Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

A S BOPANNA

5 judgments delivered by benches including this judge.

SANJAY KUMAR AGARWALversusSTATE TAX OFFICER (1) & ANR.

2023 INSC 96331 October 2023Dismissed

A batch of five review petitions was filed challenging the Supreme Court's common judgment and order dated 06‑09‑2022 in Civil Appeals No. 1661 of 2020 and No. 2568 of 2020, which interpreted the interplay between Section 48 of the Gujarat Value‑Added Tax Act, 2003 and Section 53 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code,

SWAMI VEDVYASANAND JI MAHARAJ (D) THR LRSversusSHYAM LAL CHAUHAN & ORS.

2024 INSC 35230 April 2024Disposed off

The case concerned a second appeal pending before the Patna High Court in which the original defendant, Swami Shivdharmanand, had died, and two claimants sought substitution as legal representatives. The High Court, after a trial‑court enquiry under Order 22 Rule 5 of the CPC, substituted Swami Satyanand as the appella

PRASANTA KUMAR SAHOO & ORS.versusCHARULATA SAHU & ORS.

2023 INSC 31929 March 2023Dismissed

The case involved a partition suit concerning the ancestral and self‑acquired properties of the late Kumar Sahoo, claimed by his daughter Charulata Sahu and contested by the heirs of his son Prafulla Sahoo. The trial court issued a preliminary decree allocating a one‑sixth share to the daughter in ancestral lands and o

ROYDEN HAROLD BUTHELLO & ANR.versusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ORS.

2023 INSC 18028 February 2023Dismissed

The appellants, Royden Harold Buthello and his father, alleged that the appellant was illegally abducted in Odisha on 20 October 2020 and subsequently framed in a narcotics case in Raipur on 21 October 2020. They sought a direction from the High Court to transfer the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation

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

ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMS & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS

2021 INSC 22226 March 2021Dismissed

The Association for Democratic Reforms and Common Cause filed two interlocutory applications seeking a stay on the sale of electoral bonds under the Electoral Bond Scheme, 2018, alleging that the scheme permits donor anonymity and violates transparency in political funding. The Court examined the scheme’s statutory bas

TATA CONSULTANCY SERVICES LIMITEDversusCYRUS INVESTMENTS PVT. LTD. AND ORS.

2021 INSC 21726 March 2021Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the NCLAT order that had declared Tata Sons' affairs oppressive and prejudicial, reinstated Cyrus Pallonji Mistry (CPM) as Executive Chairman and Director, restrained the Tata Trust nominees, and set aside the conversion of Tata Sons from a public to a private company. The Court held that the

RIVER PELLETS LIMITEDversusKAMACHI INDUSTRIES LIMITED

2019 INSC 81725 July 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant and respondent entered into a contract for the sale of iron ore pellets that contained an arbitration clause stating that arbitration would be governed by the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and that the venue of arbitration would be Bhubaneswar. A dispute arose and the respondent filed a pe

SHRI MALLIKARJUN DEVASTHAN, SHELGIversusSUBHASH MALLIKARJUN BIRAJDAR AND OTHERS

2024 INSC 33925 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Shri Mallikarjun Devasthan, Shelgi, a public trust registered under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950, filed change reports to record the appointment of a new Vahiwatdar and the co-option of trustees, but the reports were submitted well beyond the statutory 90‑day period. The respondents, a group o

AMIT SACHAN & ANR.versusBAR COUNCIL OF UTTAR PRADESH, LUCKNOW & ORS.

2021 INSC 54724 September 2021Dismissed

The petitioners, advocates contesting the Awadh Bar Association election, challenged the Allahabad High Court's suo moto directions that cancelled the 14‑August‑2021 election due to violent conduct and ordered fresh elections on 25‑September‑2021 along with a code of conduct and other measures. The petitioners argued t

RAHEEM SHAH & ANRversusGOVIND SINGH & ORS.

