a truck, employed a driver who had been driving with an expired licence for nearly three years. The driver suffered a road accident resulting in 20% permanent disability and claimed compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923. The High Court held the insurer not liable and p

SRI NILANJAN BHATTACHARYAversusTHE STATE OF KARANATAKA AND OTHERS

2020 INSC 56223 September 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an Indian citizen residing in the US, sought temporary custody of his three‑year‑old US‑citizen son after the mother returned to India with the child. The Superior Court of New Jersey granted the appellant temporary custody, and the appellant filed a habeas corpus petition in the Supreme Court, which was

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusM/S G S CHATHA RICE MILLS & ANR.

2020 INSC 56123 September 2020Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered whether Notification 5/2019, issued under Section 8A of the Customs Tariff Act to raise the import duty on goods from Pakistan to 200%, applied retrospectively to bills of entry that had been presented and self‑assessed before the notification was uploaded to the e‑gazette at 20:46:58 on 16

UNION OF INDIA & ANR.versusN. R. SRIVASTA & ORS.

2020 INSC 46223 July 2020Dismissed

The Union of India and Safdarjung Hospital appealed against the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission’s (NCDRC) order that held Safdarjung Hospital liable for medical negligence and directed payment of Rs.2 lakh compensation to the complainant. The complaint arose from the death of a premature baby who was re

BAJRANG LAL SHARMAversusC. K. MATHEW AND ORS.

2020 INSC 7923 January 2020Directions issued

The petitioners, senior Rajasthan Administrative Service officers, challenged the validity of a 2011 notification granting consequential seniority to SC/ST employees, alleging it violated Supreme Court directions in M. Nagaraj and Suraj Bhan Meena. The High Court had held the notification void and in contempt, but the

M/S. GRANULES INDIA LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2020 INSC 8223 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

M/s Granules India Ltd imported 96 tonnes of acetic anhydride in 1993 under an advance licence issued before 19 May 1992 and claimed exemption from customs duty under Notifications 203/1992 and 204/1992. The exemption was withdrawn by Notification 183/1993 dated 25 November 1993, but a clarificatory Notification 105/19

STAR INDIA (P) LTD.versusSOCIETY OF CATALYSTS & ANR.

2020 INSC 8123 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether Star India (P) Ltd and Bharti Airtel Ltd, who jointly conducted the 'Har Seat Hot Seat' (HSHS) contest on the TV programme KBC, engaged in an unfair trade practice under Section 2(1)(r)(3)(a) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 by allegedly funding the prize money from the higher SMS

STATE OF KERALA & ANR. ETC. ETC.versusM/S RDS PROJECT LIMITED & ORS. ETC. ETC.

2020 INSC 55922 September 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Kerala ordered the demolition and reconstruction of the Palarivattom flyover after a High Level Committee, comprising senior engineers, accepted Dr. E. Sreedharan's recommendation that a new structure would guarantee a 100‑year service life, despite earlier reports from IIT Madras suggesting repair with ca

NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR PEOPLE’S MOVEMENTS & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2020 INSC 55822 September 2020Dismissed

The petitioners, National Alliance for People’s Movements and others, challenged the categorisation adopted by the High‑Powered Committee (HPC) of Maharashtra for granting interim bail or parole to prisoners during the Covid‑19 pandemic, alleging that the exclusion of certain categories—such as serious economic offence

SHIV RAJ GUPTAversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, DELHI-IV

2020 INSC 46122 July 2020Appeal(s) allowed

Shiv Raj Gupta, former chairman and MD of Central Distillery and Breweries Ltd., sold his controlling shareholding to the Shaw Wallace Company (SWC) group and received Rs 6.6 crore as a non‑competition fee under a deed of covenant. The Assessing Officer treated the payment as taxable under s.28(ii)(a) of the Income Tax

PATEL ENGINEERING LTD.versusNORTH EASTERN ELECTRIC POWER CORPORATION LTD. (NEEPCO)

2020 INSC 40322 May 2020Dismissed

Patel Engineering Ltd. challenged three arbitral awards dated 29‑03‑2016 concerning payment for extra lead under a contract with North Eastern Electric Power Corporation Ltd. (NEEPCO). NEEPCO filed applications under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996; the Additional Deputy Commissioner upheld the

HIRA SINGH AND ANOTHERversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

2017 INSC 58322 April 2020Reference answered

The Supreme Court examined whether, for purposes of determining "small" or "commercial" quantity under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, the weight of neutral substances mixed with a narcotic drug should be counted. The Court rejected the view in E. Micheal Raj that only the pure drug content ma

CHEBROLU LEELA PRASAD RAO & ORS.versusSTATE OF A.P. & ORS.

