Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

L NAGESWARA RAO

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

IN RE: DISTRIBUTION OF ESSENTIAL SUPPLIES AND SERVICES DURING PANDEMICversus.

2021 INSC 30231 May 2021Directions issued

The Supreme Court, hearing a suo motu writ petition concerning the management of the COVID‑19 pandemic, examined the Central Government's Liberalised Vaccination Policy, which shifted free vaccination for the 18‑44 age group to State/UT governments and private hospitals and introduced differential pricing. The petition

PATTALI MAKKAL KATCHIversusA. MAYILERUMPERUMAL & ORS.

2022 INSC 37831 March 2022Disposed off

The Tamil Nadu Legislature enacted the 2021 Special Reservation Act, earmarking 10.5% of the 20% reservation for Most Backward Classes (MBCs) and Denotified Communities (DNCs) for the Vanniyakula Kshatriya community. Several writ petitions challenged the Act on the ground that the State lacked legislative competence af

KALYAN DOMBIVALI MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONversusSANJAY GAJANAN GHARAT AND ANOTHER

2022 INSC 37731 March 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Kalyan Dombivali Municipal Corporation (KDM Corp) and the State of Maharashtra appealed against a Bombay High Court order that set aside the suspension of Sanjay Gajanan Gharat, an Additional Municipal Commissioner (AMC), and quashed the departmental inquiry against him. Gharat had been arrested under the Preventio

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

2020 INSC 12331 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

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

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusYOGENDRA SINGH JADON & ANR.

2020 INSC 12431 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

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

RAJENDRA NAROTTAMDAS SHETH & ANR.versusCHANDRA PRAKASH JAIN & ANR.

2021 INSC 57930 September 2021Dismissed

The Union Bank of India (financial creditor) granted loans to R.K. Infratel Ltd. (corporate debtor), which defaulted on 30‑09‑2014, leading to the account being classified as an NPA. The bank filed a recovery suit under the 1993 Recovery of Debts Act and, later, an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bank

K. H. NAZARversusMATHEW K. JACOB & ORS.

2019 INSC 110030 September 2019Dismissed

The appellant, K.H. Nazar, sought environmental clearance to operate a quarry on land that was originally a plantation. Respondents filed writ petitions contending that the land could not be used for quarrying because such land does not qualify as a "commercial site" under the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963, and therefo

SUNITAversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2019 INSC 82830 July 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The victim Sushila's charred remains were recovered from a burning 'Bitora' in Village Kailash and DNA testing identified her. The prosecution alleged that the appellant Sunita, a cousin of the victim's husband, was the last person seen with the victim and her children, citing hostile witnesses who claimed to have seen

KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITEDversusA. BALAKRISHNAN & ANR.

2022 INSC 63030 May 2022Appeal(s) allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank (the appellant) sought initiation of a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against Prasad Properties and Investments Pvt. Ltd. (the corporate debtor) under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). The corporate debtor had stood as guarantor for loans to three borrower

IN RE: DISTRIBUTION OF ESSENTIAL SUPPLIES AND SERVICES DURING PANDEMICversus.

2021 INSC 28030 April 2021Directions issued

The Supreme Court, exercising suo motu jurisdiction under Article 32, examined the humanitarian crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and issued directions to the Union and State governments on the supply of oxygen, essential drugs, and vaccines, as well as on hospital admission policies and protection of individuals

STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD AND OTHERSversusM/S RAMKRISHNA FORGING LIMITED

2021 INSC 27830 April 2021Dismissed

The Jharkhand State Electricity Board (the Board) entered into an initial agreement with M/s Ramkrishna Forging Ltd. (the respondent) on 14 April 2004 for a 325 KVA high‑tension supply, which was subsequently enhanced to 4000 KVA through a series of supplemental agreements. In September 2007 the respondent sought to re

THE STATE OF RAJASTHANversusNEMI CHAND MAHELA AND OTHERS

2019 INSC 58830 April 2019Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a long‑running dispute concerning the award of domicile‑based bonus marks in appointments of primary school teachers in Rajasthan. Earlier judgments (Kailash Chand Sharma and Manmohan Sharma) had declared such bonus marks unconstitutional and applied the doctrine of prospective overruling, li

IN RE: T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPADversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2021 INSC 79629 November 2021Directions issued

The Supreme Court examined the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation's (DMRC) request to proceed with Phase‑IV of the Mass Rapid Transit System (MRTS) through areas of the Delhi Ridge, South‑Central and Morphological Ridges, which are either notified forest or deemed forest lands. The petitioners argued that the project would c

THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR & ORS.versusSHAHEENA MASARAT & ANR.

2021 INSC 57329 September 2021Disposed off

The State of Jammu & Kashmir sought to appoint a Re‑T (teaching guide) under its Rehbar‑e‑Taleem scheme. An advertisement dated 29‑Nov‑2002 stipulated an upper age limit of 35 years as on 1‑Jan‑2002, with the phrase "as far as possible" regarding age qualification. Respondent No.2, born on 28‑Dec‑1965, was selected des

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

2020 INSC 47029 July 2020Appeal(s) allowed

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

HINDUSTAN SANITARYWARE AND INDUSTRIES LTD. & OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF HARYANA

2019 INSC 58429 April 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Haryana issued notifications under Section 5(2) of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 fixing and revising minimum rates of wages, including provisions that classified unskilled workers as semi‑skilled after a certain period of experience, prohibited segregation of wages into allowances, included security staff as

DR. PANKAJ KUMUDCHANDRA PHADNISversusUNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE

2018 INSC 28728 March 2018Dismissed

Mahatma Gandhi was assassinated in 1948 and nine individuals were tried, resulting in convictions of seven and acquittals of two; the High Court later upheld five convictions. In 2016, Dr. Pankaj Kumudchandra Phadnis filed a writ petition seeking to reopen the case, questioning the existence of a fourth bullet and requ

PRAVEEN KUMAR C.PversusKERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION & ORS.

