Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

G S SINGHVI

242 judgments delivered by benches including this judge — showing 1–200.

YADAVA KUMARversusTHE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ANOTHER

2010 INSC 55931 August 2010Case Partly allowed

Yadava Kumar, a 30‑year‑old painter, suffered fractures of both forearms in a road accident and was assessed with 33% disability of the right upper limb, 21% of the left and 20% total disability. The Motor Vehicles Tribunal awarded Rs.52,000 as compensation, which the Karnataka High Court enhanced to Rs.72,000 but refu

REVANASIDDAPPA AND ANR.versusMALLIKARJUN AND ORS.

2011 INSC 25131 March 2011Matter referred to larger bench

The appeal arose from a Karnataka High Court decision on a partition suit involving children born of a void second marriage. The petitioners claimed that the children of the void marriage were illegitimate and therefore not coparceners in the ancestral property, while the respondents argued they were entitled to a shar

DR. SUBRAMANIAN SWAMYversusDR. MANMOHAN SINGH AND ANOTHER

2012 INSC 5931 January 2012Appeal(s) allowed

Dr. Subramanian Swamy filed a representation with the Prime Minister seeking sanction to prosecute the then Minister of Communications, A. Raja, for alleged corruption in the 2G spectrum allocation. After repeated reminders and a CBI FIR was registered 16 months later, the Delhi High Court dismissed his writ petition,

VIJAY DHANJI CHAUDHARYversusSUHAS JAYANT NATAWADKAR

2009 INSC 120830 October 2009Hearing Adjourned

The Supreme Court examined an application for restoration of a Special Leave Petition that had been dismissed for non‑prosecution. The petition was drafted by Advocate Vikas Mahajan and filed by Advocate‑on‑Record D.B. Vohra, who merely lent his name and did not take any responsibility for the case, including failing t

KRISHI UPAJ MANDI SAMITI, NARSINGHPURversusM/S. SHIV SHAKTI KHANSARI UDYOG AND OTHERS

2012 INSC 36430 August 2012Dismissed

The respondents, operators of sugar factories in Madhya Pradesh, challenged notices issued by market committees that required them to obtain licences under the Madhya Pradesh Krishi Upaj Mandi Act, 1972 and to pay market fees on purchases of sugarcane. The High Court quashed the notices, holding that the transactions w

C. MUNIAPPAN & ORS.versusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2010 INSC 55330 August 2010Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the convictions of thirty‑one accused arising from a "Rasta Roko" agitation during which a university bus carrying 47 female students was set ablaze, killing three girls and injuring many others. The Court upheld the death sentences of the three principal accused (Nedu, Madhu and Muniappan) f

SRI B.T. KRISHNAPPAversusTHE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. AND ANOTHER

2010 INSC 25830 April 2010Case Allowed

The appellant, a 50‑year‑old mason, was injured in a road accident and awarded Rs 1,55,000 compensation by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal under s.166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The High Court enhanced the award by only Rs 34,000, noting that the Tribunal’s compensation for loss of amenities and loss of earnin

AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEEversusBIOTOR INDUSTRIES LTD. & ANR.

2013 INSC 79929 November 2013Disposed off

The Agricultural Produce Market Committee (APMC) of Baroda levied a market fee on castor seeds purchased by Biotor Industries Ltd., an industrial concern that processes the seeds into castor oil. The company argued that the seeds were brought from outside the market area and, under Rule 48(2) of the Gujarat Agricultura

AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEEversusBIOTOR INDUSTRIES LTD. & ANR.

2013 INSC 80029 November 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The Agricultural Produce Market Committee (APMC) filed a special civil application seeking to levy market fee on Biotor Industries Ltd for its purchase of castor seeds and to declare Rule 48(2) of the Gujarat Agricultural Produce Markets Rules, 1965 ultra vires of Sections 28A and 59 of the Gujarat Agricultural Produce

KETAN V. PAREKHversusSPECIAL DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT AND ANOTHER.

2011 INSC 82529 November 2011Dismissed

The Special Director of Enforcement imposed a penalty on Ketan V. Parekh and others under the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999. The appellants filed appeals under Section 35 of the Act and sought condonation of a 1,056‑day delay, arguing that the time spent pursuing writ petitions in the Delhi High Court should be

STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.versusSITA RAM AND ORS.

2013 INSC 73129 October 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The employees who had been engaged on a work‑charge basis in the Haryana Public Works Department sought to have their service counted as regular service for the purpose of obtaining benefits under the Haryana Civil Services (Assured Career Progression) Rules, 1998. The Punjab and Haryana High Court had allowed the peti

ORYX FISHERIES PRIVATE LIMITEDversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2010 INSC 75529 October 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Oryx Fisheries Private Limited exported frozen shrimp to a UAE buyer who later claimed the consignment was of poor quality. The buyer lodged a complaint with the Marine Products Export Development Authority (MPEDA), which issued a show‑cause notice alleging the exporter had supplied sub‑standard goods and subsequently

M/S. ROYAL ORCHID HOTELS LIMITED AND ANOTHERversusG. JAYARAM REDDY AND ORS.

2011 INSC 72629 September 2011Dismissed

The Karnataka State Tourism Development Corporation acquired 37 acres of land for a golf‑cum‑hotel resort under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, but later transferred portions of the land to private entities. Several landowners challenged the acquisition, alleging fraud and diversion of public purpose. The High Court, a

L.S. SIKANDAR (D) BY LRS. & ORS.versusK. SUBRAMANI & ORS.

2013 INSC 57729 August 2013

The plaintiff sought specific performance of a 1983 agreement of sale and a permanent injunction, but the agreement had been terminated by a notice on 28‑03‑1985 after the plaintiff failed to pay the balance consideration and obtain required permissions within the stipulated five‑month period (extendable by two months)

PATASI DEVIversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

2012 INSC 35829 August 2012Appeal(s) allowed

Patasi Devi owned a 14-kanal plot on which she had constructed a house before the Haryana Government issued a Section 4 notification on 15‑12‑2006 for acquiring land for the development of Sector 36, Rohtak. The land was later declared acquired under Section 6 and an award was passed on 9‑12‑2009, after which the State

SATYAWATIversusRAJINDER SINGH AND ANR.

2013 INSC 29029 April 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff, Satyawati, obtained a decree for possession of an 80‑sq‑yard plot of land on 19 January 1996. An execution petition filed in 1996 was rejected by the executing court on the ground that the decree was not executable due to contradictory reports, even though the original judgment relied on a local commissi

PRAHLAD SINGH & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2011 INSC 34429 April 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants' land in Haryana was notified for acquisition in 2002 and an award was passed in 2004 under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. They filed writ petitions alleging that the land fell within a green belt under the Regional Plan 2001, that the acquisition violated the National Capital Region Planning Board Act,

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERSversusNOWROSJEE WADIA COLLEGE AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 6329 January 2013Appeal(s) allowed

Teachers in colleges affiliated to Pune University were paid leave encashment under university statutes 424(3) and 424(C) framed under the Poona University Act, 1974. After the Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994 repealed the 1974 Act, the State of Maharashtra directed universities to discontinue the benefit and amend t

GOJER BROTHERS PRIVATE LIMITEDversusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 79128 November 2013Appeal(s) allowed

Gojer Brothers Private Limited had leased land to a school which, after a prolonged eviction suit, continued to occupy the premises. The State of West Bengal issued a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to acquire the land for the school, and the appellant filed objections under Section 5A

PARMESHWARIversusAMIR CHAND & ORS.

2011 INSC 7928 January 2011Appeal(s) allowed

Parmeshwari, a pillion passenger on a motorcycle, suffered a fractured right leg and 32% permanent disability after being hit by a scooter. She filed a complaint with the Superintendent of Police (Hisar) and later a compensation claim, which the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.1,36,547 with 9% interest. The H

POONAM CHAND JAIN AND ANR.versusFAZRU

2010 INSC 6328 January 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent filed a criminal complaint alleging fraud in a land transaction, which was dismissed by a Judicial Magistrate under Section 203 of the CrPC. After the dismissal became final, the respondent filed a second complaint on almost identical facts, suppressing the existence of the first complaint. The appellant

MUSHEER KHAN @ BADSHAH KHAN & ANR.versusSTATE OF M.P.