2020 INSC 34422 April 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the validity of G.O. Ms. No.3/2000 issued by the erstwhile Andhra Pradesh Government, which provided 100% reservation for Scheduled Tribe candidates in teacher posts in scheduled areas. The Court held that under Paragraph 5(1) of Schedule V, the Governor may only exclude or modify an existing

UNION OF INDIA & ANOTHER ETC. ETC.versusM/S V.V.F LIMITED & ANOTHER ETC. ETC.

2020 INSC 34722 April 2020Disposed off

The Union of India issued an excise duty exemption for new industries in earthquake‑hit Kutch, promising a full cash/PLA refund. Subsequent notifications in 2008 limited the refund to a percentage based on actual value addition, citing tax‑evasion concerns. The original writ petitioners claimed the later notifications

NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION OF INDIAversusALIMENTA S.A.

2020 INSC 34522 April 2020Appeal(s) allowed

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

WEST U.P. SUGAR MILLS ASSOCIATION & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2020 INSC 34622 April 2020Reference answered

The Supreme Court examined a reference concerning whether the Uttar Pradesh government could fix a State Advised Price (SAP) for sugarcane under Section 16 of the U.P. Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply and Purchase) Act, 1953 and whether such power conflicted with the Central government's authority to fix a minimum price

SHYAMLAL DEVDA AND OTHERSversusPARIMALA

2020 INSC 7722 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The marriage between the respondent and appellant No.14 was solemnised in Rajasthan, after which the couple lived in Chennai. In 2014 the respondent travelled to Bengaluru for her sister's wedding and subsequently refused to return to the matrimonial home, alleging domestic violence by her husband, his parents, and sev

VARADARAJANversusKANAKAVALLI & ORS.

2020 INSC 7522 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Varadarajan, sought to execute a decree in favour of the deceased decree‑holder Umadevi by filing an application as her legal representative under a Will. The Executing Court allowed the application, but the High Court, in revision under Section 115 of the CPC, set aside that order on the ground that the

MAHARASHTRA SEAMLESS LIMITEDversusPADMANABHAN VENKATESH & ORS.

2020 INSC 7622 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP) involving United Seamless Tubular Private Ltd., where the successful resolution applicant, Maharashtra Seamless Ltd. (MSL), had offered an upfront payment of Rs. 477 crore, which was below the average liquidation value of Rs. 597.54 crore deter

RAKESH KUMAR AGARWALLA & ANR.versusNATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU & ORS.

2020 INSC 55721 September 2020Disposed off

The petitioners challenged NLSIU's admission notice dated 03‑09‑2020 which introduced a separate online National Law Aptitude Test (NLAT) instead of the Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) scheduled for 28‑09‑2020. The Court examined whether the petitioners had locus, whether the notice required prior recommendation of th

SRI V.N. KRISHNA MURTHY & ANR. ETC. ETC.versusSRI RAVIKUMAR & ORS. ETC. ETC.

2020 INSC 50221 August 2020Dismissed

The owners of certain land executed an agreement to sell to a housing society and also a General Power of Attorney (GPA) authorising the society's officers to sell the property. Sale deeds in favour of the appellants were later executed under the GPA. The respondents filed suits seeking cancellation of the agreement to

NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONversusKAVINDER AND OTHERS

2020 INSC 45821 July 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The North Delhi Municipal Corporation (N.D.M.C.) advertised a post of Labour Welfare Superintendent requiring a post‑graduate degree or diploma in Social Work, Labour Welfare, Industrial Relations, Personnel Management or any allied subject. The respondent, Kavinder, held an MBA degree in which he studied Human Resourc