2023 INSC 65124 July 2023Disposed off

The original suit (Civil Suit No.3 A/02) was decreed in favour of the plaintiff, Govind Singh, on 1 October 2005. The defendants, Raheem Shah and another, filed a regular first appeal under Section 96 of the CPC but did so 52 days after the decree, prompting an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for cond

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

SUDHA SINGHversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2021 INSC 27123 April 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The accused, alleged to be a contract killer and member of an organized crime gang, was arrested under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangster and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 for the murder of Rajnarain Singh. The Allahabad High Court granted him bail on liberal terms despite his prior involvement in fiftee

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

MAHA P. & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF KERALA & ORS.

2022 INSC 131122 July 2022Disposed off

The Supreme Court was approached to modify its earlier order that the Government had allowed NRI candidates to cure attestation defects by 31 March 2022 in the context of NEET‑UG seats reserved for the NRI quota in Kerala private medical colleges. The State of Kerala contended that no such extension existed and that th

SITA SORENversusUNION OF INDIA

2023 INSC 85620 September 2023

The appellant, a Jharkhand MLA, was charged with accepting a bribe to vote for a candidate in a Rajya Sabha election, but she did not cast the alleged bribe‑influenced vote. She sought quashing of the criminal proceedings on the ground of immunity under Article 194(2) of the Constitution. The High Court rejected the pl

MOHAMMED ZUBAIRversusSTATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS

2022 INSC 73620 July 2022Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined a writ petition filed by Mohammed Zubair, co‑founder of ALT News, who faced five FIRs in Uttar Pradesh and one in Delhi arising from the same set of tweets. The petitioner sought quashing of the FIRs and, alternatively, their consolidation with the Delhi FIR, along with interim bail in all ca

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

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

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

DASANGLU PULversusLUPALUM KRI

2023 INSC 93019 October 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a third wife of a deceased MLA from the Mishmi tribe, filed a nomination for a 2019 assembly election and marked ‘not applicable’ in Form‑26 for the spouse‑property column. The respondent challenged the nomination, alleging non‑disclosure of the deceased husband’s assets, which he claimed constituted a s

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

M.K. RANJITSINH & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2021 INSC 25819 April 2021Directions issued

The petitioners, environmentalists, sought protection for the Great Indian Bustard (GIB) and Lesser Florican, arguing that overhead power lines in Rajasthan and Gujarat cause fatal collisions. They requested that the states and the Union underground all future power lines in priority and potential habitats, convert exi

APOORVA ARORA & ANR. ETC.versusSTATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.

2024 INSC 22319 March 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, who created and acted in the web‑series “College Romance”, were charged with publishing obscene and sexually explicit material under Sections 67 and 67A of the Information Technology Act after a complaint that an episode titled “Happily F****d Up” contained vulgar expletives. The High Court upheld the F

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

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

AKSHAY KUMAR SINGHversusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI)

2019 INSC 141118 December 2019Dismissed

The case concerns the conviction and death sentence of Akshay Kumar Singh, a bus cleaner, for his participation in the gang rape and murder of a young woman on a Delhi bus (the Nirbhaya case). Singh filed a criminal review petition challenging the Supreme Court's 2017 judgment that upheld his conviction and death penal

FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA & ORS.versusABHIJIT PAUL

2022 INSC 121618 November 2022Disposed off

The Food Corporation of India (FCI) entered into a road‑transport contract with contractor Abhijit Paul to move food grains from railway sidings to depots. After the contract ended, FCI demanded reimbursement of demurrage charges imposed by the railways, alleging that the contractor’s failure to provide sufficient truc

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusM/S SEW CONSTRUCTION LIMITED & ORS.