2010 INSC 6428 January 2010Disposed off

The prosecution alleged that Musheer Khan (A‑4) and Basant Shiva (A‑5) were hired killers who shot the deceased Mallu Bhaiya at close range, based largely on circumstantial evidence and the testimony of two eyewitnesses, PW‑3 and PW‑4. The trial court convicted them of murder under IPC s.302/1208 and the Arms Act s.25(

K.C. BAJAJ AND OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 78827 November 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, doctors employed in Central Health Services and Railways, sought inclusion of the Non‑Practicing Allowance (NPA) in the computation of their pension, arguing that an Office Memorandum dated 29‑Oct‑1999 unjustly excluded NPA for those who retired before 1 January 1996. The Union of India relied on the de

ITTIANAM AND ORS.versusCHERICHI @ PADMINI

2010 INSC 43627 July 2010Disposed off

The dispute concerned the grant of letters of administration for seven properties bequeathed in a Will dated 8 May 1967. The testator had acquired full title to items 4‑7 through a sale deed executed on 2 May 1967 and registered on 8 May 1967, before his death on 20 July 1971. The High Court limited the grant to items

ALOK KUMAR PANDITversusSTATE OF ASSAM & ORS.

2012 INSC 54126 November 2012Dismissed

The appellant, an OBC candidate, applied for the Assam Civil Service through the Assam Public Service Commission and secured a higher merit score than many open‑category candidates, yet was not placed in his preferred service. He challenged the commission’s selection, arguing that more meritorious reserved‑category can

KISHAN GOPAL & ANR.versusLALA & ORS.

2013 INSC 56626 August 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The parents of a ten‑year‑old boy filed a claim petition under Sections 140 and 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking compensation for his death in a tractor‑trolley accident caused by the driver (respondent No.1). The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal rejected the claim, holding that the plaintiffs failed to prove

UNITED BANK OF INDIAversusSATYAWATI TONDON AND OTHERS

2010 INSC 42826 July 2010Appeal(s) allowed

United Bank of India (the appellant) issued notices under Sections 13(2) and 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act and obtained an order under Section 14 against guarantor Satyawati Tondon, without first taking action against the borrower, Pawan Color Lab. The guarantor filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking an injunction

HUMANITY AND ANR.versusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

2011 INSC 41126 May 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The West Bengal government advertised land for an integrated school and allotted a 50‑katha plot to cricketer Sourav Ganguly. Ganguly later requested a larger plot to meet ICSE affiliation norms and offered to surrender the original plot. Within a month the government allotted a 63‑katha plot without a fresh advertisem

URVIBEN CHIRAGHBAI SHETHversusVIJAYBHAI SHAMBHUBHAI JORANPUTRA .& ORS.

2011 INSC 33526 April 2011Appeal(s) allowed

In 1990 a car driven by the first respondent crashed, leaving the appellant, Urviben, permanently disabled and bedridden. She claimed Rs.15 lakh compensation before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) under s.166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The MACT awarded Rs.6.07 lakh with 9% interest, recording that the a

BANDA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, BANDAversusMOTI LAL AGARWAL AND OTHERS

2011 INSC 33126 April 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The State Government acquired 103 bighas of land in Banda district for the Tulsi Nagar Residential Scheme under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, issuing a notification on 8‑9‑1998 and a declaration on 7‑9‑1999. The acquisition was completed with possession handed over to the Banda Development Authority (BDA) on 30‑6‑200

SAROJ SCREENS PVT. LTD.versusGHANSHYAM AND OTHERS

2012 INSC 14826 March 2012Dismissed

The Supreme Court upheld the Bombay High Court’s order quashing the Municipal Corporation of Nagpur’s 1991 resolution to renew a 30‑year lease in favour of Saroj Screens Pvt. Ltd. and the State Government’s subsequent sanction under Section 70(5) of the City of Nagpur Corporation Act, 1948. The Court held that the earl

STATE OF GUJARATversusGIRISH RADHAKRISHNAN VARDE

2013 INSC 78325 November 2013Disposed off

The State of Gujarat appealed against the High Court’s order upholding the quashing of a magistrate’s permission to add Sections 364, 394 and 398 IPC to a charge‑sheet that had already been filed after investigation of an FIR under Section 154 CrPC. The dispute centered on whether a magistrate exercising jurisdiction u

M/S. P. DASARATHARAMA REDDY COMPLEXversusGOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER

2013 INSC 72125 October 2013Disposed off

The appellant, a contractor, was awarded a bridge construction contract by the Government of Karnataka. Disputes arose and the contract’s Clause 29 required any dispute to be first referred to the Chief Engineer or a Designated Officer, whose decision was subject to court remedy. The contractor applied under Sections 1

VIKRAM VIR VOHRAversusSHALINI BHALLA

2010 INSC 17025 March 2010Dismissed

The husband and wife obtained a mutual‑consent divorce under Section 13‑B of the Hindu Marriage Act, agreeing that the mother would retain custody of their son and the father would have fortnightly visitation. Both parties later filed applications under Section 26 of the Act seeking to modify the custody arrangement: t

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIAversusAJAY AGARWAL

2010 INSC 12325 February 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) issued a show‑cause notice and later a restraining order under Sections 11, 11(4)(b) and 11‑B of the SEBI Act, 1992, prohibiting Ajay Agarwal from associating with any corporate body and from dealing in securities for five years, based on alleged mis‑statements in a 199

MAHARASHTRA UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SC. & ORS.versusSATCHIKITSA PRASARAK MANDAL & ORS.

2010 INSC 12425 February 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The Maharashtra University of Health Sciences (MUHS) constituted a Grievance Committee under Section 53 of the Maharashtra University of Health Sciences Act, 1998 to address complaints of two unapproved lecturers (the 5th and 6th respondents) alleging sexual harassment and other mistreatment. The college and the two le

INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, KANPURversusRAJA RAM VERMA AND ORS.

2010 INSC 81224 November 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether IIT Kanpur could limit the extension of retirement age to 62 years only to teachers and staff treated on par with teachers, as per communications from the Ministry of Human Resource Development. The first respondent, an Assistant Registrar, claimed entitlement to the extended age but

SUBRAMANIAN SWAMYversusA. RAJA

2012 INSC 35224 August 2012Rejected

Dr. Subramanian Swamy filed a criminal complaint alleging that former Finance Minister P. Chidambaram conspired with Telecom Minister A. Raja in the 2G spectrum scam, seeking to make Chidambaram an accused under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The Special Judge, after examining the material, found no evidence of Chid

KANPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY THR. VICE CHAIRMANversusSHEO PRAKASH GUPTA & ANR.

2012 INSC 35124 August 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The Kanpur Development Authority (KDA) sold a plot to respondents who later sought possession, but a civil court injunction led KDA to cancel the allotment and refund the amount. The respondents filed a consumer complaint alleging interest, damages, and harassment, and the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission p

NARAYAN DUTT AND ORS.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR.

2011 INSC 16124 February 2011Disposed off

The Additional Sessions Judge convicted Narayan Dutt, Manjit Singh and Prem Kumar for murder under the IPC and sentenced them to life imprisonment. While their appeals were pending before the High Court, they filed petitions under Article 161 of the Constitution seeking pardon from the Governor of Punjab, who granted i

SANGUNTHALA (DEAD) THR. LRS.versusSPECIAL TEHSILDAR (L.A.) & ORS.

2010 INSC 11924 February 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the compensation awarded for 196 acres of land acquired for the expansion of Tamil Nadu Magnesite Limited under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The claimants argued that the land, although used agriculturally, was a potential house site and should be valued at Rs 1,75,000 per acre, as determi

SANJAY CHANDRAversusCBI

2011 INSC 81923 November 2011Disposed off

The Supreme Court considered appeals by Sanjay Chandra and 16 co‑accused who were denied bail by the Special CBI Judge and the Delhi High Court in a telecom‑licence fraud case involving alleged loss of billions to the State. The appellants argued that the investigation was complete, the charge‑sheet filed, and there wa

RAGHBIR SINGH SEHRAWATversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

2011 INSC 81623 November 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a farmer, challenged the acquisition of his agricultural land by the State of Haryana, alleging that the statutory notices under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 were not properly published, he was denied a hearing, and that possession of his land was never actually taken because crops were standing at the

REBEKA MINZ AND ORS.versusDIVISIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANR.

