Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

ALTAMAS KABIR

328 judgments delivered by benches including this judge — showing 201–328.

VIJAY KUMAR & ANR.versusDHARAM PAL & ORS.

2009 INSC 13610 February 2009Dismissed

The suit for possession was filed by Dharam Pal (Respondent No.1) asserting ownership of two properties. The defendants, Vijay Kumar & Anr., contended that the properties were bought benami in Dharam Pal's name and that Section 4 of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988 barred their defence. The trial court,

SHAKUNT ALA DEVI & ORS.versusCHAMRU MAHTO & ANR.

2009 INSC 13810 February 2009Dismissed

The appellants sought restoration of possession of land under Section 145(6) of the Criminal Procedure Code after an Executive Magistrate had declared their right to possession in 1994. The respondent obtained a revision and the High Court set aside the lower courts' orders, invoking the Specific Relief Act and the Lim

MRS. SHILPA AGGARWALversusMR. AVIRAL MITIAL & ANR.

2009 INSC 12929 December 2009Hearing Adjourned

The case involved a three‑year‑old girl, a British citizen by birth, whose parents, both Indian nationals, were permanent residents of the United Kingdom. After marital discord, the mother took the child to India, while the father obtained an ex‑parte order from the High Court of Justice, Family Division, England, decl

NAND KISHORE OJHAversusANJANI KUMAR SINGH

2009 INSC 12939 December 2009Hearing Adjourned

The Supreme Court examined a contempt petition filed by Nano Kishore Ojha against the State of Bihar for failing to honour undertakings given on 18 January 2006 and 7 February 2007 to appoint all trained primary‑school teachers to vacant posts. Earlier High Court and Supreme Court orders (1996, 1997) had directed the S

UMA SHANKAR SINGHversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ANR.

2010 INSC 5919 September 2010Dismissed

During a Bihar assembly election, an FIR was lodged for murder, robbery and illegal possession of arms, implicating Uma Shankar Singh. The investigation was transferred to the CID and both the CID and local police submitted final reports under Section 173(2) CrPC that exonerated Singh. Despite these reports, the Chief

SYED ASHWAQ AHMEDversusJT. SECRETARY AND CHIEF PASSPORT OFR. AND ANR.

2010 INSC 5909 September 2010Dismissed

The petitioner, a travel agent who began his business in 1997, sought a mandamus directing the passport authorities to allow him to continue handling passport applications on behalf of clients. The government had de‑recognised all travel agents for passport work in July 1992, and in July 2000 issued a one‑time concessi

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusSPS VAINS (RETD.) AND ORS.

2008 INSC 10259 September 2008Dismissed

The case concerned a disparity in pension benefits between Major Generals (and equivalent ranks) who retired before 1 January 1996 and those who retired after, due to the Fifth Central Pay Commission's revision of pay scales. The respondents argued that the cut‑off date created an arbitrary classification violating Art

TATA MEMORIAL HOSPITAL WORKERS UNIONversusTATA MEMORIAL CENTRE AND ANOTHER

2010 INSC 4879 August 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The Tata Memorial Hospital Workers Union, a trade union registered under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971, sought to maintain its recognition against a rival workers' association. The rival argued that the Tata Memorial Centre (TMC) was under the Central Go

GODREJ INDUSTRIES LTDversusD.G. AHIRE ASSISTANT COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE & ANOTHER

2008 INSC 7929 July 2008Case Allowed

Godrej Industries Ltd, a manufacturer of liquid hair dye, was served with three demand notices for excise duty at the rate of 105% under Tariff Item 14F (hair lotion) for the period January‑December 1982. The company argued that its product, being a hair colouring agent, fell under the residuary Tariff Item 68 introduc

JAWAHAR SINGHversusBALA JAIN & ORS.

2011 INSC 3699 May 2011Dismissed

The deceased was riding a scooter when a motorcycle driven by a minor, Jatin, collided with it, causing the deceased's death. The claimants obtained a compensation award from the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, which held the owner of the motorcycle liable because the driver was a minor without a licence. The Delhi Hig

STATE OF MEGHALAYA & ORS.versusMECKEN SINGH N.MARAK

2008 INSC 6289 May 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a Sub‑Inspector of Police, was instructed to transport pay and a service revolver to Shillong in a departmental vehicle but instead travelled by bus, resulting in the loss of Rs.17,314 and the revolver with ammunition. A departmental inquiry proved his misconduct and the competent authority removed him

STATE OF M.P.versusSUGHAR SINGH & ORS.

2010 INSC 1329 March 2010Disposed off

Eight persons were tried by a Sessions Court in Madhya Pradesh for murder and related offences under the Indian Penal Code. The High Court set aside their convictions, and the State appealed, but only four of the accused were impleaded as respondents in the appeal. The Supreme Court, in a 2008 judgment, reversed the ac

KANHAIYALALversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2008 INSC 259 January 2008Dismissed

The appellant Kanhaiyalal was convicted under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act based primarily on a statement he gave to an officer under Section 67 of the Act. The key issues were whether such a statement could be used as a confession for conviction, whether it attracted the bar of Sections 24

ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIAversusTELANGANA RASTRA SAMITHI & ANR.

2010 INSC 8628 December 2010Disposed off

The Election Commission of India withheld bye‑elections in the Vemulawada and Sircilla Assembly constituencies because an election petition challenging the previous election was pending. The petitioners challenged this decision before the Supreme Court, which examined the interpretation of Section 151A of the Represent

RATTAN LAL (SINCE DECEASED) THROUGH HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVESversusS.N. BHALLA & ORS.