2022 INSC 11228 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

In a miscellaneous application (No. 1769 of 2021) filed in Civil Appeal No. 4846 of 2021, the petitioner sought correction of a typographical error in the cause title of the judgment dated 17‑08‑2021. The judgment incorrectly read the respondent's name as "Kerala Public Service Commission Commission & Ors." The Supreme

JARNAIL SINGH & ORSversusLACHHMI NARAIN GUPTA & ORS

2022 INSC 10528 January 2022Directions issued

The Supreme Court examined the legal framework governing reservation in promotions for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes under Articles 16(4‑A) and 16(4‑B) of the Constitution. It clarified that the State must collect quantifiable, cadre‑wise data to demonstrate backwardness and inadequate representation, but no fi

MADRAS BAR ASSOCIATIONversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2020 INSC 66627 November 2020Disposed off

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

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusP. S. GILL

2019 INSC 129027 November 2019Dismissed

The Union of India appealed against the Armed Forces Tribunal’s order quashing the convening of a General Court Martial against former Army officer P.S. Gill, who was alleged to have been involved in procurement irregularities. After a Court of Inquiry identified twelve officers, including Gill, a hearing under Rule 22

BOBINDRA KUMAR & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2019 INSC 96627 August 2019Dismissed

The case concerned seniority of Sub‑Inspectors (General Duty) in the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF). Direct recruits were selected through a 2007 advertisement, allotted to units on 5 October 2009 and issued offer letters in mid‑October 2009, reporting for training in January 2010. Promotee Sub‑Inspectors were app

NARESH KUMAR ALIAS NITUversusSTATE OF HLMACHAL PRADESH

2017 INSC 67427 July 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, NARESH KUMAR alias NITU, was alleged to have been apprehended at Majhotli with two kilograms of charas, based on police testimony. An independent witness, PW‑2, testified that he was stopped by police later in the day and did not see any seizure of the appellant. The bus ticket showed the appellant board

BAJAJ AUTO LIMITEDversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2019 INSC 40727 March 2019Appeal(s) allowed

Bajaj Auto Ltd., a manufacturing unit in Uttarakhand, was granted a ten‑year exemption from central excise duty under Notification No. 50/2003‑C. The company, however, did not pay National Calamity Contingent Duty (NCCD), Education Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess, which were demanded through a show‑cause not

SHEETAL SHANKAR SALVI AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2017 INSC 27527 March 2017Dismissed

Petitioner Sheetal Shankar Salvi, at 27 weeks of pregnancy, sought a direction from the Supreme Court under Article 32 to allow medical termination of her pregnancy because the fetus was diagnosed with Arnold‑Chiari malformation type II with severe anomalies. A seven‑member Medical Board examined her case and reported

ARUN KUMAR GUPTAversusSTATE OF JHARKHAND & ANR.

2020 INSC 22827 February 2020Dismissed

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

K. ARUMUGA VELAIAHversusP.R. RAMASAMY AND ANR.

2022 INSC 10327 January 2022Dismissed

The appellant‑plaintiff, K. Arumuga Velaiyah, claimed a one‑fourth share in ancestral joint family property based on a 1994 will of his grandfather, Periyaiya Servai, and sought partition and separate possession. The lower courts dismissed the suit, holding that a partition had already been effected in 1964 by a pancha

HARI & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2021 INSC 79226 November 2021Disposed off

The case involved the brutal honour killing of a Jat girl, a Jatav boy and another Jatav youth who were tortured for twelve hours and murdered by a large group of villagers after the couple attempted an inter‑caste marriage. The trial court convicted 35 persons under IPC sections 147, 149, 302, 323, 324, 201 and s.3(3)

V. ANANTHA RAJU & ANRversusT.M. NARASIMHAN & ORS.

2021 INSC 66926 October 2021Case Partly allowed

The case involved a partnership firm that was reconstituted in 1992 and again in 1995, altering the profit‑and‑loss sharing ratios of the partners. The plaintiff‑appellants claimed a 50% share based on the 1995 Deed, while the respondents argued that the plaintiffs were entitled to only a 10% share because the conditio

DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION, ODISHA & ORS.versusPRAMOD KUMAR SAHOO

2019 INSC 109226 September 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, Pramod Kumar Sahoo, was appointed as a primary school teacher in 1988 with an intermediate qualification and later became a graduate. He claimed that, despite lacking formal teacher training, he was entitled to the pay scale reserved for Trained Matric Teachers under the Orissa Revised Scales of Pay Rul

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

2020 INSC 50626 August 2020Appeal(s) allowed

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

SMT. KAITHUAMI [L] THROUGH L.RS.versusSMT. RALLIANI AND OTHERS

2022 INSC 47526 April 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute concerned the inheritance of property belonging to the late P.S. Dahrawka and his wife Kaithuami under Mizo Customary Law. The appellant, Thansangi Huha, a divorced daughter who returned to care for her aged mother, claimed a share, while the respondents, including the widow Ralliani and the granddaughter L

THE STATE BANK OF INDIA & OTHERSversusP. SOUPRAMANIANE

2019 INSC 57926 April 2019Dismissed

P. Soupramian, a messenger employed by State Bank of India, stabbed two individuals with a broken soda bottle and was convicted under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code, receiving a three‑month imprisonment. The bank discharged him under Section 10(1)(b)(i) of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, which bars persons conv

AKKAMMA & ORS.versusVEMAVATHI & ORS.