2012 INSC 35023 August 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The husband of the appellants died in a road accident, and the wife and children claimed compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Motor Accidents Tribunal awarded Rs 10,08,000 using a multiplier of 12 and interest at 7% for certain periods. The High Court reduced the compensation to Rs 5,00,000 and the inte

DEVENDER KUMAR TYAGI AND ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

2011 INSC 60223 August 2011Case Allowed

The petitioners challenged two notifications issued by the State of Uttar Pradesh for acquiring land to develop a Leather City Project aimed at relocating polluting bone mills. The Court examined whether the declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, dated 18 December 2007, was made within the one‑year li

SHALINI SHYAM SHETTY AND ANOTHERversusRAJENDRA SHANKAR PATIL

2010 INSC 42223 July 2010Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined an appeal filed by tenants challenging a Bombay High Court order that dismissed their writ petition under Article 226. The petition sought a writ of certiorari against the landlord’s eviction suit, a pure civil dispute between private parties. The Court held that writ jurisdiction is a remedy

VIRENDER JAINversusALAKNANDA COOPERATIVE GROUP HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 27623 April 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, members of Alaknanda Cooperative Group Housing Society, had paid instalments for flats but the Society refunded their money and terminated their membership alleging default on payments. The appellants filed complaints under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, seeking restoration of membersh

SANTOSH DEVIversusNATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. AND OTHERS

2012 INSC 18123 April 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Santosh Devi, claimed compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for the death of her husband, a self‑employed dairy farmer, in a road accident caused by the negligent driving of another vehicle. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.1,32,000 with a 12% interest, applying a mu

PRAKASH CHANDRAversusNARAYAN

2012 INSC 18223 April 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant filed a suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell agricultural land, having paid earnest money, while the respondent failed to execute the sale deed. The trial court decreed specific performance, but the first appellate court reversed the decree on the ground that granting it would render the

IVO AGNELO SANTIMANO FERNANDES & ORS.versusGOVERNMENT OF GOA & ANR.

2011 INSC 15123 February 2011Appeal(s) allowed

In a land acquisition proceeding, the government paid compensation by issuing cheques to four owners, two of which remained uncollected and were subsequently deposited in the State's revenue account and utilized. The owners filed an execution application seeking the balance amount and interest, arguing that under Secti

GIRJESH SHRIVASTAVA AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS

2010 INSC 72822 October 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were appointed as contractual teachers under the Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Contractual Teachers (Conditions of Appointment and Service) Rules, 2001. Their appointments were challenged in two public interest litigations on the grounds that the advertisement failed to reserve seats for ex‑servicemen and tha

MUMBAI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT PVT. LTD.versusM/S. GOLDEN CHARIOT AIRPORT AND ANR.

2010 INSC 63322 September 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Golden Chariot Airport held a licence to operate a restaurant at Mumbai Airport, which was initially for three years and later extended twice. The licence holder claimed the licence was irrevocable based on alleged oral assurances and sought to prevent eviction after the licence expired. The Supreme Court held that the

CHANDIGARH HOUSING BOARDversusAVTAR SINGH AND OTHERS

2010 INSC 63622 September 2010Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined appeals by the Chandigarh Housing Board challenging orders of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission which directed the Board to refund earnest money and interest to members of co‑operative housing societies. The Court held that the society members are the ultimate beneficiaries

STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.versusVIJAY SINGH AND ORS.

2012 INSC 34722 August 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents were appointed as Masters, Physical Training Instructor and Hindi Teacher on a purely ad‑hoc basis between 1994 and 1996 by District Education Officers, and their services were regularised on 1‑Oct‑2003. After regularisation they claimed that the ad‑hoc period should be counted for seniority, but the de

ARUN KUMAR AGRAWAL AND ANOTHERversusNATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY AND OTHERS

2010 INSC 41622 July 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, the husband and son of a 39‑year‑old housewife who died in a road accident, claimed compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal initially awarded Rs 6 lakhs based on the notional income provision of Clause 6 of the Second Schedule but reduced it to

KOKKANDA B. POONDACHA AND OTHERSversusK.D. GANAPATHI AND ANR.

2011 INSC 14722 February 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants filed a partition suit and the respondents later applied under Order XVI Rule 1(1) and (2) read with Section 151 of the CPC to file a list of witnesses, naming the appellants' advocate, N.R. Karnath, as a witness. The trial court allowed the list but rejected the request to summon the advocate because no

R.K. ANANDversusREGISTRAR, DELHI HIGH COURT

2012 INSC 52321 November 2012Disposed off

Senior advocate R.K. Anand was held guilty of contempt for attempting to suborn a court witness in a criminal trial where he represented the accused. The Delhi High Court punished him with a four‑month ban from appearing before the High Court, a fine of Rs 2,000 and recommended that he be stripped of his senior‑advocat

M/S. S.B.P. & CO.versusM/S. PATEL ENGINEERING LTD. & ANR.

2009 INSC 119421 October 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute arose from a subcontract for a hydroelectric project where the appellant sought payment from respondent No.1 and invoked an arbitration clause. The appellant appointed an arbitrator, while respondent No.1 appointed Huddar, who declined to act. Respondent No.1 then appointed a substitute arbitrator under Sec

VIDUR IMPEX AND TRADERS PVT. LTD. AND OTHERSversusTOSH APARTMENTS PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS

2012 INSC 34421 August 2012Dismissed

The Delhi High Court entertained a suit for specific performance of an agreement dated 13‑9‑1988 and restrained the vendor from alienating the property. The vendor later sold the suit property to six companies (the appellants) who, in turn, sold it to Bhagwati Developers, all in violation of the injunction. The appella

V. RAMAKRISHNA RAOversusSINGARENI COLLIERIES COMPANY LTD. & ANR.

2011 INSC 32321 April 2011Case Allowed

The appellant, V. Ramakrishna Rao, filed an application under Section 28A(3) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 seeking correction of the market value and compensation awarded for land acquisition. The Supreme Court had earlier allowed the appeal, reversing the Andhra Pradesh High Court and holding the Section 28A(3) ap

AMRIK SINGH LYALLPURIversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2011 INSC 32421 April 2011Appeal(s) allowed

Amrik Singh Lyallpuri, a journalist, challenged the statutory provision that appeals from decisions of the Appellate Tribunal under the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 and the New Delhi Municipal Council Act, 1994 must be heard by the Administrator (the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi). The issue was whether such an

DR. SHEHLA BURNEY AND. OTHERSversusSYED ALI MOSSA RAZA (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ORS.

2011 INSC 32721 April 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiffs filed a suit for possession of a 3‑acre land alleging title derived from their parents. Defendant No.1 (Razia Begum) transferred the land to Lateef Hassan Burney (defendant No.2) who was later impleaded. The amended plaint sought possession only against defendant No.1 and made no prayer against defendant

MOHD. AYUBversusSTATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

2009 INSC 125120 November 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant applied for the post of Armourer on the prescribed last date of 14 April 2003, which was a gazetted holiday, but could not attach the required medical certificate because the holiday and preceding holidays prevented him from obtaining it; he submitted the certificate on 15 April. The recruiting authority

SATYAJIT BALLULBHAI DESAI & ORS.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2012 INSC 29120 July 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were charged in a criminal complaint alleging forgery and fraudulent sale of land, which was later withdrawn after a compromise in a related civil suit. A third party, unrelated to the dispute, succeeded in reviving the complaint before the High Court, which also granted the appellants regular bail. Six

PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARHversusMEGH RAJ GARG AND ANOTHER

2010 INSC 32920 May 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Megh Raj Garg, a Sub‑Judge‑cum‑Judicial Magistrate who joined the Punjab government service in March 1973, discovered a discrepancy in his date of birth and, after ten years, obtained a university order changing his matriculation certificate from 27‑03‑1936 to 27‑03‑1938. He then sought a corresponding correction in hi

BEENU RAWAT & ORSversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2013 INSC 76019 November 2013Case Allowed

Petitioners, volunteers of the Aam Aadmi Party, protested at Gokul Puri Police Station demanding registration of an FIR for an alleged rape. They allege that police rounded them up and beat them with lathis, causing injuries, and that the police’s version of a violent crowd is unsupported by video evidence. The respond

WEST BENGAL STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATIONversusM/S. INDRAPURI STUDIO PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER

2010 INSC 71019 October 2010Dismissed

The State Government requisitioned premises belonging to respondent No.1 under the West Bengal Premises Requisition and Control Act, 1947 and transferred them to the appellant, West Bengal State Warehousing Corporation. Because compensation could not be fixed by agreement, an arbitrator was appointed under Section 11(1

MACHAVARAPU SRINIVASA RAO AND ANOTHERversusANDHRA PRADESH URBAN AREAS

2011 INSC 69819 September 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants challenged the Vijayawada, Guntur, Tenali and Mangalagiri Urban Development Authority's (UDA) permission to construct a temple on a 75‑cent parcel of land that the Zonal Development Plan had earmarked for recreational use. The High Court had refused to quash the UDA's order, treating it as a mere land al

DR. RAM TAWAKYA SINGHversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 54419 August 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The Governor‑cum‑Chancellor of Bihar appointed several Vice‑Chancellors and Pro‑Vice‑Chancellors without adhering to the statutory requirement of meaningful consultation with the State Government under the Bihar State Universities Act and the Patna University Act. Dr. Ram Tawakya Singh, a professor, challenged these ap

N. SURESHversusYUSUF SHARIFF & ANR.

2012 INSC 13819 March 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, N. Suresh, was severely injured in a motor accident caused by the rash driving of a lorry, resulting in 90% permanent disability of his right leg and 50-60% facial disability. He claimed compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, asserting a monthly income of over Rs.8,000 prior to t

BRIHANMUMBAI MAHANAGARPALIKA AND ANOTHERversusWILLINGDON SPORTS CLUB AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 75818 November 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether the catering department of Willingdon Sports Club, which serves food only to its members and their guests, must obtain a licence under Section 394(1)(e) of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888. The High Court had held the club exempt, reasoning that its primary activity was spor

SRI K.R. MADHUSUDHAN & ORS.versusTHE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER & ANR.