2022 INSC 121718 November 2022Dismissed

The State of Madhya Pradesh awarded a contract to M/S Sew Construction for a masonry dam, but the original sand quarry became depleted, prompting the contractor to seek an alternate quarry. The contract’s clause 3.11(A) allowed escalation of rates only if the circumstance was beyond the contractor’s control and a writt

MR. RAJEEV NOHWARversusCHIEF CONTROLLING REVENUE AUTHORITY MAHARASTRA STATE, PUNE & ORS

2021 INSC 75618 November 2021Disposed off

In a miscellaneous application (No. 1770 of 2021) arising from Civil Appeal No. 5970 of 2021, the appellant sought correction of a clerical error in the Supreme Court's judgment dated 24 September 2021. The specific error was the reference to "Collector of Stamps, Mumbai" in paragraph 32, which was deemed inaccurate. T

JAWAHARLAL NEHRU TECHNOLOGICALversusCRESCENT EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY & ORS.

2021 INSC 75718 November 2021Disposed off

The case concerned Jawaharlic​h Nehru Technological University (JNTU) seeking a State Government No‑Objection Certificate (NOC) before granting affiliation to new courses in institutions that already had All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) approval. The Telangana High Court, relying on the view that AICTE

G H M/S GENENTECH INC. & ORS.versusDRUGS CONTROLLER GENERAL OF INDIA & ORS.

2019 INSC 139117 December 2019Appeal(s) allowed

Genentech Inc., Roche Products (India) and F. Hoffmann‑La Roche filed a suit in the Delhi High Court seeking to restrain Reliance Life Sciences from launching its biosimilar product ‘TrastuRel’, alleging improper use of data and passing off. The Single Judge of the High Court, on 25 April 2016, allowed Reliance to mark

UNIVERSITY OF DELHIversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2019 INSC 138917 December 2019Dismissed

The University of Delhi challenged the conversion of land acquired for the Delhi Metro project into a residential housing scheme, filing a writ petition that was dismissed for delay and laches. The University later filed a Letters Patent Appeal (LPA) 916 days after the writ petition’s disposal, seeking condonation of t

MRS. KALYANI RAJANversusINDRAPRASTHA APOLLO HOSPITAL & ORS.

2023 INSC 92117 October 2023Dismissed

The appellant, Mrs. Kalyani Rajan, filed a consumer complaint alleging that her husband, who underwent neurosurgery at Indraprastha Apollo Hospital, died of a heart attack because the hospital failed to provide proper post‑operative care, specifically by shifting him to a private room instead of the ICU. The National C

MS. XversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

2023 INSC 25217 March 2023Disposed off

Ms. X, a model, complained that the accused businessman lured her under the pretext of modelling work and raped her in a hotel room. The FIR was initially filed under Sections 354, 354‑B and 506 IPC, and later, after her supplementary statements and a medico‑legal report, Section 376 IPC (rape) was added. The High Cour

BALASORE ALLOYS LIMITEDversusMEDIMA LLC

2020 INSC 55016 September 2020Dismissed

Balasore Alloys Ltd filed an arbitration petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of a sole arbitrator based on Clause 7 of 37 purchase orders. Medima LLC contended that the parties were bound by an earlier ‘Umbrella’ (Pricing) Agreement dated 31‑03‑2018, which contain

MAJOR SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

2022 INSC 130616 June 2022Case Partly allowed

Major Singh, the appellant, struck his uncle Makhan Singh with a wooden cot leg ("bahi") after a quarrel the previous day, causing a head injury that led to the uncle's death a day later. The trial court acquitted Singh, but the Punjab and Haryana High Court set aside the acquittal and convicted him under Section 302 I

JINI DHANRAJGIR & ANRversusSHIBU MATHEW & ANR. ETC.

2023 INSC 54416 May 2023Dismissed

The original plaintiff, Mrs. Cherian, sued the Mathew family for title and possession of a 2.81‑acre land parcel. The trial court dismissed the suit, but the High Court later restored it and the decree of possession was finally passed in 2000, with a later modification requiring the defendants to pay compensation. Afte

IN RE: EXPEDITIOUS TRIAL OF CASES UNDER SECTION 138 OF N.I. ACT 1881versus.