2021 INSC 78525 November 2021Case Partly allowed

The appellants (Akkamma & Ors.) filed a suit in 1987 seeking a declaration of ownership of land and a permanent injunction against the respondents (Vemavathi & Ors.) alleging interference with possession. The trial court dismissed the suit on the ground that the plaintiffs could not establish possession and therefore c

STATE OF HARYANAversusHARNAM SINGH (DEAD) THR. LRS. & ORS.

2021 INSC 78625 November 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Haryana challenged a High Court order that had set aside the findings of the trial court and first appellate court which held that a will purportedly executed by Kishan Singh in favour of Harnam Singh was not genuine. The dispute centered on whether the will satisfied the requirements of Section 63 of the

RAJASTHAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, AJMER & ANR.versusSHIKUN RAM FIRODA & ANR.

2019 INSC 119725 October 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The Rajasthan Public Service Commission (RPSC) issued an advertisement on 18 June 2013 for recruitment to State and Subordinate Services. A press note dated 12 November 2014 allowed candidates to correct mistakes or change categories in already‑submitted online applications, but did not invite fresh applications. Sever

G H RANJIT KUMAR HALDARversusSTATE OF SIKKIM

2019 INSC 81125 July 2019Dismissed

The appellants Ranjit Kumar Haldar and Mamta Mohanta were convicted for the murder of Netai Mohanta, whose body was found concealed under wooden flooring in a house they had rented. The prosecution relied on the discovery of the body, statements of witnesses, and a disclosure statement by the wife of the deceased. The

STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS.versusATINDRA NATH BHATTACHARYYA & ANR.

2019 INSC 81225 July 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, Atindra Nath Bhattacharyya, a chief manager of State Bank of India, was charge‑sheeted with 16 allegations of financial irregularities and was removed from service after an inquiry found ten charges proved. The Calcutta High Court Single Bench set aside the removal on the ground that the employee was no

STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER ETC. ETC.versusDR. NARENDER SONI AND OTHERS ETC. ETC.

2017 INSC 46925 May 2017Dismissed

The State of Haryana issued a notification on 5 May 2017 identifying "remote/difficult" areas for granting weightage in NEET PG admissions under Regulation 9(IV) of the Post‑Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2000. The High Court set aside the notification, holding it was based on an arbitrary and hasty process, a

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIAversusMEGA CORPORATION LIMITED

2022 INSC 34425 March 2022Dismissed

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) restrained Mega Corporation Ltd, a listed radio‑taxi company, from accessing the capital market after observing an unusual surge in its share price and alleged profit manipulation. SEBI issued a show‑cause notice alleging violations of the SEBI (Prohibition of Fraudulen

SUMAN DEVI & ORS.versusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ORS.

2021 INSC 21225 March 2021Dismissed

The Uttarakhand Government advertised 440 ANM vacancies in 2016 without specifying the statutory requirement of an intermediate qualification in the science stream, which the appellants challenged as contrary to the 1997 Service Rules (amended 1998) that continued to apply after the state's creation. The Supreme Court

PATRICIA MUKHIMversusSTATE OF MEGHALAYA & ORS.

2021 INSC 21325 March 2021Appeal(s) allowed

In July 2020, a group of tribal youths attacked non‑tribal youngsters playing basketball in Lawsohtun, Meghalaya. Journalist Patricia Mukhim posted a Facebook message condemning the attack and urging the state government and police to act, which was complained about as hate speech. An FIR was lodged under Sections 153A

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

2020 INSC 22225 February 2020Appeal(s) allowed

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

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

2020 INSC 22125 February 2020Appeal(s) allowed

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

VINOD JAINversusSANTOKBA DURLABHJI MEMORIAL HOSPITAL & ANR.

2019 INSC 26625 February 2019Dismissed

The appellant's wife, suffering from multiple serious illnesses, was admitted to a hospital where a doctor treated her with intravenous antibiotics but later switched to oral administration after a cannula failure. She was discharged in stable condition, but subsequently deteriorated, was admitted to two other hospital

B.B. PATEL & ORSversusDLF UNIVERSAL LTD

2022 INSC 9125 January 2022Disposed off

The appellants, buyers of apartments from DLF Universal Ltd., entered into an Apartment Buyer Agreement in 1993 promising possession within 2½‑3 years. Possession was delayed and the builder imposed extra charges, leading the buyers to allege unfair trade practice under the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices (M

POSTMAN VENGAISAMY & ORS.versusSTATE REPRESENTED BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE & ORS.

2019 INSC 80224 July 2019Dismissed

The case involved fifteen accused who, on 26 April 2003, surrounded and brutally attacked the deceased Chinnaperiaiyah and two witnesses, Irulandi (PW‑1) and Ramar (PW‑2), using swords, resulting in the victim's death. The prosecution proved a prior attack on the victim on 8 April 2003, establishing a motive and a patt

RANDHIR KAURversusPRITHVI PAL SINGH & ORS.

2019 INSC 80624 July 2019Appeal(s) allowed

Randhir Kaur filed a suit for specific performance of a 2004 agreement to sell 193 kanals 18 marlas of land, having paid earnest money of Rs.13.5 lakh through her son Dhanwant Singh. The trial court decreed specific performance, but the High Court, in a second appeal under Section 41 of the Punjab Courts Act, set aside

KANTA YADAVversusOM PRAKASH YADAV & ORS.