2011 INSC 13718 February 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased, a 53‑year‑old senior assistant of Karnataka Electricity Board, died in a road accident caused by a van owned by the first respondent. The claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was decided by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) with a multiplier of 11, awarding Rs.14,27,496

KOLLAM CHANDRA SEKHARversusKOLLAM PADMA LATHA

2013 INSC 62917 September 2013Dismissed

The husband filed a petition for divorce under Section 13(1)(iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, alleging his wife suffered from schizophrenia, while the wife filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights. The trial court granted the divorce and dismissed the restitution petition, but the Andhra Pradesh High Court se

P. S. SOMANATHAN AND ORS.versusDISTRICT INSURANCE OFFICER AND ANR.

2011 INSC 13117 February 2011Appeal(s) allowed

A 33‑year‑old unmarried man was killed by a lorry on a highway. His mother, brother and later the mother’s daughter filed a claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking compensation. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) awarded Rs.1,71,600 using a multiplier of 16 based on the deceased’s age and

RAVIRAJ UDUPAversusM/S UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. & ORS.

2011 INSC 58016 August 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a 32‑year‑old private contractor, claimed compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, for injuries sustained in a road accident. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.4,06,400 with 8% interest, considering the nature of injuries and loss of future earnings. The insurer appeale

STATE OF UTTARANCHAL &ANR.versusSUNIL KUMAR VAISH & ORS.

2011 INSC 58116 August 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttarakhand appealed a High Court order that directed the State Government to pay Rs.70,99,951.50 as compensation to the successors of an unauthorised occupier of a leased land. The land had been declared unauthorised occupation in 1972 and the State had successfully evicted the occupier under the U.P. Pub

ASHOK KUMAR RATILAL PATELversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2012 INSC 28316 July 2012Appeal(s) allowed

Dr. Ashok Kumar Ratilal Patel, a Director at North Gujarat University, applied for the post of Director on deputation at AICTE after a public advertisement. He was selected, offered appointment, and accepted the terms, which allowed him to either draw the deputation pay or retain his higher parent‑department pay with a

SUSHILA TIWARY AND OTHERSversusALLAHABAD BANK AND OTHERS

2012 INSC 28416 July 2012Dismissed

Shri Ravindra Nath Tiwary, a Special Assistant of Allahabad Bank, was suspended and charged with offences under IPC sections 468 and 477A. He was convicted, dismissed from service under Clause 19.6(a) of the 1966 Bi‑partite Settlement, and later acquitted on appeal by the benefit of doubt. The Bank then issued a notice

V.S. KANODIA ETC. ETC.versusA.L.MUTHU (D) THR. LRS. & ANR

2012 INSC 28516 July 2012Case Partly allowed

The tenants (appellants) occupied three non‑residential premises in Chennai. For the first premises, the Rent Controller had fixed the fair rent using a market value of the land of Rs 25 lakhs per ground, and appeals against that order were pending. For the second and third premises, the appellate authority fixed highe

AZIM AHMAD KAZMI AND ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2012 INSC 28616 July 2012Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a dispute where the Uttar Pradesh Government, under a lease deed dated 19 March 1996, cancelled the lease of a plot in Allahabad and resumed possession for public purposes such as extending the High Court building. The lessees challenged the cancellation, alleging violation of Article 14 and

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERSversusMISS PRITILATA NANDA

2010 INSC 40716 July 2010Hearing Adjourned

Miss Pritilata Nanda, a physically handicapped candidate, applied for a Class III post in South Eastern Railway, cleared the written and viva tests and was placed 11th in the merit list. Despite her selection, the railway refused to appoint her because her name had not been sponsored by an employment exchange, as requi

R.K. JAINversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR

2013 INSC 25616 April 2013Dismissed

R.K. Jain filed an RTI application seeking copies of the Annual Confidential Report (ACR) of Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram, a Member of CESTAT, and the follow‑up action on alleged integrity issues. The Central Public Information Officer denied the request under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, deeming the ACR "personal informa

BALATHANDAYUTHAM & ANR.versusEZHILARASAN

2010 INSC 21716 April 2010Dismissed

The father executed a registered Will in 1972 bequeathing property to two sons and two daughters, omitting his eldest son (appellant). After the father's death in 1980, the appellant claimed that the earlier Will had been revoked by two subsequent unregistered Wills dated 25 April 1980 and 2 May 1980, which allegedly g

ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF INDIAversusNARENDER ANAND AND OTHERS

2012 INSC 3016 January 2012Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether Jantar Mantar, New Delhi, is a protected monument and whether the 1992 notification declaring a 100‑metre prohibited area around it applies to a plot where the respondents sought to construct a multistoried building. The Court held that the 1956 notification declaring Jantar Mantar a

M/S. NATIONAL SEEDS CORPORATION LTD.versusM. MADHUSUDHAN REDDY AND ANOTHER

2012 INSC 2916 January 2012Dismissed

Farmers who bought foundation seeds from National Seeds Corporation (NSC) alleged crop failure due to defective seeds and sought compensation under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. NSC contended that the Seeds Act, 1966 was a special law that exclusively governed seed quality disputes, that the growers were not "cons

TRANS MEDITERRANEAN AIRWAYSversusM/S UNIVERSAL EXPORTS & ANR.

2011 INSC 68915 September 2011Dismissed

The case concerned a complaint by Universal Exports (the consignor) that Trans Mediterranean Airways, an international cargo carrier, misdelivered a consignment intended for Barclays Bank, Madrid, delivering it instead to M/s Liwe Espanola. The consignor sought compensation under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, alle

PRALHAD AND ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

2010 INSC 61815 September 2010Case Partly allowed

The land of the appellants was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, with a notification dated 5 March 1983 and an award on 1 March 1984. The owners filed a reference under Section 18 for enhanced compensation, and while the reference was pending, the 1984 Amendment Act introduced Section 23(1A) and a transiti

ASHOK KUMAR JAINversusSUMATI JAIN

2013 INSC 25515 April 2013Dismissed

The husband, Ashok Kumar Jain, filed a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking divorce from his wife, Sumati Jain, on grounds of cruelty and desertion. The trial court dismissed the petition, finding that the husband himself had been cruel and had created circumstances that forced the wife to

RANJIT KUMAR MURMUversusM/S LACHMI NARAYAN BHOMROJ & ORS.

2013 INSC 25315 April 2013Dismissed

The appellant, a kerosene dealer, challenged a reduction in his monthly kerosene quota after the Director of Consumer Goods increased the quota of a rival dealer, which was upheld by the District Magistrate. The appellant withdrew his writ petition and appealed to the Principal Secretary and Commissioner of Food and Su

SRI RADHY SHYAM (D) THROUGH LRS. & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2011 INSC 30415 April 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh, through the Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority, acquired land belonging to the appellants for a planned industrial development of Gautam Budh Nagar, invoking Sections 17(1) and 17(4) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, thereby dispensing with the hearing provision of Section 5‑A.

P.K. MOHAN RAMversusB.N. ANANTHACHARY AND ORS.

2010 INSC 14915 March 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, P.K. Mohan Ram, sought partition of his share in a property that the original owner had earlier executed a document titled "Settlement Deed" in favour of 16 relatives. The respondents claimed the document was a will obtained by fraud and that the settlor later executed a revocation deed and a will. The t

KRUSHNAKANT B. PARMARversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2012 INSC 9015 February 2012Appeal(s) allowed

Krushnakant B. Parmar, a Security Assistant, was dismissed for alleged unauthorised absence from duty over three periods, alleged to violate Rule 3(1)(ii) and (iii) of the Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964. Parmar contended that he was prevented from signing the attendance register by his controlling officer

SMT. GEETAversusSTATE OF U. P. & ORS.