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusR. KARTHIK

2020 INSC 6221 January 2020Dismissed

The sailor R. Karthik was dismissed from the Indian Navy under Section 45(a) of the Navy Act after a superior officer complained that Karthik had struck him during an incident at sea. The Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) set aside the dismissal, deeming it disproportionate, and substituted it with a 75‑day detention and los

PAULversusSTATE OF KERALA

2020 INSC 6921 January 2020Dismissed

Paul was married to Jessy and was accused of cruelty and of causing her death. The trial court initially acquitted him, but the Kerala High Court set aside the acquittal, remanded the case for further examination under Section 313 Cr.PC, and the trial court subsequently convicted him under Section 302 IPC, sentencing h

DR NALLAPAREDDY SRIDHAR REDDYversusTHE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ORS

2020 INSC 6821 January 2020Dismissed

The appellant, Dr Nallapareddy Sridhar Reddy, was originally charged under Section 498A IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act. After the trial had proceeded, the public prosecutor filed an application under Section 216 of the CrPC to add charges of cheating (IPC ss. 406 and 420) based on an additional charge‑sheet filed in

NIRMAL KUMAR PARSANversusCOMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES & ORS.

2020 INSC 6021 January 2020Dismissed

The appellants imported cigarettes, stored them in a bonded warehouse in West Bengal and sold them to the master of a foreign‑going ship as ship stores without paying customs duty. They claimed the sales were "in the course of import" and therefore exempt from West Bengal sales tax under the 1954 and 1994 Acts. The Cou

CHANDRA MOHAN VARMAversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2020 INSC 7021 January 2020Dismissed

Chandra Mohan Varma, a Professor of Cardiology in a Uttar Pradesh government medical college, retired on attaining the age of 60 on 13 August 2014. He was granted a ‘session ending benefit’ extending his service until 30 June 2015 under a Government Order dated 19 November 2012. While he was on this extension, the Stat

DHANSAI SAHUversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ORS.

2020 INSC 7421 January 2020Matter referred to larger bench

DhanSai Sahu, who had worked as a daily‑wager before being regularised as a government employee, claimed gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 after superannuation. The High Court held that Section 2(e) of the Act excluded him because his post was governed by the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Pension) Rules,

INDU BAI & ORS.versusSTATE OF TELANGANA & ORS.

2020 INSC 6321 January 2020Disposed off

The Supreme Court disposed of two appeals. In Indu Bai & Ors. v. State of Telangana, the Court set aside the High Court's order that had allowed the State's challenge to the claim of pre‑partition tenancy and remitted the matter to the High Court for proper determination. In The Home Secretary (Prison) v. H. Nilofer Ni

RAMESAN (DEAD) THROUGH LR. GIRIJA AversusTHE STATE OF KERALA

2020 INSC 6621 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

Ramesan was convicted under Sections 55(a) and 55(g) of the Kerala Abkari Act and sentenced to two years' imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1 lakh for each charge. He appealed the conviction, but died while the appeal was pending. The Kerala High Court held that the imprisonment portion of the sentence became unworkable du

KEISHAM MEGHACHANDRA SINGHversusTHE HON’BLE SPEAKER MANIPUR LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY & ORS.

2020 INSC 6521 January 2020Disposed off

The 2017 Manipur Legislative Assembly election produced a hung house; the Congress‑nominated MLA (Respondent No.3) joined a BJP‑led government and was sworn in as a minister. Thirteen disqualification petitions were filed under paragraph 2(1)(a) of the Tenth Schedule, but the Speaker failed to decide them for over two

STANDARD CHARTERED BANKversusMSTC LIMITED

2020 INSC 7221 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

Standard Chartered Bank filed a Section 19 application before the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) to recover a debt of about Rs 191 crore from MSTC Limited. After the DRT allowed an intervening application, the respondent appealed, withdrew the appeal, and then filed a review petition under Rule 5A, which was dismissed fo

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.versusSRI BUCHIYYAMMA RICE MILL & ANR.