2019 INSC 80824 July 2019Dismissed

Zorawar Singh owned immovable property in Delhi and executed a will (1985) and codicil (1995) bequeathing it to the parties. After his death, the respondents filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction concerning the will, while the appellant filed a suit for natural succession. The Delhi High Court held that

V. SHANTHAversusSTATE OF TELANGANA AND ORS.

2017 INSC 46824 May 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, V. Shanth, was the owner of a seed distribution company accused of selling spurious chilli seeds that caused loss to farmers, leading to three FIRs under the IPC and the Seeds Act, 1966. The State invoked preventive detention under the Telangana Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Dacoits,

PUNJAB NATIONAL BANKversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2022 INSC 23024 February 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Central Excise Commissioner ordered the confiscation of land, building, plant and machinery of Rathi Ispat Ltd. (RIL) under Rule 173Q(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 in 2007, even though that rule had been omitted from the statute by a 2000 notification. RIL had earlier mortgaged the same assets to Punjab Nati

SANJAY MARUTIRAO PATILversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2020 INSC 8524 January 2020Dismissed

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

S. KARTHIK & ORS.versusN. SUBHASH CHAND JAIN & ORS.

2021 INSC 53423 September 2021Dismissed

The appellants, guarantors of a loan of Rs.21.14 crore extended to Ace Concrete Pvt. Ltd., contested the sale of four mortgaged properties by Indian Overseas Bank under the SARFAESI Act. The bank issued a first sale notice on 21‑Jan‑2012 with a 30‑day period, but the sale was stayed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT)

IN RE: COGNIZANCE FOR EXTENSION OF LIMITATIONMISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. 665 OF 2021 IN (SMW (C) NO. 3 OF 2020)versus.

2021 INSC 53623 September 2021Disposed off

The Supreme Court, acting suo motu, extended the limitation period for all judicial and quasi‑judicial proceedings due to the COVID‑19 pandemic, initially ordering an exclusion of the period from 15 March 2020 to 14 March 2021. After a decline in cases, the Court on 8 March 2021 limited the exclusion to that one‑year s

GOVINDBHAI CHHOTABHAI PATEL & ORS.versusPATEL RAMANBHAI MATHURBHAI

2019 INSC 107023 September 2019Dismissed

The appellants, sons of the deceased donor, claimed that a property gifted by their father to the respondent was ancestral and that the donor lacked authority to execute the gift deed, alleging the deed was forged. The trial court held the property ancestral, a view affirmed by the first appellate court, but the Gujara

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusBRIG. DEVINDER SINGH

2019 INSC 94823 August 2019Appeal(s) allowed

Brigadier Devinder Singh, who commanded a brigade during the Kargil War (Operation Vijay), alleged that several internal military documents – the Battle Performance Report, After‑Action Report, and related reports – incorrectly recorded his role and sought their correction. The Armed Forces Tribunal directed that the r

ANJAN KUMAR SARMA & ORS.versusSTATE OF ASSAM

2017 INSC 46723 May 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Anjan Kumar Sarma and others, were convicted by the High Court for murder (Sec. 302) and related offences on the basis that they were last seen with the victim, Rekha Dutta, and offered no explanation. The Supreme Court examined whether the "last seen together" circumstance, without any other corroborat

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERSversusLT. GEN. (RETD.) S.K. SAHNI

2022 INSC 33223 March 2022Dismissed

Lt. Gen. (Retd.) S.K. Sahni, former Director General, Supplies and Transport, was investigated by a Court of Inquiry (CoI) for alleged irregularities in procurement and quality control. The CoI recommended only a recordable censure, but the Army Commander ordered disciplinary action under the Army Act and Army Rules, l

NETAJI ACHYUT SHINDE (PATIL) & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2021 INSC 20023 March 2021Dismissed

The case concerns the murder of Suhas on 5 July 2011, for which three accused—Netaji Achyut Shinde (A‑1), Samadhan Shinde (A‑2) and Balasaheb Shinde (A‑3)—were charged under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC. A telephonic intimation at 17:45 was treated by the trial court as the FIR, leading to the conviction of A‑2

BIJAY KUMAR SINGH & OTHERSversusAMIT KUMAR CHAMARIYA & ANR.

2019 INSC 118122 October 2019Dismissed

The landlord filed eviction suits under the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 alleging non‑payment of rent arrears for two shops. The tenants filed applications under Section 7(2) of the Act seeking determination of the disputed rent and deposited the arrears they admitted. The trial court allowed the applications

RAMESH PARSRAM MALANI & ORSversusTHE STATE OF TELANGANA & ORS.

2019 INSC 117822 October 2019Dismissed

The appellant, whose father was a displaced person from Sindh, claimed the balance of his verified land claim (43.7 standard acres) after having received an initial allotment of 40.4 acres. The Chief Commissioner of Land Administration (CCLA) allotted 19.26 acres in 2003, but the High Court held the CCLA lacked authori

SMT. CHINTAMBARAMMA & ANR.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2019 INSC 94422 August 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, the mother‑in‑law and sister‑in‑law of the deceased Sahitya, were convicted by the trial court and the Karnataka High Court for murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC based on a prosecution theory that they conspired with alleged assailants (accused Nos. 4 and 5). The Supreme Court exa

CHANDRASEKAR AND ANOTHERversusSTATE

2017 INSC 46522 May 2017Dismissed

The appellants Chandrasekar and another were convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC and of voluntarily causing hurt under Section 324 IPC for repeatedly assaulting the deceased on the head with a hammer, sickle and iron rod, resulting in his death. The prosecution relied heavily on the testimony of an injured eyewit

RAHUL S SHAHversusJINENDRA KUMAR GANDHI & ORS.