2012 INSC 3238 August 2012Disposed off

The appellant purchased a plot in 1978 and paid Rs.50,000 as earnest money. The vendors were contractually obliged to obtain sale permission and an Income Tax clearance, but failed to do so within six months, invoking Clause 9 to terminate the agreement and refunding the earnest money. The appellant protested the refun

MOHD. JAMALversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2013 INSC 4488 July 2013Disposed off

The petitioners, who were land owners, applied for petroleum retail outlet dealerships under a 2002 policy that later was suspended. They entered into long‑term lease deeds and maintenance‑handling contracts with Indian Oil and IBP, investing substantial sums, and claimed that the oil companies were estopped from withd

PRAVINBHAI KASHIRAMBHAI PATELversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

2010 INSC 3838 July 2010Dismissed

The petitioner, Pravinbhai Kashirambhai Patel, complained of a mob assault and theft on 11 September 2008, filing three separate police complaints that contained differing versions of the incident. Respondents No.2 and No.3 obtained anticipatory bail from an Additional Sessions Judge, which the petitioner sought to can

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.versusM/S. PROTECTION MANUFACTURERS PVT. LTD.

2010 INSC 3898 July 2010Dismissed

The insured's factory suffered a fire and the insurer, New India Assurance Co., appointed a surveyor, joint surveyors, and later an investigator who alleged arson, before seeking the opinion of former Chief Justice Y.V. Chandrachud who concluded the fire was accidental. The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commissi

KANTA DEVI & ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA & ANR.

2008 INSC 7838 July 2008Case Partly allowed

The State of Haryana acquired 265 kanals of land for a grain market and awarded compensation based on various rates. The High Court, relying on a single sale deed (Exhibit P‑6), enhanced compensation to Rs.2,88,000 per acre but deducted 70% as development charges, which the claimants challenged as excessive given the l

M.D., M/S. RAMAKRISHNA POULTRY P. LTD.versusR. CHELLAPPAN & ORS.

2009 INSC 7538 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

M/s. Ramakrishna Poultry Ltd., a poultry farmer, purchased land and erected sheds while the Power Grid Corporation was surveying a 400 kV transmission line that would pass over the sheds. The company claimed that the high‑voltage lines would harm its birds and sought a realignment or increased tower height. The Madras

STATE OF HARYANAversusGURBAX SINGH (DEAD) BY LRS & ANR. ETC.

2008 INSC 6178 May 2008Disposed off

The State of Haryana acquired 185 kanals of land from villages Ratgal, Sunderpur and Palwal for a government Ayurvedic college under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Collector initially awarded Rs 40,000 per acre for chahi land and Rs 25,000 per acre for gair mumkin land; the Additional District Judge raised the awa

RASHIDA HAROON KUPURADEversusDIV. MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ORS.

2010 INSC 848 February 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased workman suffered a heart attack six months after being involved in a vehicular accident. The Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation awarded compensation, which the insurer challenged. The Karnataka High Court set aside the award against the insurer, held that the employer (vehicle owner) was liable despit

TAMEESHWAR VAISHNAVversusRAMVISHAL GUPTA

2010 INSC 208 January 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved two cheques that were dishonoured and a notice under Section 138(b) of the Negotiable Instruments Act was served on the drawer. The drawer received the first notice on 14 June 2006 but the payee did not file a complaint within the 15‑day period prescribed under Section 138(c). A second notice was sent

ASHOK KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA.AND ORS.versusRAM LAL AND OTHERS

2008 INSC 238 January 2008Disposed off

The Uttar Pradesh Government, facing a shortage of Trade Tax Officers, withdrew 97 Grade‑II posts from the purview of the State Public Service Commission under the proviso to Article 320(3) of the Constitution and filled them through a Limited Departmental Examination in 1987. The appointees were initially designated a

DATTU S/O NAMDEV THAKURversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

2011 INSC 8377 December 2011Dismissed

The petitioners—a father, Dattu Thakur, and his son and daughter—were issued Scheduled‑Tribe certificates in 2001. In 2009 the Maharashtra Caste Scrutiny Committee cancelled those certificates for failing to prove belonging to the Thakur tribe, and the Bombay High Court upheld the cancellation. The petitioners challeng

SURAJ BHAN MEENA & ANR.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

2010 INSC 8577 December 2010Disposed off

The Rajasthan High Court quashed two state notifications that granted consequential seniority to Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe officers promoted under reservation, on the ground that the state had not complied with the requirements laid down in M. Nagaraj's case. The petitioners, members of the Rajasthan Administ

BABU RAM AND ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

2009 INSC 11697 October 2009Disposed off

The appellants, owners of land in Narwana, challenged the State of Haryana's acquisition of their property for a sewage treatment plant (STP) on the ground that the acquisition was made under Section 17(4) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, which dispensed with the right to file objections under Section 5‑A. The High C

KUSHAL KUMAR GUPTA AND ANR.versusMALA GUPTA

2011 INSC 6597 September 2011Dismissed

Mala Gupta filed a criminal complaint under Sections 406 and 498A IPC against her parents‑in‑law before the Judicial Magistrate, Patiala. The magistrate issued process, prompting the petitioners to seek a revision and later a quashing of the proceedings under Section 482 CrPC, arguing that the Patiala court lacked juri

SWAMI NATHversusNIRMAL SINGH

2010 INSC 5727 September 2010Dismissed

The petitioners, tenants, challenged eviction orders passed by Rent Controllers under Section 13‑B of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, filed by their landlord‑respondents who were non‑resident Indians. The tenants argued that the landlord already possessed another shop in the same building, lacked a bo

PALRAJversusTHE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, NEKRTC

2010 INSC 5797 September 2010Disposed off

Palraj, a bus driver for a Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation, suffered a severe accident that left him unable to drive but capable of performing other duties. The corporation reassigned him as a peon with the same salary. The Commissioner of Workmen's Compensation initially awarded compensation based on an 85%

T.R. BOOPALAN & ORSversusTAMIL NADU HOUSING BOARD AND ORS.

2008 INSC 9147 August 2008Case Allowed

The appellants owned a 0.81‑acre plot covered by Survey No.188/4 that was subject to a Section 4(1) notification under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. A writ petition quashed the notification, but the petition mistakenly referred to the land as 0.81 cents; an application to correct this error was dismissed. The Tamil N

GOVT. OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY & ANR.versusRAVI PRAKASH GUPTA & ANR.