2021 INSC 25716 April 2021Directions issued

The Supreme Court, acting suo motu under Article 32, examined the massive backlog of cases filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, which was impeding the disposal of other criminal matters. After hearing the Amicus Curiae, the Solicitor General, the Reserve Bank of India and various state repre

SANTOSH CHATURVEDIversusKAILASH CHANDRA & ANR.

2019 INSC 125215 November 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Santosh Chaturvedi, filed a petition under Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 seeking release of a shop premises occupied by the respondents. The prescribed authority dismissed the petition on the ground that the appellant could not claim own

RAVINDER KUMAR GOELversusTHE STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

2023 INSC 12915 February 2023Case Partly allowed

The appellants' small parcels of land in Sultanpur were acquired by the State of Haryana for an expressway under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The initial award fixed a market value of Rs.12.5 lakh per acre based on a government circular, which was later enhanced by the Reference Court to Rs.43.17 lakh and then by th

FUTURE COUPONS PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS.versusAMAZON.COM NV INVESTMENT HOLDINGS LLC & ORS

2022 INSC 18315 February 2022Disposed off

Future Retail Ltd (FRL) and Future Coupons Pvt Ltd (FCPL) entered into a sale agreement with Reliance Group, which Amazon challenged by initiating arbitration at the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC). An emergency arbitrator issued an injunction restraining FRL from proceeding with the deal, and the Del

UNION OF INDIAversusPRADEEP VINOD CONSTRUCTION COMPANY

2019 INSC 124114 November 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India (Railways) awarded civil engineering contracts to Pradeep Vinod Construction Company, which later claimed additional payments despite having signed final bills and supplementary agreements indicating full settlement. The contractor invoked the arbitration clause in Clause 64 of the General Conditions

PADUM KUMARversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2020 INSC 3714 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

Padum Kumar, a postman, delivered a registered envelope containing four Indira Vikas Patras (Rs.20,000) on 09‑04‑1992, which was never received by the complainant, Dr. K.B. Varshney. The delivery slip bore the signature "D. Mohan"; the complainant's son, Devesh Mohan, denied that the signature was his. Private handwrit

SHYAM MADAN MOHAN RUIA & ORS.versusMESSER HOLDINGS LIMITED & ORS.

2019 INSC 137013 December 2019Disposed off

The appellants (Ruias) entered into a settlement on 5 December 2002 transferring 75,001 shares of Bombay Oxygen Investments Ltd. to them. Respondent No.1 (Messer Holdings Ltd.) filed Suit No. 2410 of 2008 seeking to cancel the settlement and claimed ownership of the shares, raising a limitation defence under Section 9A

MANGILALversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2023 INSC 63412 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was convicted under the NDPS Act for alleged possession of poppy straw, based largely on police testimony and a seizure that was never physically produced in court. The trial and appellate courts accepted the prosecution's case despite several procedural lapses, including the non‑compliance with Section 5

AURELIANO FERNANDESversusSTATE OF GOA AND OTHERS

2023 INSC 52712 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Aureliano Fernandes, a lecturer at Goa University, was accused of sexual harassment by several female students and was served notice to explain. A Complaints Committee conducted an inquiry in May 2009, but the appellant, citing health issues, was denied extensions and the proceedings were held ex‑parte, resulting in a

MS SARITA SINGHversusM/S SHREE INFOSOFT PRIVATE LIMITED

2022 INSC 4512 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a software developer, was employed by Shree Infosoft Private Limited under a contract that included a clause on overseas deputation, obligating repayment of costs if she failed to serve a specified period after such deputation. She was sent to the United States for a business meeting in August‑September

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusAMRITA SINHA

2021 INSC 86811 December 2021Appeal(s) allowed

Amrita Sinha, whose husband, a Sergeant in the Indian Air Force, died in service in 2008, applied for a compassionate appointment under the Central Government scheme, citing her family pension of Rs 8,265 per month. The initial applications were rejected, but the Central Administrative Tribunal quashed the rejection, d