2021 INSC 27022 April 2021Dismissed

The case arose from a protracted dispute over a one‑acre property in Bengaluru that had been sold multiple times, leading to conflicting claims and a series of suits for declaration, possession, and execution. The decree‑holders obtained a decree for possession, but the judgment debtors and subsequent purchasers repeat

SHRIKANT G. MANTRIversusPUNJAB NATIONAL BANK

2022 INSC 21722 February 2022Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a stock‑broker, obtained an overdraft facility and subsequent enhancements from the respondent bank, pledging shares as security. After a dispute over the bank’s sale of the pledged shares, the appellant filed a consumer complaint seeking the return of the shares, alleging deficiency in service. The cent

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusDHRUV GURJAR AND ANOTHER

2019 INSC 25422 February 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh appealed against two orders of the Madhya Pradesh High Court that quashed FIRs relating to serious offences including IPC sections 307, 294, 34, 394 and Arms Act sections 25 and 27 on the ground that the complainant had reached a compromise with the accused. The Supreme Court examined whethe

VARADARAJANversusKANAKAVALLI & ORS.

2020 INSC 7522 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

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

RAJENDRA BAJORIA AND OTHERSversusHEMANT KUMAR JALAN AND OTHERS

2021 INSC 51421 September 2021Dismissed

The plaintiffs, heirs of some original partners of the partnership firm ‘Soorajmull Nagarmull’, filed a suit seeking declaration of entitlement to the firm’s assets, representation before authorities, injunctions, and dissolution of the firm. The defendants, heirs of the remaining original partners, contended that the

PUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LIMITED AND ANOTHERversusEMTA COAL LIMITED

2021 INSC 52321 September 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd (PSPCL) entered a joint‑venture with EMTA Coal Ltd for the captive Pachhwara coal block. After the Supreme Court’s Manohar Lal Sharma judgment, the block was re‑allotted to PSPCL, which later decided to invite competitive bidding for a mine‑developer‑operator, rejecting EMTA’s cla

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

2020 INSC 50221 August 2020Dismissed

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

LALIT KUMAR JAINversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2021 INSC 29721 May 2021Dismissed

The petitioners, who were personal guarantors to corporate debtors, challenged a Central Government notification dated 15‑Nov‑2019 that brought certain provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) into force only for personal guarantors. They argued that the notification exceeded the power conferred by

AZGAR BARID (D) BY LRS.versusMAZAMBI @ PYAREMABI AND OTHERS

2022 INSC 21021 February 2022Dismissed

The case arose from a partition suit (O.S. No. 388/77) where the trial court decreed shares only to plaintiffs 2 and 3, rejecting plaintiffs 4‑8. The appellant‑defendant appealed and the First Appellate Court set aside the trial decree, but the High Court restored it and, on remand, divided the property among the appel

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusR. KARTHIK

2020 INSC 6221 January 2020Dismissed

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

INDU BAI & ORS.versusSTATE OF TELANGANA & ORS.

2020 INSC 6321 January 2020Disposed off

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

SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS.versusDHARMBIR SINGH

2019 INSC 106320 September 2019Appeal(s) allowed

Dharambir Singh, a former Territorial Army soldier, was injured in a scooter accident while on two days of casual leave and claimed a disability pension. The Armed Forces Tribunal had granted the pension, holding that leave is deemed duty, but the Government appealed. The Supreme Court examined whether personnel on lea

MUSTAFAversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2019 INSC 92420 August 2019Disposed off

An FIR was lodged under the United Provinces Excise Act, 1910 and the IPC for the seizure of illicit liquor and a firearm, leading to the confiscation of a truck owned by the appellant. The District Magistrate, who also acted as the Collector, issued a show‑cause notice and subsequently ordered the vehicle's confiscati

STATE OF ODISHA & ORS. ETC.ETCversusSULEKH CHANDRA PRADHAN ETC.ETC.

2022 INSC 45220 April 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Odisha and other respondents challenged the appointments of Hindi teachers in aided Middle English (M.E.) schools, arguing that the teachers were appointed without complying with the Odisha Education (Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Teachers and Members of the Staff of Aided Educational Institutio

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

2020 INSC 21920 February 2020Appeal(s) allowed

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

TATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ORS.versusSMT. SURESHWATI

2021 INSC 3220 January 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned a claim by Smt. Sureshwati that her services as a clerk/assistant teacher in a private school turned government‑aided were illegally retrenched on 8 March 2006 without a disciplinary enquiry. The school contended that she had abandoned her post in July 1997 after marriage and had not been in continuo

HARYANA SPACE APPLICATION CENTRE (HARSAC) & ANR.versusM/S PAN INDIA CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD.

2021 INSC 3320 January 2021Disposed off

The Haryana Space Application Centre (HARSAC), a nodal agency of the Haryana government, awarded a GIS modernisation contract to Pan India Consultants and incorporated an arbitration clause in the service level agreement. HARSAC appointed the Principal Secretary to the Government of Haryana as its nominee arbitrator, w

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

2021 INSC 25719 May 2022Directions issued

The Supreme Court, hearing a suo motu writ concerning the massive pendency of cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, noted that over 33 lakh complaints were pending, a sharp rise from 26 lakh five months earlier. An expert committee had recommended the creation of de novo special NI courts, but amic

ALL INDIA JUDGES ASSOCIATION AND OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2022 INSC 44619 April 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court considered applications filed by two Delhi Judicial Service officers seeking modification of its earlier orders on promotion to the Delhi Higher Judicial Service (DHJS). The Court revisited its 2002 and 2010 directives that required a minimum of five years of service as a Civil Judge (Senior Division)

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

2020 INSC 31519 March 2020Appeal(s) allowed

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

DHANPATversusSHEO RAM (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS. & ORS.