2010 INSC 3687 July 2010Dismissed

Visually‑impaired candidate Ravi Prakash Gupta cleared the Civil Services Examination and was placed fifth among candidates of his disability category, but was denied appointment because only one post was offered for visually‑handicapped candidates. He claimed entitlement to a reservation under Section 33 of the Person

MAHESH CHANDRA BANERJIversusU.P. AVAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD AND ORS.

2010 INSC 3667 July 2010Case Partly allowed

The Banerji family claimed that, apart from 1‑1‑10 bighas of land excluded by the Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Act, the remaining portion of their Plot No. 1002 had been acquired for a development scheme (Yojana No. 7) and that no compensation had been assessed. The State and the Parishad argued that the land

SUPREME COURT BAR ASSOCIATION & ORSversusB.D. KAUSHIK

2012 INSC 2037 May 2012Disposed off

The Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) had been directed by the Supreme Court in 2011 to identify regular practitioners for voting rights under the "One Bar One Vote" principle. While the Implementation Committee was carrying out this task, the SCBA held a General Body Meeting on 16 January 2012 that passed resolutio

KANPUR ELECTRICITY SUPPLY CO. LTD. & ANR.versusM/S. L.M.L. LIMITED & ORS.

2010 INSC 2887 May 2010Dismissed

L.M.L. Ltd., a two-wheeler manufacturer, was declared a Relief Undertaking and later a Sick Company due to market downturn. It applied to Kanpur Electricity Supply Co. Ltd. (KESCO) for reduction of its contracted load from 8 MVA to 1.25 MVA effective 1 April 2006, a decision approved by the Uttar Pradesh Electricity Re

INCABLE NET (ANDHRA) LIMITED & ORS.versusAP AKSH BROADBAND LTD. & ORS.

2010 INSC 2927 May 2010Dismissed

The petitioners, minority shareholders of a joint venture company (APAKSH Broadband Ltd.), alleged that the majority shareholder, which was also the EPC contractor, mismanaged funds and oppressed them, seeking winding up under Sections 397, 398, 402 and 403 of the Companies Act, 1956. The Company Law Board and the High

HARISH MAGANLAL BAIJALversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2010 INSC 2937 May 2010Dismissed

The petitioner appeared for the 1990 Maharashtra State Service (Main) examination and, scoring 604 marks, missed the 14 open-category DSP vacancies, being appointed as Sales Tax Officer instead. After three originally selected candidates were declared ineligible, the petitioner was recommended and appointed as a replac

V.D. BHANOTversusSAVITA BHANOT

2012 INSC 797 February 2012Disposed off

The petition arose from a dispute between V.D. Bhanot and his wife Savita Bhanot concerning relief under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The wife filed a petition under Section 12 seeking residence and maintenance after being evicted from the matrimonial home, and the magistrate granted interi

BRINDABAN DAS AND ORS.versusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2009 INSC 97 January 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from a murder FIR filed on 29‑11‑2002 in which, besides the named assailant Laxman Murmu, the complainant alleged that several other persons might have been involved. The appellants were granted anticipatory bail, later discharged from the case on 30‑6‑2004, and were not named in the charge‑sheet. Two ye

CHOUDHURY PARVEEN SULTANAversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR.

2009 INSC 107 January 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant filed a complaint alleging that a Deputy Superintendent of Police, while investigating a shooting case, threatened her husband to withdraw his statement and attempted to obtain his signature on a blank paper. The Judicial Magistrate took cognizance of the alleged offences under IPC sections 384 and 506 an

VIPUL SHITAL PRASAD AGARWALversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

2012 INSC 5086 November 2012Dismissed

Dr. Vipul Shital Prasad Agarwal, a Superintendent of Police, was arrested in connection with FIR No.115 of 2006 concerning a alleged fake encounter. The Supreme Court had directed the CBI to take over the investigation and the CBI registered a fresh FIR, but the original charge‑sheet filed under the first FIR was submi

RASIKLAL DALPATRAM THAKKARversusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS.

2009 INSC 12226 November 2009Dismissed

The appellant, Rasiklal Dalpatram Thakar, was charged by Madhavpura Mercantile Cooperative Bank for alleged loan fraud. The Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad, under Section 156(3) of the CrPC ordered the Economic Offences Wing, State CID, to investigate. The investigating agency submitted a report stating that t

GOVT. OF A. P. & ORS.versusSRI SEVADAS VIDYAMANDIR HIGH SCHOOL & ORS.

2011 INSC 6536 September 2011Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether a 20 October 2004 Government Memo that banned filling vacant grant‑in‑aid teaching posts in private aided schools could be applied retrospectively to recruitment processes that had already been initiated with prior permission. The Court held that the Memo was prospective, not retrospe

DR. RAJBIR SINGH DALALversusCHAUDHARI DEVI LAL UNIVERSITY, SIRSA & ANR.

2008 INSC 9136 August 2008Case Allowed

The Chaudhary Devi Lal University advertised for a Reader in Public Administration and appointed Dr. Rajbir Singh Dalal, who holds an M.A. and Ph.D. in Political Science. A lecturer challenged the appointment, arguing that the appellant lacked the required qualification in the "relevant subject" under UGC regulations.

JAHID SHAIKH & ORS.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

2011 INSC 4636 July 2011Disposed off

The petitioners, accused in the 2008 Ahmedabad‑Surat bomb blast cases, sought transfer of the Sessions trial from Gujarat to another state under Section 406 of the CrPC, alleging bias by police, jail authorities and the judiciary and a hostile communal atmosphere that would deny them a free and fair trial. The State op

CENTRAL BANK OF INDIAversusM/S. ASIAN GLOBAL LTD. & ORS.