MRUGENDRA INDRAVADAN MEHTA AND OTHERSversusAHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION

2024 INSC 40110 May 2024Dismissed

The plaintiffs sued the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation seeking either compensation for the loss of 974 square metres of land or, alternatively, an allotment of land of that size in any town planning scheme. The trial court granted the alternative relief of land allotment but rejected the compensation claim, prompting

UNION OF INDIA & ORSversusD.G.O.F. EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION AND ANR.

2023 INSC 9959 November 2023Dismissed

The D.G.O.F. Employees Association, representing assistants and personal assistants of the Ordnance Factory Board (OFB) headquarters, sought parity in pay with similarly placed employees of the Central Secretariat Service (CSS) and other central cadres, invoking para 3.1.9 of the Sixth Central Pay Commission (CPC) reco

M/S. RAJASTHAN ART EMPORIUMversusKUWAIT AIRWAYS & ANR.

2023 INSC 9969 November 2023Dismissed

M/s Rajasthan Art Emporium (appellant) exported a large consignment of handicraft goods to the United States and booked air carriage with Kuwait Airways (respondent No.1) through Dagga Air Agents (respondent No.2), receiving a guarantee that the shipment would arrive within seven days. The goods were delayed by more th

HIND OFFSHORE PVT. LTD.versusIFFCO – TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.

2023 INSC 6979 August 2023Dismissed

Hind Offshore Pvt. Ltd. chartered the vessel M.V. Sea Panther and obtained a marine hull insurance policy from IFFCO‑Tokio covering the period 09.11.2006‑08.11.2007, which required a class warranty. The vessel had suffered engine damage during the preceding policy year, for which the insurer paid an advance, but the re

M/S. ISNAR AQUA FARMSversusUNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.

2023 INSC 6808 August 2023Disposed off

The appellant, a prawn farming partnership, obtained a five‑month insurance policy from United India Insurance covering 22,67,000 prawns. An outbreak of White Spot Disease caused massive mortality, and the appellant filed a claim which the insurer rejected, alleging improper record‑keeping. The National Consumer Disput

MRS. BHUMIKABEN N. MODI & ORS.versusLIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA

2024 INSC 3958 May 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased submitted a life insurance proposal on 6 July 1996 and paid the first premium by cheque on 9 July 1996; he died accidentally on 14 July 1996. The insurer issued an Acceptance‑cum‑First Premium Receipt on 9 July, which the appellants (widow and children) relied on to claim policy benefits. The insurer argue

RAJ REDDY KALLEMversusTHE STATE OF HARYANA & ANR.

2024 INSC 3478 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for issuing dishonoured cheques and also faced an FIR under Sections 406, 420 and 120B of the IPC for allegedly cheating a complainant after taking an advance for a laser cutting machine. Both parties initially agreed to settle the dispute

V. SENTHIL BALAJIversusTHE STATE REPRESENTED BY DEPUTY DIRECTOR AND ORS.

2023 INSC 6777 August 2023Dismissed

The appellant, a cabinet minister, was arrested under Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) on 14 June 2023 and produced before a magistrate, after which a judicial remand was ordered. His wife filed a writ of habeas corpus challenging the arrest, while the respondents sought police custody

K. HYMAVATHIversusTHE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ANR.

2023 INSC 8116 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant K. Hymavathi loaned Rs 20 lakh to respondent No.2, who executed a promissory note on 25 July 2012 promising repayment by December 2016. The respondent later issued a cheque for Rs 10 lakh on 28 April 2017, which was dishonoured, leading the appellant to file a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable

THE TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARDversusAYYAPPA SPICES & ORS.