2010 INSC 87614 December 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The Uttar Pradesh Panchayat Laws (Amendment) Act, 2007 abolished the post of Up‑Pramukh in Kshettra Panchayats but retained a non‑obstante clause in section 7(3) stating that those elected before the amendment would continue to hold office as such until their term ends. A dispute arose whether a senior Up‑Pramukh could

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.versusSARANGDHAR SINGH SHIVDAS SINGH CHAVAN AND ANR.

2010 INSC 87714 December 2010Dismissed

The State of Maharashtra appealed against a Bombay High Court order that quashed a Collector’s directive, issued on the instructions of the Chief Minister, which required police to obtain clearance from a District Anti‑Money Lending Committee and a legal opinion before registering any FIR against Gokulchand Sananda and

THE CALCUTTA PORT TRUST AND OTHERSversusANADI KUMAR DAS (CAPT.) AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 75713 November 2013Disposed off

The Calcutta Port Trust introduced a pension scheme for its employees and issued several circulars allowing retirees to switch from the Contributory Provident Fund (CPF) scheme to the pension scheme, each with a cut‑off date. Respondent No.1, a former Class‑I officer who retired in 1983, claimed he was never informed o

A. SRIDHARversusUNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ANR.

2011 INSC 68013 September 2011Dismissed

A. Sridhar, while riding a motorcycle with a pillion rider, met with an accident on 14 January 1998 due to an oil spill on the road, sustaining grievous injuries. He filed a claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking Rs. 6,00,000 as compensation, and the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded Rs. 1

D. SAMPATHversusUNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ANR.

2011 INSC 68113 September 2011Case Partly allowed

A pillion rider of a motorcycle insured by United India Insurance suffered injuries in an accident caused by an oil spill. A medical doctor certified that the rider had a 75% disability, and the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 3,50,000. The High Court enhanced the compensation to Rs. 4,90,000

OM PRAKASHversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANR.

2012 INSC 17213 April 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The father of a 13½‑year‑old girl (appellant) appealed against the trial and High Court orders that allowed the accused, Vijay Kumar (respondent No.2), to be tried as a juvenile under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. The courts had relied on school records showing a birth date of 30‑06‑

N. MANJEGOWDAversusTHE MANAGER, THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.

2013 INSC 74912 November 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a 36‑year‑old advocate, suffered grievous injuries including loss of strength and sensation in all four limbs after a motorbike accident. He claimed compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, and the Tribunal awarded Rs.6,17,500 as loss of future income based on a 50% whole‑body disability

DEEPALI GUNDU SURWASEversusKRANTI JUNIOR ADHYAPAK MAHAVIDYALAYA (D.ED.) AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 52912 August 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a teacher in a private aided school, refused to contribute to a tax demand and was suspended and later terminated without proper approval or a fair inquiry, violating the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Act, 1977 and principles of natural justice. The School Tribunal quas

JAIPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND OTHERSversusVIJAY KUMAR DATA AND ANOTHER

2011 INSC 48512 July 2011

The Supreme Court examined the Jaipur Development Authority’s attempt to regularise illegal land allotments in the Lal Kothi Scheme, which were based on a letter dated 6 December 2001 purporting to be a government policy. The Court held that the letter was not a valid policy order under Article 166 because it was not i

ABHYUDYA SANSTHAversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2011 INSC 38912 May 2011Dismissed

The appellants, a group of educational institutions, filed Special Leave Petitions claiming they had been granted recognition by the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) and sought interim orders directing the State Government to allot students to their D.Ed. courses. During the pendency of the petitions, the

RANVEER YADAVversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2010 INSC 31612 May 2010Dismissed

Ranveer Yadav, a witness in a criminal trial, along with five others disrupted court proceedings, forcing the judge to leave the courtroom. The High Court, acting under Section 15(2) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, held Yadav to be the main culprit and convicted him of criminal contempt under Section 2(c)(ii), sen

RAJESH & OTHERSversusRAJBIR SINGH & OTHERS

2013 INSC 24812 April 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved the widow and minor children of Bijender Singh, a 33‑year‑old clerk who died in a motor accident. They claimed compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded Rs 8,96,500, which the High Court increased to Rs 10,17,000 after applying the Sarla

DEVENDER PAL SINGH BHULLARversusSTATE OF N.C.T. OF DELHI

2013 INSC 24912 April 2013Dismissed

The petitioners, convicted under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA) and sentenced to death, sought commutation of their sentences under Article 72 of the Constitution. After a delay of about eight years in deciding the mercy petition, they argued that the delay itself warranted conversion o

RAJ KUMAR SHIVHAREversusASSISTANT DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT & ANOTHER

2010 INSC 20612 April 2010Dismissed

Raj Kumar Shivhare was penalised under the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (FEMA) for receiving unauthorized foreign payments and was ordered to deposit a penalty of Rs.2 crore. He appealed the Appellate Tribunal's order refusing dispensation of the pre‑deposit of penalty, but the Tribunal upheld the requirement.

RASHMI AJAY KR. KESHARWANI & ANR.versusAJAY KR. KESHARWANI AND ORS.

2012 INSC 12812 March 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The husband, Ajay Kumar, filed a habeas corpus petition before the Allahabad High Court alleging that his wife, Rashmi, was illegally detaining their minor son. In reality, the child had been living with the mother in Maharashtra since birth. The husband had earlier filed a criminal application in the Bombay High Court

GHISALALversusDHAPUBAI (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ORS.

2011 INSC 3712 January 2011Disposed off

Ghisalal claimed to be the adopted son of Gopalji and sought a one‑half share in Gopalji's ancestral property, asserting that the adoption was valid because Gopalji's wife, Dhapubai, had consented. The trial court, appellate court and High Court presumed Dhapubai's consent from her mere presence at the adoption ceremon

MAHANT JAWALA SINGH CHELA OF MAHANT BISHAN SINGH (DEAD) THROUGH LEGAL REPRESENTATIVEversusTHE SHIROMANI GURDWARA PRABHANDHAK COMMITIEE, AMRITSAR

2011 INSC 3912 January 2011Appeal(s) allowed

Fifty‑three Sikh worshippers petitioned under Section 7(1) of the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925 to have Gurdwara Sri Guru Granth Sahib in Jalal, Bhatinda declared a Sikh Gurdwara. The appellant, Mahant Jawala Singh, filed a petition under Section 8 claiming the institution was a Nirmala Dera, not established for Sikh public

SURESH KUMAR KOUSHAL AND ANOTHERversusNAZ FOUNDATION AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 82311 December 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, which criminalises "carnal intercourse against the order of nature". The petitioners argued that the provision violated Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution by arbitrarily classifying "unnatural" acts, being vague, and

SURINDER SINGH BRAR AND OTHERS ETC.ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2012 INSC 46311 October 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the acquisition of about 105 acres of land in Manimajra, Chandigarh for the expansion of the Rajiv Gandhi Technology Park (Phase III). The acquisition was approved by the Adviser to the Administrator of the Union Territory based on reports of the Land Acquisition Officer (LAO), which the petitioners

RAMESH CHANDRA AGRAWALversusREGENCY HOSPITAL LTD. AND ORS.

2009 INSC 113111 September 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, diagnosed with spinal tuberculosis (Pott's disease), underwent three surgeries that left him handicapped and filed a complaint before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) alleging medical negligence. The Commission dismissed the complaint, holding that negligence was not proved, bu

MATHAI M. PAIKEDAYversusC.K. ANTONY

2011 INSC 48211 July 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant filed two suits for recovery of money against the respondent, a retired Deputy Conservator of Forest drawing a pension of Rs 10,500, and obtained decrees in his favour. The respondent appealed the decrees before the Kerala High Court and sought to prosecute the appeals as an indigent person under Order 44

AMAR SINGHversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2011 INSC 38211 May 2011Dismissed

Amar Singh filed a writ petition under Article 32 alleging that his telephone conversations were intercepted by the Government of India and the Delhi administration at the behest of a political party, and sought an injunction and damages. The petition relied on annexes that were later shown to be forged and were obtain

DEVINDER SINGHversusMUNICIPAL COUNCIL, SANAUR

2011 INSC 29311 April 2011Appeal(s) allowed

Devinder Singh was engaged by the Municipal Council, Sanaur as a clerk on a contract basis from August 1994 and his services were terminated on 30 September 1996 without the notice or compensation required under Section 25‑F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Labour Court awarded him reinstatement, but the Punja

SRI NAGARAJAPPAversusDIVISIONAL MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.