2020 INSC 31619 March 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Dhanpat sought a declaration that he, his mother and sisters were entitled to equal shares in a suit land, challenging a Will dated 30‑April‑1980 that favored his brother’s sons. The trial court and first appellate court dismissed the suit, holding that the Will was duly executed and the property had been

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusHARJEET SINGH & ANR.

2019 INSC 22419 February 2019Disposed off

The State of Madhya Pradesh prosecuted Harjeet Singh (Accused No.1) and Ramji Lal (Accused No.2) for stabbing the complainant Sukhdev with a knife, causing four injuries to the chest, scapula, back and buttocks. The trial court convicted both under Section 307 IPC, but the High Court reduced Harjeet Singh's conviction

RENAISSANCE HOTEL HOLDINGS INC.versusB. VIJAYA SAI AND OTHERS

2022 INSC 7019 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

Renaissance Hotel Holdings Inc., a US company, holds a registered trademark "RENAISSANCE" for hotel‑related services and goods in Classes 16 and 42. The respondents operated hotels under the name "SAI RENAISSANCE" in Bangalore and Puttaparthi, prompting the plaintiff to seek a permanent injunction. The trial court gran

G H STANDARD CHARTERED BANKversusHEAVY ENGINEERING CORPORATION LTD. & ANR.

2019 INSC 140518 December 2019Dismissed

The plaintiff Heavy Engineering Corporation (HEC) ordered equipment from Simon Carves India Ltd. (SCIL) and obtained two bank guarantees from Standard Chartered Bank (formerly ANZ Grindlays) as security for advances. SCIL failed to deliver, and HEC demanded encashment of the guarantees, which the bank refused. The High

JHARKHAND PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSIONversusMANOJ KUMAR GUPTA AND ANR.

2019 INSC 140118 December 2019Disposed off

The Jharkhand Public Service Commission (JPSC) advertised the Jharkhand Eligibility Test (JET) to determine eligibility for lecturer appointments, requiring candidates to secure 50% in Papers I and II before attempting Paper III. The petitioner obtained the required 50% in Papers I and II but failed to meet a 60% cut‑o

INDIAN OVERSEAS BANKversusM/S RCM INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. AND ANOTHER

2022 INSC 58418 May 2022Dismissed

Indian Overseas Bank (IOB) had taken possession of two secured assets of M/s RCM Infrastructure Ltd. and conducted an e‑auction under the SARFAESI Act, selling the assets to bidders who paid 25% of the price and were later allowed to pay the balance by 8 March 2019. The corporate debtor filed a petition under Section 1

BHAGWANIversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2022 INSC 5218 January 2022Case Partly allowed

The appellant was convicted of kidnapping, raping and murdering an 11‑year‑old girl after she disappeared from a village ceremony. Circumstantial and forensic evidence, including DNA matches to the co‑accused Satish and blood‑stained clothing recovered from the appellant's cowshed, linked the appellant to the crime, wh

NGAITLANG DHARversusPANNA PRAGATI INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS.

2021 INSC 92317 December 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a dispute arising from the corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP) of Meghalaya Infratech Ltd., where four resolution applicants submitted bids and Ngaitlang Dhar emerged as the highest bidder (H‑1). The losing bidder, Panna Pragati Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (PPIPL), sought additional t

PANI RAMversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2021 INSC 92217 December 2021Appeal(s) allowed

Pani Ram, a former regular army infantry officer, re‑enrolled in the Territorial Army (TA) and suffered a severe accident while returning from leave, resulting in an 80% disability. The Medical Board and a Court of Inquiry found the injury attributable to military service, and he was invalided out, seeking a disability

BRIJMANI DEVIversusPAPPU KUMAR & ANR.

2021 INSC 91917 December 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, mother of the deceased Rupesh Kumar, filed two FIRs alleging that the respondent, Pappu Kumar, attempted to murder her son in 2017 and murdered him in 2020, also violating the Arms Act. The respondent was arrested after absconding for seven months and was denied bail by the Sessions Court, but the Patna

SUNNY ABRAHAMversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2021 INSC 92017 December 2021Appeal(s) allowed

Sunny Abraham, an Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, was subjected to disciplinary proceedings under Rule 14 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965. A charge memorandum was issued on 18 Nov 2002 without the Finance Minister’s (the Disciplinary Authority’s) approval, which was

UTTAM RAMversusDEVINDER SINGH HUDAN & ANR.

2019 INSC 116017 October 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an apple orchard owner, supplied packing material on credit to the respondent, who later settled the account and issued a cheque for Rs.5,38,856 which was returned for insufficient funds. The appellant filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, which was dismissed by the

MANI PUSHPAK JOSHIversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ANR.