2010 INSC 3566 July 2010Dismissed

The Central Bank of India sued Asian Global Ltd., its sister concern, and several directors for offences under Sections 138 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, alleging that a cheque issued as a corporate guarantee was dishonoured. The trial court held the bank to be a holder in due course and rejected the direc

MD. RAISUL ISLAM AND ORS.versusGOKUL MOHAN HAZARIKA AND ORS.

2010 INSC 3596 July 2010Dismissed

The case concerned the seniority of Assam Civil Service (Class‑I) officers promoted from Class‑II and those directly recruited in 1986. An advertisement and selection process began in 1984 under the unamended 1960 Rules, which prescribed a 50% promotion quota. While the selection was underway, the Government amended Ru

MADRAS CEMENTS LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

2010 INSC 2806 May 2010Dismissed

Madras Cements Ltd., a cement manufacturer, claimed Modvat credit for certain items it described as components, spares and accessories used in its mining operations during November‑December 1999. The Revenue argued that the items were not capital goods under Rule 570 of the Central Excise Rules and disallowed the credi

KALLAKURICHI TALUK CO-OP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD.versusM. MARIA SOOSAI & ORS.

2010 INSC 2846 May 2010Disposed off

M. Maria Soosai, an accountant of Kallakurichi Taluk Co‑op Housing Society, was deemed to have resigned in 1990 after being absent without leave, pursuant to the Society’s bye‑laws and Rule 149(10)(1) of the Tamil Nadu Co‑operative Societies Rules, 1988. After five years he sought relief before the Labour Court and, wh

ATLA SIDDA REDDYversusBUSI SUBBA REDDY AND ORS.

2010 INSC 2856 May 2010Dismissed

The petitioner sought a declaration of title to land that he claimed to have purchased in 1984 from Syed Ghouse Bi (alias Chand Begum), who had allegedly acquired it from Lakshmamma in 1974. The defendant contended that Lakshmamma had already sold the same land to Thondolu Mahaboob Basha in 1968, a deed (Ext.B2) that,

JAMIRUDDIN ANSARIversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR.

2009 INSC 7336 May 2009Disposed off

The case arose from a private complaint filed under Section 9(1) of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) alleging organised crime offences by senior police officials. The Special Court ordered an investigation, but the Bombay High Court Full Bench was split on whether such a complaint could be enterta

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusPARUL DEBNATH & ORS.

2009 INSC 7456 May 2009Dismissed

The respondents, Home Guards in the Andaman & Nicobar Islands, had served continuously for 12‑23 years and sought regularisation and equal pay with regular employees. The Central Administrative Tribunal directed the government to frame a scheme for their absorption, invoking the principles laid down in State of West Be

BAHADUR SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2010 INSC 1996 April 2010Dismissed

The petitioner, Bahadur Singh, was caught after police raided his house based on secret information and recovered six bags of poppy husk from a locked room that he opened with a key in his possession. He was convicted under Section 15 of the NDPS Act and sentenced to twelve years' rigorous imprisonment, which the High

MOHAN KUMAR RAYANAversusKOMAL MOHAN RAYANA

2010 INSC 1976 April 2010Dismissed

Mohan Kumar Rayana and Komal Mohan Rayana, who were married in 2000, separated and contested custody of their daughter Anisha, born in 2002. The Family Court awarded custody to the mother with the father receiving alternate weekend visitation and a 50% share of school vacations, a decision affirmed by the Bombay High C

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusRAMESHWAR & ORS.

2009 INSC 4566 April 2009Disposed off

The State of Madhya Pradesh prosecuted directors of Indore Premier Co-operative Bank for allegedly sanctioning loans without proper verification, invoking Sections 409, 418, 420, 120‑B IPC and Section 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The Trial Court framed charges, but the High Court

KISHORSINH RATANSINH JADEJAversusMARUTI CORP. & ORS.

2009 INSC 4576 April 2009Disposed off

The appellants, owners of agricultural land, entered into an agreement in 1980 for a cooperative housing project that later failed, leading the respondent Maruti Corp. to sue for specific performance in 1999. While the Gujarat High Court admitted the appeal and initially ordered that any dealing with the property would

AYURVED SHASTRA SEVA MANDAL & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2013 INSC 1356 March 2013Dismissed

The Department of AYUSH refused permission to several Indian‑medicine colleges to admit students for the 2011‑12 academic year, citing deficiencies in infrastructure and teaching staff. The colleges challenged the refusal in the High Court, which dismissed their petitions, leading to Special Leave Petitions before the

IZHARUL HAQ ABDUL HAMID SHAIKH & ANR.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2009 INSC 3326 March 2009Disposed off

Three criminal appeals under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (TADA) sought bail for appellants – Izharl Haq Abdul Hamid Shaikh, Amir Gulam Husein Bandukwala and labourer Jivan Raghu Varli – who had been denied bail by Designated TADA Courts. The appellants argued that the FIRs were lodged

STATE OF ORISSAversusGOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ANR.

2009 INSC 1196 February 2009Disposed off

The State of Orissa filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking the constitution of a Water Disputes Tribunal and an interim injunction against the State of Andhra Pradesh, which was constructing a side‑channel weir and flood‑flow canal on the Vansadhara river despite a 1994 agreement to share the river’s waters equ

BALJIT SINGHversusIMPROVEMENT TRUST LUDHIANA & ANR.

2009 INSC 16 January 2009Disposed off

Baljit Singh purchased plot No.91-8 from Smt. Shammi Verma, who had been allotted the plot by the Improvement Trust, Ludhiana, and the transfer was approved by the Trust. The Trust later cancelled the original allotment on the ground that Smt. Verma was not a "locally displaced person" and that the officer who effected

TAMIL NADU WATER SUPPLY & DRAINAGE BOARDversusM/S. SATYANARAYANA BROTHERS PVT. LTD.