2024 INSC 1836 March 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The Travancore Devaswom Board, which prepares and distributes Aravana Prasadam at Sabarimala Temple, procured cardamom through a series of tenders that were cancelled due to pesticide contamination, and subsequently awarded a supply order to respondent No.2 under an urgency clause. Respondent No.1, a previous supplier

RATNAMBAR KAUSHIKversusUNION OF INDIA

2022 INSC 12545 December 2022Case Allowed

Petitioner Ratnambar Kaushik was arrested for allegedly transporting 90,520 kg of raw unmanufactured tobacco in seven trucks for clandestine manufacture of zarda, thereby evading GST under Sections 132(1)(a), (h), (k), (l) and 132(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The investigation was completed and a

PRAKASH BANGversusGLAXO SMITHKLINE PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. & ANR.

2023 INSC 7945 September 2023Dismissed

The appellant, Prakash Bang, claimed that after receiving the hepatitis B vaccine Engerix‑B, he suffered myositis and permanent shoulder disability, seeking compensation from the manufacturer GlaxoSmithKline under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission dismissed his claim

LAL BAHADUR SHASTRI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY & ANR.versusDELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS.

2023 INSC 7975 September 2023Disposed off

The appellants, charitable educational societies, deposited amounts with the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) to obtain the benefit of additional floor area ratio (FAR) as required by DDA notifications dated 10‑10‑2008 and 23‑12‑2008. While the writ petitions were pending, DDA issued a subsequent notification on 17‑07

RAJESH MONGAversusHOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LIMITED & ORS.

2024 INSC 1624 March 2024Dismissed

The appellant, a home buyer, applied for a home loan from HDFC (respondent No.1) after being assured via email that the interest rate would be linked to the RBI's Prime Lending Rate. The loan agreement, signed on 11 January 2006, included an adjustable rate clause that allowed HDFC to vary its retail prime lending rate

IFB AGRO INDUSTRIES LIMITEDversusSICGIL INDIA LIMITED AND OTHERS

2023 INSC 94 January 2023Dismissed

IFB Agro Industries, a listed company, alleged that SICGIL India Ltd. and related persons acquired more than 5% of its shares from the open market without making the disclosures required under SEBI's Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeover (SAST) Regulations and Insider Trading (PIT) Regulations. The appellant f

PANKAJ BANSALversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2023 INSC 8663 October 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Pankaj Bansal and Basant Bansal, were arrested by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) under Section 19(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) after being summoned in connection with two Enforcement Case Information Reports (ECIRs). They had earlier obtained anticipatory bail for the firs

CAPTAIN PRAMOD KUMAR BAJAJversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

2023 INSC 2043 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Captain Pramod Kumar Bajaj, a senior Income Tax officer, was selected for appointment as a Member of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) but his appointment never materialised due to the respondents withholding his vigilance clearance and placing his name on a suspect list. Despite multiple favourable orders from

ANUSHKA RENGUNTHWAR & ORSversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2023 INSC 993 February 2023Case Partly allowed

The petitioners, who are Overseas Citizens of India (OCI) card‑holders, had been allowed since 2005 to appear for the All India Pre‑Medical Test (NEET) and compete for medical seats on parity with Non‑Resident Indians (NRIs) and Indian citizens. In March 2021 the Union of India issued a notification under Section 7B(1)

VIVEK NARAYAN SHARMAversusUNION OF INDIA

2023 INSC 22 January 2023

The Supreme Court, by a 4:1 majority, upheld the constitutional validity of the Central Government's notification dated 8th November 2016 demonetising all series of Rs.500 and Rs.1,000 bank notes under Section 26(2) of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934. The majority held that the word 'any' in Section 26(2) includes

THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.versusSHARWAN KUMAR KUMAWAT ETC. ETC

2023 INSC 6611 August 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan challenged the constitutional validity of sub‑rule (10) of Rule 4 and sub‑rule (3) of Rule 7 of the Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1986, which rejected pending applications for minor‑mineral leases and introduced an auction‑based allocation. The appellants argued that the High Court er

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