2020 INSC 7121 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The rice mill suffered a boiler collapse after a lorry allegedly collided with it, and the insurer, New India Assurance, repudiated the claim, citing overload as the cause. The insurer appointed a preliminary surveyor, a structural expert, an investigator, and a final IRDA‑licensed surveyor, all of whom concluded the c

DULESHWAR & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF M.P. (NOW CHHATTISGARH)

2020 INSC 6121 January 2020Disposed off

The case involved two violent incidents on 15 October 1998 in Kodebod, where a large group of armed men assaulted Dhanwaram, causing grievous injuries, and later beat Govind Singh to death. The trial court convicted ten of the eighteen accused under Sections 147, 148, 302/149 IPC, while acquitting eight, and the High C

CHANABASAPPAversusKARNATAKA NEERAVARI NIGAM LTD. & ANR.

2020 INSC 6421 January 2020Disposed off

The appellant claimed that his land was submerged in 1991 due to the Malprabha Reservoir project and therefore sought damages and interest under Section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 from that date. The High Court enhanced compensation but limited interest to the date of award (23 July 2009), rejecting the claim

RUSODAY SECURITIES LTD.versusNATIONAL STOCK EXCHANGE OF INDIA LTD. & ORS.

2020 INSC 65020 November 2020Disposed off

Rusoday Securities Ltd., a trading member of the National Stock Exchange (NSE), exceeded its gross exposure limits in 1997, leading the NSE to withdraw its trading facilities and later expel it for failing to maintain required capital deposits. The appellant challenged the validity of the NSE's circular prescribing ope

VENKATESAN BALASUBRAMANIYANversusTHE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, D.R.I. BANGALORE

2020 INSC 65220 November 2020Dismissed

Two offences under the NDPS Act were investigated – one for contraband recovered from a car in Hyderabad and another for contraband seized from a factory in Maharashtra. A combined complaint covering both offences was filed in the Special Court at Omerga on 6 July 2018, well within the 180‑day period prescribed for fil

PAWAN KUMAR GUPTAversusSTATE OF NCT OF DELHI

2020 INSC 32420 March 2020Dismissed

Pawan Kumar Gupta, convicted of a capital offence, filed a mercy petition with the President of India which was rejected. He challenged the rejection through a writ petition under Articles 32 and 72 of the Constitution, contending that his claim of juvenility had not been finally decided, that he suffered torture in pr

PARTAP SINGH (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. & ORS.versusSHIV RAM (DEAD) THROUGH LRS.

2020 INSC 21920 February 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiffs, heirs of Shri Partap Singh, sued Shiv Ram alleging ownership of certain lands and seeking possession and injunctions, while the defendant claimed to be a tenant and that the suit should be tried in the revenue court. The trial court, relying on oral testimony, held that the presumption of truth in the J

MOTAMARRI APPANNA VEERRAJU @ MAV RAJUversusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL

2020 INSC 21620 February 2020Disposed off

Motamari Appanna Veerraju (Mav Raju) was charged under several IPC sections and the Prevention of Corruption Act. After the Sessions Court rejected his bail, the Calcutta High Court granted him interim bail on 1 Oct 2018 and kept the regular bail application pending, issuing successive interim orders until November 201

YASHITA SAHUversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

2020 INSC 5820 January 2020

The Supreme Court examined a dispute where a mother, Yashita Sahu, took her US‑born daughter to India in violation of a consent order of the Norfolk Juvenile Court, which had granted shared parenting. The father filed a writ of habeas corpus in the Rajasthan High Court seeking the child's return, and the High Court ord

M/S FAIR COMMUNICATION AND CONSULTANTS & ANR.versusSURENDRA KERDILE

2020 INSC 5720 January 2020Dismissed

Surendra Kerdile, the maternal uncle, gave his nephew Sanjay a power of attorney to sell a flat. Two sale agreements were executed, one for Rs 2,30,000 on 03‑07‑1989 and a later one for Rs 1,30,000 on 30‑11‑1989. Surendra advanced Rs 80,000 to Sanjay for business expansion; Sanjay issued post‑dated cheques which were l

PAWAN KUMAR GUPTAversusSTATE OF NCT OF DELHI

2020 INSC 5520 January 2020Dismissed

Pawan Kumar Gupta, an accused in the Nirbhaya case, claimed he was a juvenile at the time of the offence on the basis of a school leaving certificate showing a birth date of 08‑10‑1996. He sought an enquiry under Section 7A of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, but the Metropolitan Magist