2009 INSC 12155 November 2009Disposed off

The Tamil Nadu Water Supply & Drainage Board entered into a contract with M/s. Satyanarayana Brothers Pvt. Ltd. for the Veeranam drinking‑water project. The contractor failed to complete the work within the extended time, leading to arbitration. After several awards and appeals, the Supreme Court found that the sole ar

THANU RAMversusSTATE OF M.P.

2010 INSC 6735 October 2010Dismissed

Thanu Ram's wife, Hirabai, committed suicide by self‑immolation in the fourth year of their marriage while six months pregnant. She made a dying declaration before a Naib Tahsildar, which a doctor affirmed was given in a sound mental state. The prosecution proved that the husband and his mother subjected Hirabai to men

PRABIR BANERJEEversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS

2007 INSC 10105 October 2007Dismissed

Prabir Banerjee, a Group‑B Superintendent in the Central Excise Department, was transferred from the Bhopal zone to the Nagpur Commissionerate under an office order. He challenged the transfer, arguing that circulars dated 19 Feb 2004 and 9 Mar 2004 prohibited inter‑zonal transfers, making the order void. The Central A

TAMILSELVANversusSTATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TAMIL NADU

2008 INSC 9055 August 2008Case Allowed

The case involved six sandalwood smugglers accused of shooting a forest guard and injuring a gardener. The FIR described the assailants only as unidentified persons in a group of about 50, and no names were recorded. The trial court convicted all six under Section 302 IPC, but the High Court acquitted five, upholding o

COX & KINGS LTD.versusINDIAN RLY. CATERING & TOURISM CORPORATION LTD. & ANR.

2012 INSC 2705 July 2012Dismissed

Cox & Kings Ltd. entered into a joint‑venture with IRCTC to operate a luxury tourist train under a lease of the train to the joint‑venture company. IRCTC later terminated the lease, prompting Cox & Kings to invoke Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking a stay of termination and the appointment

LARSEN AND TOUBRO LTD. & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2011 INSC 3545 May 2011Dismissed

The Union of India issued a Request for Proposal for 20 fast patrol vessels, stipulating that bids must be at a firm and fixed price for the contract duration. Larsen & Toubro (Petitioner No.1) submitted the lowest commercial bid but included a foreign‑exchange rate variation clause without specifying the currency, vio

DEVENDER KUMAR & ANR. ETC.versusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS. ETC.

2010 INSC 2735 May 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were arrested in a dowry‑related case under IPC sections 498‑A, 406, 506, 323 and 34 and produced before a magistrate. Their first application for police remand was dismissed and they were placed in judicial custody, after which they were granted bail. The investigating officer later filed a second appli

VIJAYANversusSADANANDAN K. & ANR.

2009 INSC 6805 May 2009Dismissed

Vijayan was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to one year imprisonment with a direction to pay Rs.8.25 lakh as compensation under Section 357(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), with a default term of six months’ imprisonment for non‑payment. The Kerala High Court uphe

HARI RAMversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.

2009 INSC 6935 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

Hari Ram was arrested in 1998 for offences under the IPC and the trial court initially held him to be a juvenile (under 16) and sent the case to the Juvenile Justice Board. The Rajasthan High Court later held he was over 16 and applied the 1986 Juvenile Act, rejecting the claim of juvenility. On appeal, the Supreme Cou

SMT. SELVI & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2007 INSC 5205 May 2007Disposed off

The Supreme Court considered whether the involuntary administration of narcoanalysis, polygraph, and Brain Electrical Activation Profile (BEAP) tests for investigative purposes violates fundamental rights. The Court held that compulsory administration of these techniques violates Article 20(3) of the Constitution, whic

SUVARNALATAversusMOHAN ANANDRAO DESHMUKH & ANR.

2010 INSC 1945 April 2010Hearing Adjourned

The husband filed a petition for divorce on the ground that his wife suffered from schizophrenia. The Family Court granted the decree of divorce, which was affirmed by the High Court. The wife appealed only to challenge the findings on her alleged mental disorder and to claim a lump‑sum permanent alimony of Rs 75 lakhs

M/S. JAYABHERI PROPERTIES PVT. LTD. AND ORS.versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ORS.

2010 INSC 1955 April 2010Disposed off

The State of Andhra Pradesh sought to acquire land for the Outer Ring Road (ORR) project around Hyderabad and Secunderabad. After objections that the original western alignment would cut through water bodies and require extensive rock cutting, an alternative alignment through Narsingi and Poppalguda villages was adopte

MUNAGALA YADAMMAversusSTATE OF A.P. & ORS.

2012 INSC 65 January 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a detention order issued under the Andhra Pradesh Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1986 against Munagala Anjaiah, who was alleged to be a bootlegger violating the Andhra Pradesh Prohibition Act, 1995. The appellant's wife challenged the order, and the High Court upheld it, reasoning th

GULLIPILLI SOWRIA RAJversusBANDARU PAVANI @ GULLIPILI PAVANI

2008 INSC 13994 December 2008Dismissed

The appellant, a Roman Catholic Christian, married the respondent, a Hindu, in a temple according to Hindu customs and later registered the marriage under Section 8 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The respondent filed a petition under Section 12(1)(c) seeking a decree of nullity, alleging the appellant misrepresented

DIRECTOR ( STUDIES) & ORS.versusVAIBHAV SINGH CHAUHAN

2008 INSC 12374 November 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a student of hospitality management, was caught with a slip containing exam material during the 2005 Front Office Management exam and confessed to possessing it. The institute disqualified him for one academic session under Rule 9.2 of its Examination Rules and allowed re‑admission for the next session.

RADHEY SHYAM GUPTAversusPUNJAB NATIONAL BANK & ANR.