2011 INSC 28811 April 2011Appeal(s) allowed

Sri Nagarajappa, a coolie, was injured in a motor accident caused by a negligent bus driver and claimed compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded Rs 1,70,200, using a 20% disability figure (based on whole‑body disability) and a multiplier of 11 (age 55).

ARESH @ ASHOK J. MEHTA (D) BY PROP. LRS.versusSPL. TAHSILDAR, BALGAUM KARNATAKA & ANR.

2013 INSC 14511 March 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a former landowner, claimed interest on compensation due for land vested in the State under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961. The compensation was partially paid in cash and the balance in National Savings Certificates, but the State denied interest on the cash portion, relying on a 1986 circular. Th

KUM. MICHAELversusREGIONAL MANAGER ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.

2013 INSC 9111 February 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an 8‑year‑old boy, was struck by a motorcycle in 2001, sustaining a fractured right leg, permanent disability of 16% and a 1 cm shortening of the limb. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded Rs 77,000 as compensation, which the Karnataka High Court enhanced to Rs 1 lakh. The appellant appealed to the

RAJYA SABHA SECRETARIAT AND ORS.versusSUBHASH BALODA AND ORS.

2013 INSC 9011 February 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The Rajya Sabha and Lok Sabha Secretariats recruited Security Assistants Grade‑II through a four‑stage process, awarding 25 marks for the personal interview, of which 7 marks were allocated for NCC/Sports and computer‑course certificates that were advertised as ‘desirable’. Unsuccessful candidates challenged the inclus

CHATTERJEE PETROCHEM CO. & ANRversusHALDIA PETROCHEMICALS LTD. & ORS.

2013 INSC 81710 December 2013Appeal(s) allowed

Chatterjee Petrochem (Mauritius) Co. invoked the arbitration clause in a restructuring agreement dated 12 January 2002, seeking ICC arbitration over a dispute with Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd. Haldia contended that a later agreement dated 8 March 2002, which granted exclusive jurisdiction to the Calcutta courts, nullifie

OSWAL AGRO MILLS LTD.versusHINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD. AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 81610 December 2013Dismissed

Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. obtained permission from the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai to convert a plot in a Special Industrial Zone to a residential‑commercial complex adjacent to Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd.'s (HPCL) refinery. HPCL objected, citing safety, security and health risks, and the Bombay High C

ABHAY SINGHversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 81910 December 2013Directions issued

The Supreme Court examined the widespread misuse of red lights and multi‑toned horns on motor vehicles, which were being employed by a large number of public officials and private citizens beyond the limited class intended by law. The petition, led by senior counsel Harish Salve, raised constitutional concerns that suc

STATE OF HARYANAversusJANAK SINGH & ETC.

2013 INSC 33610 May 2013Case Partly allowed

The State of Haryana appealed against a Punjab & Haryana High Court order that reduced the imprisonment terms of two accused, Joginder Singh and Janak Singh, for rape and related offences to the time they had already served. The trial court had convicted them under IPC Sections 376, 506 and, for Janak Singh, also 511,

MARKIO TADOversusTAKAM SORANG

2013 INSC 33810 May 2013Appeal(s) allowed

In the Arunachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly election of 2009, Markio Tado was declared elected over Takam Sorang. Sorang filed an election petition alleging booth capturing, and later sought forensic examination of voters' counterfoils (Form 17A) to prove impersonation and double voting. The Gauhati High Court Single

PREMAversusNANJE GOWDA AND OTHERS

2011 INSC 37210 May 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an unmarried daughter, sought to increase her share in a joint Hindu family property after the Karnataka legislature inserted Section 6A into the Hindu Succession Act, granting daughters equal coparcenary rights. A preliminary decree in the partition suit had already fixed her share at 1/28th, but the fi

V.K. SURENDRAversusV.K. THIMMAIAH & ORS.

2013 INSC 23210 April 2013Dismissed

The appellant, one of the four sons of the deceased, appealed against a Karnataka High Court decree that declared the disputed lands to be ancestral joint family property and allocated specific shares to each heir. The plaintiff, a daughter, claimed the lands were self‑acquired by the father and sought a one‑tenth shar

STATE OF KERALAversusABDUL ALI

2013 INSC 23510 April 2013Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether land that does not qualify as a "private forest" under the Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1971 can be subjected to a total prohibition of tree felling under Section 5 of the Kerala Preservation of Trees Act, 1986. The Court held that Explanation II of Section 5 i

MARY PAPPA JEBAMANIversusGANESAN & ORS.

2013 INSC 8119 December 2013Disposed off

Mary Pappa Jebamani filed a criminal complaint alleging assault and verbal abuse under IPC sections 294(b) and 323. The summary trial court acquitted the accused because two key eyewitnesses turned hostile and the trial court found the evidence insufficient. The Sessions Court set aside the acquittal and convicted the

RAJESHWAR SINGHversusSUBRATA ROY SAHARA & ORS.

2013 INSC 8129 December 2013Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a contempt petition filed by Rajeshwar Singh, an Assistant Director of the Enforcement Directorate, who alleged that respondents including Subrata Roy Sahara were intimidating him and attempting to derail the court‑monitored investigation into the 2G Spectrum scam. The petitioner invoked Arti

PUTTAMMA & ORS.versusK. L. NARAYANA REDDY & ANR.

2013 INSC 8149 December 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners claimed compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 after the death of a 48‑year‑old employee who earned Rs.13,331 per month; the Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.9.03 lakh, which the Karnataka High Court enhanced to Rs.11.25 lakh by applying a split‑multiplier and a lower multiplier of 10.

J & K NATIONAL PANTHERS PARTYversusTHE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2010 INSC 7649 November 2010Dismissed

The Jammu & Kashmir National Panthers Party challenged the 2002 amendment to Section 3 of the Jammu & Kashmir Representation of the People Act, 1957 and the corresponding amendment to Section 47(3) of the Jammu & Kashmir Constitution, which defer the delimitation of Legislative Assembly constituencies until after the f

RAMJAS FOUNDATION AND ANOTHERversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2010 INSC 7639 November 2010Dismissed

The Ramjas Foundation owned land in Delhi that was acquired under a 1959 notification issued under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for planned development. The Foundation claimed the land was a Wakf property, exempt under clause (d) of the notification, and argued that a non‑Muslim could create a Wakf and that the acqui

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusJITENDER PAL BHARDWAJ

2009 INSC 11809 October 2009Dismissed

The Delhi Development Authority (DOA) allotted a 60 sq.m plot to Jitender Pal Bhardwaj under the Rohini Scheme in 2005. After the allotment, Bhardwaj disclosed that he owned a flat of 62.22 sq.m in Mayur Vihar, which DOA deemed a violation of clause 1(ii) of the scheme’s eligibility conditions and consequently cancelle

KHATRI HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANOTHERversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

2011 INSC 6679 September 2011Dismissed

The appellants, Khatri Hotels Private Ltd. and another, claimed title and sought an injunction over land they alleged to have purchased. The land had been urbanised under the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 and transferred to the Delhi Development Authority (DOA) by notification under the Delhi Development Act, 1

D.P. DASversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2011 INSC 5599 August 2011Appeal(s) allowed

In 1983 the Ordnance Factories Organization recruited Specialist Medical Officers (SMOs) in several disciplines. When a post was created in 1991, the UPSC prepared a combined seniority list, using the date of interview to rank candidates who were recommended on the same day. D.P. Das, an SMO, challenged this method, ar

MRS. ZAKIYA BEGUM & ORS.versusMRS. SHANAZ ALI & ORS.

2010 INSC 4889 August 2010Dismissed

The landlords, Mrs. Zakiya Begum and others, let a premises to the tenants, Mrs. Shanaz Ali and others, at a monthly rent of Rs. 4,000. The landlords filed an eviction suit under the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961, but while the suit was pending the Karnataka Rent Act, 1999 came into force, repealing the 1961 Act. Th

NOIDA ENTREPRENEURS ASSOCIATIONversusNOIDA & ORS.

2011 INSC 3669 May 2011Disposed off

The Noida Entrepreneurs Association filed a writ petition alleging that the former CEO of the New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (NOIDA), Shri Ravi Mathur, IAS, misused his position between 1993-94 by awarding contracts without tender, evading conversion charges, and illegally converting a 13‑hectare city park

PREMJI NATHUversusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ANOTHER

2012 INSC 1669 April 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Premji Nathu, challenged the compensation awarded for his land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. After the Collector issued a notice under s.12(2) on 22‑Feb‑1985 without attaching a copy of the award, the appellant obtained the award later and filed an application on 8‑Apr‑1985 under s.18(1)

VOLTAS LIMITEDversusTEHSILDAR, THANE & ORS.