2019 INSC 116117 October 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The father of a six‑year‑old girl filed an FIR alleging sexual assault by a teacher at her school. The child’s statements, recorded under Sections 161 and 164 of the CrPC, later identified two men, one wearing spectacles, as perpetrators; the latter was the school manager, not a teaching staff. The trial court, and sub

THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.versusDEVENDRA SHARMA

2019 INSC 115717 October 2019Disposed off

The case concerned a large number of appointments to Class III and Class IV posts in the Bihar Health Department that were made without sanctioned vacancies, advertisement or competent authority, many on forged documents. A State Committee classified the appointments as illegal, forged or irregular and termination orde

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHIversusM/S MITSUBISHI CORPORATION

2021 INSC 49517 September 2021Disposed off

M/s Mitsubishi Corporation, a non‑resident Japanese company, was assessed for income attributable to its Indian operations for the years 1998‑99 to 2004‑05 and was levied interest under section 234B of the Income‑Tax Act for alleged default in payment of advance tax. The company argued that, because tax was deductible

PAPPU DEO YADAVversusNARESH KUMAR AND ORS.

2020 INSC 55317 September 2020Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a 20‑year‑old data‑entry operator, lost his right hand in a motor‑vehicle accident and claimed compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal assessed his disability at 89% but reduced it to 45% and used a monthly income of Rs 8,000, omitting a 50% addition for future

PRADEEP SINGH DEHALversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS.

2019 INSC 104517 September 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned two recruitment advertisements for Assistant Professor posts at Himachal Pradesh University. The appellant, an OBC candidate, was appointed, while the respondent, a General category candidate, claimed he was denied five marks for "publications" that had been awarded in an earlier, incomplete selectio

RITU SAXENAversusJ. S. GROVER & ANR.

2019 INSC 104717 September 2019Dismissed

Ritu Saxena filed a suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell a flat, claiming she was ready and willing to pay the balance consideration of Rs.50 lakhs. The trial court dismissed the suit, holding that she failed to prove her financial capacity, a finding affirmed by the Delhi High Court. On appeal, the Su

PRAVEEN KUMAR C.PversusKERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION & ORS.

2021 INSC 40417 August 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Praveen Kumar C.P. and Anitha Devi, applied for High School Assistant posts in Kerala where the recruitment notification required a B.Ed. in the concerned subject (Natural Science). Their B.Ed. degrees were in Biological Science (and related subjects) obtained from universities outside Kerala. They obta

ABDUL AHAD AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2021 INSC 41117 August 2021Dismissed

The petitioners, who qualified the NEET 2016 exam, were admitted to the 1st year MBBS course at Glocal Medical College through a private counselling process conducted by the college, contrary to the Uttar Pradesh Government's notification dated 22‑08‑2016 that mandated centralized counselling for all medical admissions

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.versusG. RAMANARAYANA JOSHI

2022 INSC 58117 May 2022Dismissed

The respondent claimed ownership of a 45.01‑acre parcel that his ancestors bought at a public auction in 1887, which was forfeited for non‑payment of land revenue in 1892 but remained in the family's possession. The Karnataka Government, by a 1994 order, transferred the land to the Forest Department as part of a land‑b

AARIFABEN YUNUSBHAI PATEL & ORS.versusMUKUL THAKOREBHAI AMIN & ORS.

2020 INSC 29717 March 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The cooperative bank (R‑2) obtained a decree for repayment of a loan from respondents R‑1 and R‑3 and obtained a court order to sell the mortgaged flats. The sale was conducted and the appellants were the highest bidders. R‑1 later filed a writ petition and, after its dismissal, filed an application under Order XXI Rul

YOGENDRA @ JOGENDRA SINGHversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2019 INSC 5417 January 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Yogendra Singh, was convicted under IPC sections 302, 326A and 460 for throwing acid on his former lover, Smt. Ruby, resulting in her death and injuring her relatives. The trial court and High Court affirmed the conviction and imposed the death penalty, relying heavily on the victim's dying declaration a

MOHD. MUSTAFAversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2021 INSC 73116 November 2021Dismissed

The case concerned the appointment of Dinkar Gupta as Director General of Police (HoPF) of Punjab, which was challenged on the ground that the empanelment panel prepared by the UPSC violated the directions in Prakash Singh v. Union of India. The appellants alleged bias, procedural impropriety and that the Draft Guideli

THE CHAIRMAN, STATE BANK OF INDIA ANDversusM. J. JAMES

2021 INSC 73216 November 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The former manager of the Bank of Cochin, M.J. James, was dismissed for sanctioning advances in violation of head‑office instructions. During the disciplinary inquiry he was denied the right to be represented by an officer of a bank‑employees' union other than the Bank of Cochin, which he claimed violated Clause 22(ix)

KIRPA RAM (DECEASED) THROUGH LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES & ORS.versusSURENDRA DEO GAUR & ORS.

2020 INSC 64016 November 2020Dismissed

The respondents filed a suit for permanent injunction claiming ownership of Khasra No. 238 in Village Basai Darapur, Delhi, while the appellant (Kirpa Ram) contended that the land was Khasra No. 79 in Village Shakarpur and that the dispute was a boundary issue barred under Section 28 of the Delhi Land Revenue Act, 1954

SAKHARAM GANESH PUJARI (D) THR. HIS LRSversusHUSEN ABA BAHADUR (D} BY HIS LRS.& ANR.

2017 INSC 129816 November 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The landlord, a retired armed forces officer, held land under the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Act, 1948, which was occupied by the tenant. Under Section 32F the tenant could purchase the land by giving notice within one year of the landlord's retirement, provided the landlord did not terminate the tenancy; the land

DR. S. KUMAR & ORS.versusS. RAMALINGAM

2019 INSC 76016 July 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned a 16‑feet‑by‑103‑feet passage in a Chennai property. The plaintiff (Dr. S. Kumar & Ors.) claimed exclusive right to use the passage based on a sale deed dated 31 May 1988, while the defendant No.2 (S. Ramalingam) relied on an earlier sale deed dated 1 April 1976 that reserved a right of way for her.