DESH RAJversusBALKISHAN (D) THROUGH PROPOSED LR MS. ROHINI

2020 INSC 5920 January 2020Disposed off

The appellant and respondent, brothers, entered into an agreement to sell one floor of their ancestral property, which the respondent later sought to enforce through a suit for specific performance. The appellant repeatedly failed to file a written statement within the timelines prescribed by Order VIII Rule 1 of the C

M/S KALEDONIA JUTE AND FIBRES PVT. LTD.versusM/S AXIS NIRMAN AND INDUSTRIES LTD. & ORS.

2020 INSC 64819 November 2020Appeal(s) allowed

M/s Kaledonia Jute and Fibres Pvt. Ltd. (appellant) sought to recover a debt from M/s Axis Nirman and Industries Ltd. (first respondent) and filed a petition under Section 7 of the IBC before the NCLT. Simultaneously, a winding‑up petition against the first respondent was pending before the Allahabad High Court, which

JAYANTILAL VERMAversusSTATE OF M.P. (NOW CHHATTISGARH)

2020 INSC 64919 November 2020Dismissed

The appellant, Jayantilal Verma, was convicted under Section 302 IPC for the strangulation death of his wife, Sahodara Bai, whose body was found in their matrimonial home. The prosecution's case rested primarily on the testimony of the step‑brother (PW‑1) and the post‑mortem report indicating homicidal asphyxia. Althou

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

2020 INSC 49819 August 2020Disposed off

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

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

2020 INSC 49719 August 2020Dismissed

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

GHANSHYAM UPADHYAYversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2020 INSC 49919 August 2020Dismissed

Ghanshyam Upadhyay, a lawyer, filed a criminal miscellaneous petition seeking the dissolution of a Commission of Inquiry that was set up to investigate the alleged encounter killing of Vikas Dubey. He alleged bias and conflict of interest against the Commission's Chairman, Justice B.S. Chauhan, and its member, K.L. Gup

MOHD. ANWARversusTHE STATE (N.C.T. OF DELHI)

2020 INSC 49619 August 2020Dismissed

The appellant, Mohd. Anwar, was accused of robbing a motorist with two accomplices, using a knife and a revolver, and extorting Rs.30,000. The trial court convicted him of robbery with hurt and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment, which the High Court reduced to two years under Section 394 IPC and added a conviction

JINOFER KAWASJI BHUJWALAversusTHE STATE OF GUJARAT

2020 INSC 44119 June 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a director of Aatash Norcontrol Limited (ANL), was arrested in connection with alleged financial irregularities in a Build‑Own‑Operate‑Transfer project for a Vessel Traffic and Port Management System (VTPMS) in the Gulf of Khambhat. While the dispute over capital costs was referred to arbitration, the Gu

MUNISH KUMARversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND ANOTHER

2020 INSC 39819 May 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant sought a compassionate appointment after his father, a government employee, died while in service on 16 June 2004. The father had applied for retirement on medical grounds before his death, but the retirement was approved only after his death, with effect from an earlier date. The State rejected the appel

KAVITA KANWARversusMRS. PAMELA MEHTA & ORS.

2020 INSC 39719 May 2020Dismissed

The appellant, the younger daughter of Smt. Amarjeet Mamik, sought probate of a 2003 Will that left the entire immovable property to her, while excluding her brother and elder sister. The Trial Court and the Delhi High Court rejected the probate petition, finding numerous unexplained suspicious circumstances, including

THE WORKMEN THROUGH THE CONVENER FCI LABOUR FEDERATIONversusRAVUTHAR DAWOOD NASEEM

2020 INSC 40119 May 2020Dismissed

The workmen, represented by the FCI Labour Federation, sought to compel the Food Corporation of India (FCI) to regularise contract labourers under the Departmental Labour System (DLS) as directed by the Supreme Court in a 2018 order. The corporation had instead regularised the workers under its long‑existing Direct Pay

ARNAB RANJAN GOSWAMIversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2020 INSC 40019 May 2020Disposed off

The petitioners, a prominent journalist and media owner, challenged fourteen FIRs and complaints filed in various states arising from a single television broadcast on 21 April 2020, alleging that the FIRs violated their freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a). The Supreme Court examined whether multiple FIRs on the sa

GURCHARAN SINGH & ORS.versusANGREZ KAUR & ANR.