2012 INSC 5118 November 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The Maharashtra government acquired land for Voltas Ltd. and issued an allotment order in 1969 restricting alienation without prior permission and mandating use for workers' housing. Voltas later obtained an exemption under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, to develop surplus land for a weaker‑section

DIPAK KUMAR MUKHERJEEversusKOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND OTHERS

2012 INSC 4588 October 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Dipak Kumar Mukherjee, challenged the illegal construction of a multi‑storeyed building by respondent No.7 (a construction company) that exceeded the two‑storey plan sanctioned under the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980. Despite a stop‑work notice and a demolition order passed by the Mayor‑in‑Coun

GAINDA RAM AND OTHERSversusM.C.D. AND OTHERS

2010 INSC 7018 October 2010Disposed off

The petitioners, street hawkers and vendors in Delhi, challenged actions of the New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC) and Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) that restricted their hawking activities, claiming a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(g). The Supreme Court reiterated that this right is subject to reasonable

MARABASAPPA (D) BY LRS. & ORS.versusNINGAPPA (D) BY LRS. & ORS.

2011 INSC 6658 September 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute concerned lands acquired by Parwatevva, a Hindu woman, after her marriage. The plaintiffs alleged that all the properties were joint Hindu family assets and sought a one‑third share for each son, while the defendants contended that the lands were Parwatevva's self‑acquired or stridhana property. The trial c

M/S. KRANTI ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD. & ANR.versusSH. MASOOD AHMED KHAN & OTHERS

2010 INSC 5828 September 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court heard two separate appeals filed by a builder (Kranti Associates) and Corporation Bank against orders of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (National Commission) that dismissed their revision petitions without providing adequate reasons. The Court examined whether a quasi‑judicial bod

MIS. CITADEL FINE PHARMACEUTICALSversusMIS. RAMANIYAM REAL ESTATES P. LTD. & ANR.

2011 INSC 5498 August 2011Disposed off

Citadel Fine Pharmaceuticals (vendor) and Ramaniyam Real Estates (buyer) entered into a sale agreement for 66 cents of land, of which 19 cents were declared excess under the Tamil Nadu Urban Land Ceiling Act. The contract made time of the essence, requiring the buyer to obtain clearance from the land‑ceiling authoritie

V. KISHAN RAOversusNIKHIL SUPER SPECIALITY HOSPITAL & ANOTHER.

2010 INSC 1298 March 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant's wife was admitted to Nikhil Super Speciality Hospital with intermittent fever; the hospital failed to diagnose malaria and treated her for typhoid, leading to her death after being transferred to another hospital. The District Consumer Forum held the hospital negligent and awarded Rs. 2 lakh compensatio

GOPAL SINGHversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2013 INSC 858 February 2013Disposed off

Gopal Singh was convicted under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code for firing a country‑made pistol ("katta") and causing a firearm injury to his nephew, Narain Singh. The appellant challenged the conviction on the ground that the weapon was not seized and the injury was not grievous, and also contended that the thre

CHANMUNIYAversusVIRENDRA KUMAR SINGH KUSHWAHA & ANR.

2010 INSC 6817 October 2010Matter referred to larger bench

The appellant, Chanmuniya, claimed that after the death of her first husband she was married to her brother‑in‑law according to Kushwaha customs, with Katha and Sindur, and lived with him as husband and wife. The husband later deserted and stopped maintenance, prompting her to file a petition under Section 125 of the C

K.K. POONACHAversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS

2010 INSC 5747 September 2010Dismissed

The petitioners challenged the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 on the ground that it was not reserved for the President’s consideration and did not receive his assent as required by the now‑repealed Article 31(3). The Supreme Court examined whether the Act, enacted under Entry 5 of List II for city developmen

K. NAINA MOHAMED (DEAD) THROUGH LRS.versusA.M. VASUDEVAN CHETTIAR (D) BY LRS. & ORS.

2010 INSC 3727 July 2010Dismissed

The testator’s 1951 Will gave life interest in two houses to her sisters and, after their deaths, vested absolute title in the male heirs, subject to a clause that any sale must be to the other male heirs at market price and not to strangers. After a partition, Rukmani Ammal and her son sold one house (property B) to K

M/S. JEEVAN DIESELS & ELECTRICALS LTD.versusM/S JASBIR SINGH CHADHA (HUF) & ANR.

2010 INSC 2967 May 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The landlord filed a suit for possession and mesne profits against the tenant, alleging that the lease had expired and a termination notice had been served. The tenant denied that the tenancy had been terminated and contested the landlord's claim of admission. The landlord sought a judgment on admission under Order 12

SECRETARY, CANNANORE DISTRICT MUSLIM EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATIONversusSTATE OF KERALA AND ORS.

2010 INSC 2977 May 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The Secretary of the Cannanore District Muslim Educational Association, a minority institution, sought permission to run a Higher Secondary school after the Kerala government abolished pre‑degree courses and allowed colleges with high schools to add classes up to the 12th standard. Although the Council of Ministers had

SATHEEDEVIversusPRASANNA AND ANR.

2010 INSC 2997 May 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Satheedevi owned a 9.98‑acre rubber plantation and had executed a power of attorney in favour of her daughter, who later sold the land to her husband by a registered sale deed. Satheedevi filed a suit for cancellation of that sale deed, stating the property value as Rs 7 lakhs and paying court fees accordingly. The tri

KARAM KAPAHI & OTHERSversusM/S. LAL CHAND PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST & ANOTHER

2010 INSC 2007 April 2010Dismissed

The Lal Chand Public Charitable Trust leased property to the South Delhi Club and later terminated the lease for non‑payment of rent. The Trust sued for possession; the Club contested the Trust’s title and sought relief under Section 114 of the Transfer of Property Act, while also admitting non‑payment of rent in its s

INDIAN SOAPS & TOILETRIES MAKERS ASSOCIATIONversusOZAIR HUSAIN AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 1417 March 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The Delhi High Court, in a public‑interest writ, ordered manufacturers of drugs and cosmetics (other than life‑saving drugs) to display symbols indicating whether the product contained vegetarian or non‑vegetarian ingredients. The petitioners challenged this order, arguing that the Drugs and Cosmetics Act and Rules do

DEV SHARAN & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2011 INSC 1887 March 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh sought to acquire 25.89 hectares of agricultural land in Murchha village for the construction of a district jail, issuing notifications under Sections 4 and 17 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on 21 August 2008 and dispensing with the Section 5A hearing on the ground of urgency. The land‑own

SUNIL SHARMA & ORS.versusBACHITAR SINGH & ORS

2011 INSC 1047 February 2011Case Partly allowed

The legal heirs of Mrs. Sunita Sharma, who died in a motor accident, appealed the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) and the High Court. The Supreme Court examined how the deceased’s income should be computed, rejecting deductions for HRA, CCA, EPF, GIS and allowing inclusion of these all

ABDUL RAZAK (D) THROUGH LRS. AND ORS.versusMANGESH RAJARAM WAGLE AND ORS.

2010 INSC 197 January 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The suit concerned tenancy of premises in Goa, where the plaintiffs (respondents) sought declaration of tenancy and possession against the defendants, including the legal representatives (appellants) of a deceased defendant. The appellants filed an additional written statement after being impleaded, which the trial cou

BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITEDversusTELECOM REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 8086 December 2013Reference answered

The Supreme Court examined whether the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) could entertain challenges to regulations made by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) under Section 36 of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997. It held that the power conferred on TRAI by Sectio

VIJAYA BANKversusSHYAMAL KUMAR LODH

2010 INSC 3536 July 2010Dismissed

Shyamal Kumar Lodh, an employee of Vijaya Bank, filed an application before the Labour Court at Dibrugarh for suspension/subsistence allowance under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The bank contended that the Court, constituted by the State Government, lacked jurisdiction because it had not been sp

SHIVJEE SINGHversusNAGENDRA TIWARY AND ORS.

2010 INSC 3556 July 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Shivjee Singh filed a protest petition that was converted into a complaint alleging that four persons killed his son. The Judicial Magistrate, after examining the appellant and only two of the four witnesses he named, took cognizance of offences under Sections 302, 1208 IPC and Section 27 Arms Act and iss

SINGAPAGU ANJAIAHversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2010 INSC 3576 July 2010Dismissed

Eight persons, including the appellant Singapagu Anjaiah, were tried for rioting, attempt to commit murder, murder and causing hurt. The appellant allegedly struck the deceased, S. Ramalingam, on the head with a crow bar, causing multiple skull fractures and death, as corroborated by five eyewitnesses and an autopsy re

UNION OF INDIA & OTHERSversusAJAY WAHI

2010 INSC 3616 July 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Lt. Col. Ajay Wahi, an officer of the Army Medical Corps, sought premature retirement on medical grounds and was granted voluntary retirement. He claimed a disability pension, which was denied under Regulation 50 of the Army Pension Regulations that bars any disability pension for officers who retire voluntarily. Wahi

JAYAMMA & ORS.versusTHE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, HASSAN DIST., HASSAN AND ORS.