2008 INSC 12384 November 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a guarantor, challenged the attachment of his fixed deposit receipts, which were created from his pension and gratuity, by the executing court in a suit filed by the bank to recover a loan. The trial court had decreed that the bank could recover the debt by first auctioning the hypothecated vehicle and,

M/S. V.K. ENTERPRISES AND ANR.versusM/S. SHIVA STEELS

2010 INSC 4784 August 2010Dismissed

The respondent filed a suit under Order 37 Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC to recover a cheque amount that was dishonoured. The petitioner applied for leave to defend under Order 37 Rule 3, alleging that the cheque dated 11‑10‑2006 was originally dated 11‑10‑2000 and had been tampered with, and that the cheque was given only

SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES LTD.versusMUSIC BROADCAST PVT. LTD.

2012 INSC 2004 May 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether the Copyright Board, under Section 31(1)(b) of the Copyright Act, 1957, could grant an interim compulsory licence while a complaint was pending. The Board had earlier held it lacked such power, but the Delhi High Court reversed that view and directed the Board to grant an interim lice

MAHESHWARI PRASAD & ORS.versusSTATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS.

2012 INSC 1654 April 2012Dismissed

The State of Jharkhand advertised 350 vacancies for police drivers, requiring candidates to hold a licence for heavy motor vehicles or a combined licence for light and heavy vehicles. The original merit list published on 29 May 2005 included the appellants, but a revised list on 23 August 2005 excluded them because the

CHAUGULEversusBHAGWAT

2012 INSC 1624 April 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was elected to the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly. An independent candidate, Y, filed an election petition challenging the rejection of his nomination paper, but later withdrew the petition. Within fourteen days, Bhagwat, who had not contested the election, applied under Section 110(3)(c) of the Represe

GLODYNE TECHNOSERVE LTD.versusSTATE OF M.P. & ORS.

2011 INSC 2664 April 2011Dismissed

The Government of Madhya Pradesh issued an RFP for a vendor to manage the District Mechanism for the Public Distribution System, requiring bidders to submit a copy of an active ISO 9001:2000 certification with their technical bid. Glodyne Technoserve Ltd., the appellant, possessed a valid current ISO certificate but mi

MIS. BHARAT STEEL TUBES LTD. ETC.versusIFCI LTD. & ORS.

2011 INSC 2574 April 2011Dismissed

Bharat Steel Tubes Ltd. challenged a Delhi High Court order that held IFCI Ltd. to be a "public financial institution" under Section 4A of the Companies Act, 1956 and therefore entitled to enforce a security interest under the SARFAESI Act, 2002. The petitioner argued that the Central Government no longer held 51% of I

YUMMAN ONGBI LEMBI LEIMAversusSTATE OF MANIPUR & ORS.

2012 INSC 24 January 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant's husband, Yumman Somendro, was arrested in January 2011 for murder and, while in police custody, was served with a detention order under the National Security Act (NSA) dated 31 January 2011, which was later confirmed by the Governor for twelve months. The order was based solely on the subjective satisfa

COAL MINES P.F. COMMR. THR. BOARD OF TRUSTEEversusRAMESH CHANDRA JHA

2012 INSC 34 January 2012Dismissed

The Coal Mines Provident Fund Commissioner (appellant) challenged a Jharkhand High Court order that upheld a suit filed by a former lower‑division clerk (respondent) who had been removed from service. The central issue was whether the Commissioner, as a public officer under Section 2(17) of the Code of Civil Procedure

ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIAversusTELEANGANA RASTRA SAMITHI & ANR.

2010 INSC 8483 December 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Twelve members of the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly resigned to press for a separate Telangana state, creating twelve casual vacancies. The Election Commission of India (ECI) announced bye‑elections for ten clear vacancies but withheld elections for two constituencies where election petitions under Section 84 of

SHRI ARUN B. KHANJIREversusTHE ICHALKARANJI URBAN CO-OP. BANK LTD. & ORS.

2008 INSC 13913 December 2008Dismissed

The petitioner, Arun B. Khanjire, disputed his liability for loans taken from ICHALKARANJI URBAN CO-OP BANK Ltd. and faced recovery proceedings under Section 101 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. The Assistant Registrar issued recovery certificates, which the petitioner challenged through writ petiti

MOOTHA VENKATESWARA RAO (DEAD) TR. LRS.versusGODHAVARI CO-OP MILK P. UNION LTD. & ORS.

2008 INSC 13933 December 2008Dismissed

The State of Andhra Pradesh acquired five acres of land in 1978 under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. After a series of writ petitions and appeals, the parties entered into a Memorandum of Settlement (MOU) in 1992, stipulating that compensation determined by a Subordinate Judge must be paid within eight weeks, otherwis

SOUTHERN SALES & SERVICES & ORS.versusSAUERMILCH DESIGN & HANDELS GMBH

2008 INSC 11213 October 2008Dismissed

The respondent filed a suit under Order 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for recovery of Euro 757,885.42. The defendant raised triable issues and admitted part of the claim; the trial court gave unconditional leave to defend. The Karnataka High Court modified this to conditional leave, allowing defence of Euro 3

RUKMINI NARVEKARversusVIJAYA SATARDEKAR & ORS.

2008 INSC 11313 October 2008Disposed off

The appellant Rukmini Narvekar filed a criminal complaint alleging that advocate Ranjit Satardekar fraudulently obtained her signature on a Power of Attorney and used it to sell her property to his wife Vijaya Satardekar. The High Court quashed the criminal proceedings against both accused, relying on evidence from a r

STATE OF WEST BENGALversusSHYAMADAS BANERJEE & ANOTHER

2008 INSC 10093 September 2008Dismissed

The case concerned Shyamadas Banerjee, a sitting MLA who was alleged to have forged medical bills in 1999. Although the offence was committed while he was an MLA, he ceased to be a member of the State Legislature in July 2000, long before a charge‑sheet was filed in 2003 and cognizance was taken by a Special Judge unde

STATE OF U.P. AND ANR.versusSANTOSH KUMAR MISHRA AND ANR.