2020 INSC 31419 March 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Gurcharan Singh and others, obtained a decree on 9 January 1995 confirming their ownership of a suit land based on a registered will (dated 2 September 1986) and a family settlement (dated 15 June 1994) executed by the sole defendant, Bhajan Singh. Bhajan Singh had admitted these facts in his statement

NAND RAM (D) THROUGH LRS. & ORS.versusJAGDISH PRASAD (D) THROUGH LRS.

2020 INSC 31519 March 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, owners of land leased for 20 years to the respondent, sought possession after the lease was deemed terminated for non‑payment of rent and after part of the land was de‑notified following acquisition under the Land Acquisition Act. The respondent claimed a share of compensation for the unexpired lease te

K PAVITHRA AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2020 INSC 32119 March 2020Dismissed

The applicants, 277 petitioners in B K Pavithra, challenged a Government Order dated 15 May 2019 and a circular dated 24 June 2019 issued by the Karnataka government to implement the Karnataka Extension of Consequential Seniority Act 2018, seeking directions for post‑based reservation, application of the creamy‑layer p

RAM CHANDRA PRASAD SINGHversusSHARAD YADAV

2020 INSC 32219 March 2020Dismissed

The appellant, a Rajya Sabha MP and JD(U) leader, petitioned the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha to disqualify respondent Sharad Yadav under paragraph 2(1)(a) of the Tenth Schedule, alleging that Yadav had voluntarily given up JD(U) membership by aligning with the RJD. The Chairman, after due process, disqualified Yadav on

FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIAversusBRIHANMUMBAI MAHANAGAR PALIKA & ORS.

2020 INSC 31819 March 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The Food Corporation of India (FCI) occupied godowns and silos that were constructed by the Central Government on land acquired before 1964 and claimed exemption from Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation's property tax under Article 285(1) of the Constitution. The Municipal Corporation argued that, under Section 146 of t

AKSHAY KUMAR SINGHversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2020 INSC 31219 March 2020Dismissed

Akshay Kumar Singh, a convict in the Nirbhaya case, filed a mercy petition with the President of India, which was rejected on 19 March 2020. He subsequently filed a writ petition under Article 32 challenging the rejection, alleging miscarriage of justice, solitary confinement, torture, media influence, and a pending di

MUKESHversusSTATE OF NCT OF DELHI

2020 INSC 31119 March 2020Dismissed

Mukesh, a convicted participant in the Nirbhaya case, filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution challenging the merits of his conviction and a series of subsequent orders, including the High Court's upholding of the conviction, a review petition, a curative petition, a mercy petition rejected by the Pr

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.versusVIJAY SHANKAR DUBEY

2020 INSC 31719 March 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a former Joint Director, Prosecution who retired on 31 January 1997, sought a revised pension based on a pay‑scale amendment issued by the Uttar Pradesh Government on 2 February 2007, which upgraded the pay scale of certain prosecution posts from 1 April 2001 following an analogy with the CBI. The High

RAJASTHAN STATE ELECTRICITY BOARDversusTHE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (ASSESSMENT) & ANR.

2020 INSC 31319 March 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The Rajasthan State Electricity Board (a government company) filed its return for AY 1991‑92 on 30‑12‑1991 claiming 100% depreciation, although the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1991 had already restricted depreciation for companies to 75%. The Assessing Officer disallowed the excess 25% depreciation and levied additi

SHYAM SAHNIversusARJUN PRAKASH AND OTHERS

2020 INSC 31919 March 2020Appeal(s) allowed

Shyam Sahni filed a civil suit seeking declaration, possession, injunction and partition of property inherited from his mother. Respondent No.1 (Arjun Prakash) and his father created an equitable mortgage on the property to secure a bank loan and repeatedly failed to honour undertakings to clear the charge, leading to

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