2013 INSC 3126 May 2013Dismissed

The petitioners, owners of residential houses in Mukundur village, claimed that seepage from a canal had caused damage to their homes and sought a mandamus directing the Land Acquisition Collector to complete acquisition proceedings as per a government letter. The High Court had ordered the Collector to pass awards, bu

SMT. V. SUDHAversusP. GANAPATHI BHAT & ANR.

2013 INSC 3116 May 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a 36‑year‑old woman, suffered grievous injuries to her left leg and forearm when a motorcycle driven by the first respondent collided with her. She claimed compensation of Rs.3,50,000 under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, citing loss of earnings, pain and suffering, and future medical expenses for a femora

AKHIL BHARTIYA UPBHOKTA CONGRESSversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ORS.

2011 INSC 2796 April 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a public‑spirit organization, challenged the State of Madhya Pradesh's reservation and allotment of 20 acres of Nazul land to the Shri Kushabhau Thakre Memorial Trust (later respondent No.5) on the ground that the process violated Article 14 of the Constitution. The land was allotted without any public a

ADARSH SHIKSHA MAHAVIDYALAYA AND OTHERSversusSUBHASH RAHANGDALE AND OTHERS

2012 INSC 76 January 2012Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered a civil appeal challenging the Madhya Pradesh High Court's order that arose from a public‑interest writ petition highlighting irregularities in the grant of recognition to private teacher‑training institutions by the Western Regional Committee of the National Council for Teacher Education (

V. RAMAKRISHNA RAOversusTHE SINGARENI COLLIERIES COMPANY LTD. AND ANR.

2010 INSC 6705 October 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant's land was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and the initial market value was fixed by the Collector. After a reference under Section 18, the Reference Court increased the value, but the appellant, who had not made a Section 18 application, sought equal compensation through Section 28A(1) and

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.versusGOPALI & ORS.

2012 INSC 2715 July 2012Dismissed

The case involved a claim for compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act after the death of Nanag Ram, a 36‑year‑old machine operator, in a road accident. The claimants sought Rs.24 lakh, while the insurer challenged the award on several grounds. The Supreme Court examined whether the High Court should ha

JUSTICE P. D. DINAKARANversusHON'BLE JUDGES INQUIRY COMMITTEE & ORS.

2011 INSC 4525 July 2011Dismissed

Justice P.D. Dinakaran, then Chief Justice of the Karnataka High Court, challenged the constitution of an Inquiry Committee set up under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 to investigate allegations against him. He objected to the inclusion of senior advocate P.P. Rao (respondent No.3) on grounds of bias, citing Rao's part

INDU BHUSHAN DWIVEDIversusSTATE OF JHARKHAND AND ANR.

2010 INSC 3485 July 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Indu Bhushan Dwivedi, a Sub‑Divisional Judicial Magistrate, was dismissed from service after a departmental inquiry found two of three charges proved: leaving headquarters without permission and using derogatory language. The High Court’s dismissal recommendation relied on adverse remarks in his Annual Confidential Rep

BHANWAR KANWARversusR.K. GUPTA & ANR.

2013 INSC 2165 April 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant's son suffered convulsions and was treated by respondent No.1, an Ayurvedic practitioner, who advertised a total cure and allegedly prescribed allopathic medicines while claiming they were Ayurvedic. The treatment, conducted between 1994 and 1997, worsened the child's condition, leading the appellant to f

BILKIS AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

2011 INSC 2725 April 2011Case Partly allowed

The appellants' land was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for a tourism development project, and an award of Rs.300 per acre was initially made. The Reference Court enhanced the compensation to Rs.650 per acre, noting that the land had been converted to non‑agricultural use and had future tourism potential

HARJINDER SINGHversusPUNJAB STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION

2010 INSC 95 January 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Harjinder Singh, a workman employed by Punjab State Warehousing Corporation, was retrenched despite seniority over junior employees. The Labour Court awarded him reinstatement with 50% back wages under Section 25G of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Punjab & Haryana High Court, exercising writ jurisdiction under

VISHNU (DEAD) BY L.RSversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 6714 October 2013Dismissed

The appellant, a contractor, entered into five irrigation contracts with the State of Maharashtra in 1983. After abandoning the work in 1985, he sought damages and later invoked Clause 30 of the contracts, claiming it was an arbitration clause that made the Superintending Engineer’s decision binding as an arbitral awar

MOHANLAL NANABHAI CHOKSI (DEAD) BY LRS.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS.

2010 INSC 6684 October 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, owners of land in Surat, challenged the acquisition of their property for a vegetable market initiated by the Surat Municipal Corporation (SMC) under Section 78 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949. They argued that the later Gujarat Agricultural Produce Market Act, 1963, a special

UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHERversusM/S. SWISS GARNIER LIFE SCIENCES & ORS.

2013 INSC 4394 July 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India challenged the Delhi High Court's order setting aside price‑fixation notifications for Doxofylline formulations, arguing that Doxofylline is a derivative of the scheduled bulk drug Theophylline. The respondents contended that Doxofylline is a new chemical entity not listed in the First Schedule of th

STATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS.versusASHOK KUMAR DANGI AND OTHERS

2011 INSC 4354 July 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a dispute over the recruitment of primary school teachers in Jharkhand, where candidates holding C.P.Ed./Dip.P.Ed. sought appointment as primary teachers and the High Court had directed that 5% of vacancies be filled by physical‑trained candidates based on Bihar's policy. The Court held that

CHITIARANJAN DASversusSTATE OF ORISSA

2011 INSC 4434 July 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Deputy Secretary in the Orissa Administrative Service, was found to possess assets disproportionate to his known income. The State Vigilance Department sought sanction for his prosecution under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, but the State Government refused sanction while he was in service. Af

DUNLOP INDIA LIMITEDversusA.P. RAHNA AND ANR.

2011 INSC 3534 May 2011Dismissed

The dispute concerned eviction of Dunlop India Limited from premises leased under the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965. The landlord alleged that the tenant had ceased to occupy the premises for more than six months without reasonable cause, first from June 1998 and later from September 2001. The ten

AMRIT BHANU SHALI & ORS.versusNATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ORS.

2012 INSC 1634 April 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased, a 26‑year‑old unmarried man, was killed in a road accident. His parents and unmarried sister filed a claim under s.166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for compensation. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded Rs 8,66,000, applying a 50% deduction for personal and living expenses and a multiplier of 17

SANT SINGHversusSUKHDEV SINGH AND ORS.

2011 INSC 1864 March 2011Appeal(s) allowed

Sant Singh, a 48‑year‑old work‑munshi, was injured as a pillion rider when a four‑wheeler collided with his scooter, fracturing both legs. He filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking Rs 5 lakh and 24% interest. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded Rs 1,47,209 with 7.5% int

STATE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERSversusPALAK MODI AND ANOTHER

2012 INSC 5583 December 2012Dismissed

The case concerned two probationary officers of State Bank of India who were terminated after being alleged to have used unfair means in a confirmation test. The bank, relying on a report from the Institute of Banking Personnel Selection (IBPS) and seating‑arrangement evidence, extended their probation and then dismiss

DALIP SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2009 INSC 12773 December 2009Dismissed

The appellant, Dalip Singh, sought to set aside an ex‑parte order that declared 18.22 acres of his late father Praveen Singh's land surplus under the Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960. The tenure‑holder had been served a notice in 1975 but failed to object; an ex‑parte order was made in Dec

M. MANSOOR & ANR.versusUNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ANR.

2013 INSC 6683 October 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The parents of a 24‑year‑old bachelor who died in a motor‑vehicle accident filed a claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking compensation. The Motor Claims Tribunal awarded Rs 24,65,668 after deducting one‑third of the deceased’s income for personal expenses and applying a multiplier of 17. The Ma

SANOBANU NAZIRBHAI MIRZA & ORS.versusAHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL TRANSPORT SERVICE

2013 INSC 6693 October 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased Nazirbhai, a 25‑year‑old skilled polisher earning Rs 4,000‑5,000 per month, was killed by an Ahmedabad Municipal Transport Service bus. His legal representatives filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded Rs 3,51,300 based on a notio

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