2010 INSC 4743 August 2010Disposed off

The case concerned the selection and appointment of pharmacy diploma holders as pharmacists in Uttar Pradesh. The 1980 Rules required that vacancies be filled by appointing candidates who obtained their diplomas earlier, irrespective of merit, while the 2002 and 2003 Rules introduced a merit‑based selection. The State

KAMLESH C. SHAH & ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

2013 INSC 4213 July 2013Dismissed

The petitioners sought an interim order declaring that the acquisition of a "cessed" building by MHADA under Chapter VIII‑A of the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976 was no longer necessary, as the landlord and tenants had entered into a development agreement while the substantive constitutional challen

C.V. FRANCISversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2013 INSC 4193 July 2013Dismissed

C.V. Francis, a manager of Bokaro Steel Ltd (later SAIL), applied for voluntary retirement under a scheme introduced by the employer on 7 April 1998. Before his application was accepted, he travelled to the United States, obtained another job and repeatedly sought leave, which was denied. The employer treated him as ab

VIDYA DHAR & ORS.versusMULTI SCREEN MEDIA PVT. LTD.

2013 INSC 3013 May 2013Dismissed

Three petitioners convicted in the Junior Basic Trained (JBT) teachers recruitment scam appealed their convictions before the Delhi High Court. While the appeal was pending, the respondent, a television producer, sought to broadcast a dramatized episode of "Crime Patrol Dastak" depicting the scam. The petitioners obtai

ISHWARDAS ROHANIversusALOK MISHRA & ORS.

2012 INSC 1983 May 2012Matter referred to larger bench

The appellant, a returned candidate, challenged an election petition filed by the respondent alleging corrupt practices under Sections 123 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The High Court, despite noting deficiencies in the petition, directed the respondent to amend the pleadings and verify them, rather th

SUSANTA GHOSHversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2012 INSC 743 February 2012Disposed off

Susanta Ghosh, a sitting MLA, was named in a fourth FIR lodged nine years after a 2002 incident in which seven persons were killed. The earlier three FIRs and charge‑sheets did not mention him. He had earlier been granted anticipatory bail, but the trial court denied regular bail, prompting an appeal to the Calcutta Hi

SAMARTH SHIKSHA SAMITI & ANR.versusBIR BAHADUR SINGH RATHOUR & ORS.

2009 INSC 963 February 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, Bir Bahadur Singh Rathour, was appointed as a Lower Division Clerk by Samarth Shiksha Samiti, a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, and posted in one of its schools. He was later promoted to Upper Division Clerk, transferred to the Samiti’s central office, and subsequently suspended

JITENDRA PANCHALversusINTELLIGENCE OFFICER, NCB & ANR.

2009 INSC 1003 February 2009Dismissed

Jitendra Panchal was arrested in Austria, extradited to the United States and convicted under the US Controlled Substances Act for conspiracy to possess and distribute hashish, serving a 54‑month sentence. After deportation to India, he was arrested by the Narcotics Control Bureau and charged under the NDPS Act for imp

GHULAM NABI DAR & ORS.versusSTATE OF J&K & ORS.

2013 INSC 23 January 2013Disposed off

The appellants, long-time occupants of certain lands, challenged a 1980 notification under Section 6 of the Jammu and Kashmir State Evacuees' (Administration of Property) Act, 2006 that declared the lands evacuee property vested in the Custodian. They claimed to be protected tenants‑at‑will existing before the Act and

SURESH DHANUKAversusSUNLTA MOHAPATRA

2011 INSC 8312 December 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Suresh Dhanuka, and respondent, Sunita Mahapatra, entered into a joint‑venture and a deed of assignment whereby the respondent assigned 50% of her rights in the trademark "Naturoma Herbal" to the appellant, with a covenant that the mark be marketed solely by the appellant and that neither party could use

M/S. JULIEN EDUCATIONAL TRUSTversusSOURENDRA KUMAR ROY & ORS.

2009 INSC 12702 December 2009Appeal(s) allowed

Julien Educational Trust, which runs a school, sought to purchase adjacent land owned by eight co‑sharers for expansion. An oral agreement was reached, draft deeds were prepared and approved by most sellers, but execution was delayed and the sellers later attempted to sell the land to third parties. The Trust filed a s

STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.versusCOMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT, M.T.S. VIDYA MANDIR AND ORS.

2009 INSC 12722 December 2009Dismissed

The State of Uttar Pradesh issued a 2006 notification to bring 1,000 unaided A‑class Junior High Schools (classes 6‑8) into a grant‑in‑aid scheme, but conditioned eligibility on the schools not offering education below or above those classes. Several institutions that had been recognized as Junior High Schools between

K.M. IBRAHIMversusK.P. MOHAMMED AND ANR.

2009 INSC 12742 December 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant issued a cheque of Rs.95,000 to discharge a lawful debt, which was later dishonoured for insufficient funds. He was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced, with the conviction affirmed by the High Court. The parties subsequently settled their dispute and sought to comp

VINITEC ELECTRONICS PRIVATE LTD.versusHCL INFOSYSTEMS LTD.

2007 INSC 11242 November 2007Dismissed

Vinitec Electronics supplied UPS systems to HCL but HCL defaulted on a portion of the payment. The contract required a performance bank guarantee of 10% of the contract value, which was initially conditional, payable only upon proof of default. The guarantee was later amended to delete the default condition, making it

BHUSHAN KUMAR MEENversusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

2011 INSC 6332 September 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Bhushan Kumar Meen, was married to the respondent No.2 in 2004. After periods of discord, the wife filed a complaint in 2006 alleging dowry demand and cruelty, leading to an FIR under Sections 406 and 498‑A IPC. The Women's Cell’s inquiry found no evidence of dowry demand and deemed the dispute civil, bu

THOTA VENKATESWARLUversusSTATE OF A.P. TR. PRINCL. SEC. & ANR.

2011 INSC 6342 September 2011Disposed off

The petitioner, Thota Venkateswarlu, married Parvathareddy Suneetha in India and later moved with her to Botswana, where she alleged cruelty and dowry demands. A complaint was lodged in India invoking IPC sections 498‑A and 506 (alleged to have occurred abroad) and Dowry Prohibition Act sections 3 and 4 (alleged to hav

BABUBHAI JAMNADAS PATELversusSTATE OD GUJARAT & ORS.

2009 INSC 11032 September 2009Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered appeals by Babubhai Jamnadas Patel challenging the Gujarat High Court's orders directing the police to file progress reports and monitor the investigation of FIR No.187/2008 relating to alleged offences under Sections 420, 465, 466, 467 and 120‑B IPC. The issue was whether a High Court may

V.N. BHARATversusD.D.A. AND ANR.

2008 INSC 10032 September 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant applied for a self‑financing flat under a Delhi Development Authority scheme, paid the first four instalments and was allotted a flat. The DOA issued a show‑cause notice for non‑payment of the fifth instalment and claimed that a demand letter dated 11‑Sept‑1996 had been served, invoking the statutory pres

SUPRI ADVERTISING & ENTERTAINMENT PVT. LTD.versusDR. ANAHITA PANDOLE & ORS.

2008 INSC 10082 September 2008Appeal(s) allowed

Dr. Anahita Pandole filed a writ petition challenging the Mumbai Municipal Corporation's permission to advertising agencies for displaying mobile hoarding advertisements, alleging traffic hazards, environmental damage and harm to heritage buildings. The Bombay High Court directed that such mobile hoarding vehicles shou

SUCHETAN EXPORTS P. LTD.versusGUPTA COAL INDIA LIMITED AND ORS.

2011 INSC 5322 August 2011Disposed off

The parties entered into a high‑seas sale agreement for 16,943 metric tonnes of South African coal. The seller delivered the whole consignment to a stevedore, who released 9,542.92 tonnes to the buyer, leaving 7,400.082 tonnes in its custody. The buyer failed to pay the balance price, prompting the seller to sue for br

SHEHAMMALversusHASAN KHANI RAWTHER AND ORS.

2011 INSC 5332 August 2011Dismissed

The case concerned the intestate estate of Meeralava Rawther, a Muslim who had executed deeds of relinquishment with five of his children (excluding his youngest son, Hassan) in exchange for consideration. After his death, Hassan claimed an oral gift of the entire property, while the other children and the petitioners

M/S. JOY AUTO WORKS & ORSversusSUMER BUILDERS (P) LTD. & ANR.

2009 INSC 4552 April 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, owners of Plot No.878 and a portion of Plot No.879 in Mumbai, relied on a motorable access through Plot No.879 to reach their land, as no other road existed. After the respondent acquired the remaining part of Plot No.879, it obstructed this access, prompting the appellants to seek a perpetual injunctio

MRS. SHILPA AGGARWALversusMR. AVIRAL MITTAL & ANR.

2010 INSC 762 February 2010Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained a criminal appeal arising from a Special Leave Petition concerning the implementation of a High Court order that required the husband to facilitate the wife and their minor daughter’s travel to the United Kingdom to contest a custody proceeding pending before the Family Division of the UK

BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARDversusTHE PATNA ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO. LTD. & ORS.

2011 INSC 6271 September 2011Disposed off

The Bihar State Electricity Board (BSEB) took over Patna Electric Supply Co. Ltd. (PESCO) and was directed by the Supreme Court to pay compensation based on the book value of PESCO's assets under the Indian Electricity Act, 1910. BSEB paid Rs 99.72 lakhs, leaving a balance of Rs 35.74 lakhs, which it paid to the Bank o

YOGRAJ INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.versusSSANG YONG ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION CO. LTD.

2011 INSC 6281 September 2011Dismissed

The National Highways Authority of India awarded a highway upgrade contract to SSang Yong Engineering (respondent), which subcontracted the work to Yograj Infrastructure (appellant). After alleged delays, the respondent terminated the subcontract and invoked an arbitration clause that designated Singapore as the seat a

RANVIR SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ANR.

2009 INSC 10951 September 2009Dismissed

Ranvir Singh challenged two criminal complaints filed by Smt. Ved Wati under the Prevention of Corruption Act, alleging that the first complaint (1999) and a later complaint (2002) were dismissed because the complainant failed to pay the process fee. He argued that a second complaint on the same facts could not be ente

ANIL KUMAR JAINversusMAYA JAIN

2009 INSC 11011 September 2009Appeal(s) allowed

Anil Kumar Jain and Maya Jain, married in 1985, filed a joint petition for mutual divorce under Section 13‑B of the Hindu Marriage Act in 2004. After the statutory six‑month period, the wife withdrew her consent, stating she did not want the marriage dissolved, leading the trial court and the High Court to dismiss the

M/S. OPTIEMUS INFRACOM LTD. ETC.versusM/S. ISHAN SYSTEMS PVT. LTD. & ANR.

2012 INSC 3131 August 2012Disposed off

The appellants challenged a writ petition filed by the respondents before the Allahabad High Court that sought to quash an order of the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) Delhi approving the auction of the respondents' property under the SARFAESI Act. The High Court, after finding no ground to interfere with the DRT order, n

PRADIP KUMAR MAITYversusCHINMOY KUMAR BHUNIA & ORS.

2013 INSC 3731 July 2013Dismissed

The appellant, a 60% hearing‑impaired candidate, secured the first merit for a Group ‘D’ non‑teaching post in a West Bengal school and was appointed, but the second‑ranked respondent challenged the appointment on the ground that the appellant had exceeded the prescribed upper age limit. The appellant claimed entitlemen

B.A. UMESHversusREGR.GEN.HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

2011 INSC 891 February 2011Dismissed

The appellant B.A. Umesh was convicted of rape, murder and robbery (IPC ss.376, 302, 392) and sentenced to death. The Supreme Court examined the prosecution's case, which relied on a chain of circumstantial evidence, eyewitness testimony, a test identification parade, fingerprint evidence, forensic reports and an extra

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