G H STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS.versusMOHAMMAD BADRUDDIN

2019 INSC 76416 July 2019Disposed off

The State Bank of India (SBI) conducted a departmental inquiry against Mohammad Badruddin on five charges, finding only charge No. 4 proved. The Disciplinary Authority, disagreeing with the Inquiry Officer on charges 1 and 5, imposed removal from service, while an earlier appellate authority had altered a compulsory re

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

2021 INSC 25716 April 2021Directions issued

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

KALOJI NARAYANA RAO UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCESversusSRIKEERTI REDDI PINGLE & ORS.

2021 INSC 9216 February 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant university rejected the NRI student’s application for the MBBS programme on the ground that she had not satisfied the biology subject requirement of the Medical Council of India (MCI) Regulation 4(2). The student relied on an equivalence certificate issued by the Telangana State Board of Intermediate Educ

MEERA SANTOSH PAL AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2017 INSC 5216 January 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Meera Santosh Pal, a 22‑year‑old woman, petitioned the Supreme Court under Article 32 seeking permission to terminate her 24‑week pregnancy after the fetus was diagnosed with anencephaly, a lethal condition that also endangered her life. A seven‑member Medical Board examined her and concluded that continuation of the p

JAIKAM KHANversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2021 INSC 89615 December 2021Disposed off

Six members of a family were murdered in a house on 23 January 2014. The prosecution relied primarily on the ocular testimony of two interested witnesses, PW‑1 (Ali Sher Khan) and PW‑2 (Jaan Mohammad), who were closely related to both the deceased and the accused. The Supreme Court held that because the witnesses were

RATHNAMMA & ORS.versusSUJATHAMMA & ORS.

2019 INSC 125515 November 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff, Sujathamma, a maternal granddaughter of the deceased's father, claimed to have married her maternal uncle Hanumanthappa on 7 March 1986 and sought a share of his estate as his wife. The alleged marriage was supported only by a registration document (Ex.P/1) with no evidence of any customary rites or sapt

RAJNEESH KHAJURIAversusM/S. WOCKHARDT LTD. & ANR.

2020 INSC 4315 January 2020Dismissed

Rajneesh Khajuria, a sales employee of Wockhardt Ltd., was transferred from Sagar to Mumbai and failed to report, after which his services were terminated. He filed a complaint under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 alleging that the transfer and terminatio

MOHD. RASHIDversusTHE DIRECTOR, LOCAL BODIES, NEW SECRETARIAT & ORS.

2020 INSC 4415 January 2020Dismissed

The appellants, who applied for direct recruitment to the posts of Administrative Officer/Assistant Assessor and Collector in the Delhi Municipal Corporations, challenged the advertisement of 30 vacancies on the ground that the recruitment rules required promotion or deputation quotas to be filled first. The Central Ad

STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICEversusM. MURUGESAN & ANR.

2020 INSC 4615 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The State, represented by the Inspector of Police, appealed against a Madras High Court order that, after granting bail to M. Murugesan and another under Section 439 of the CrPC, retained the case file and directed the State to collect extensive data on criminal cases and submit reform recommendations. The Supreme Cour

SHRI UTTAM CHAND (D) THROUGH LRS.versusNATHU RAM (D) THROUGH LRS. & ORS.

2020 INSC 4215 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

Shri Uttam Chand purchased a government‑owned property at a public auction in 1964 and obtained a sale certificate in 1965. He filed a suit for possession in 1979 against Nathu Ram and others, who claimed ancestral ownership and alleged that the Managing Officer had no authority to auction the land. The trial court rec

LOCHAN SHRIVASversusTHE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2021 INSC 88214 December 2021Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a 23‑year‑old resident of Chhattisgarh, was convicted of kidnapping, rape, murder and related offences after a missing‑child case led to his confession and the recovery of the victim’s body from a concealed sack. The trial court sentenced him to death for murder and to rigorous imprisonment for the other

HARSHITA BHASINversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS

2016 INSC 112914 December 2016Disposed off

Mukul Bhasin and Harshita Bhasin, married in 2007, separated in 2013 and have two minor children aged eight and five. The husband filed a petition under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 for dissolution of marriage and custody, while the wife filed a habeas corpus petition. The Calcutta High Court refused interim custo

RAM KRISHAN GROVER AND OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2019 INSC 123914 November 2019Dismissed

The petitioners, tenants in Chandigarh and Punjab, challenged Section 13‑B of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, which gives Non‑Resident Indian (NRI) landlords a preferential right to evict tenants, and the extension of this provision to the Union Territory of Chandigarh by a 2009 notification under Sec

MADRAS BAR ASSOCIATIONversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2021 INSC 33214 July 2021Disposed off

The Madras Bar Association challenged the Finance Act, 2017 as amended by the Tribunal Reforms (Rationalisation and Conditions of Service) Ordinance, 2021, contending that the first proviso to s.184(1) (minimum age of 50 for appointment as Chairperson or Member), the second and third provisos (parity of allowances with

SHYAM SEL AND POWER LIMITED ANDversusSHYAM STEEL INDUSTRIES LIMITED

2022 INSC 30314 March 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff, holder of the trademark ‘SHYAM’, sued the appellants for infringement and sought a temporary injunction. The Single Judge of the Calcutta High Court refused an interim injunction, granting the appellants time to file an affidavit and postponing the matter. The plaintiff appealed this order to the Divisio

M.R. VINODAversusM.S. SUSHEELAMMA (D) BY LRS. AND OTHERS

2021 INSC 87813 December 2021Dismissed

The case involved three branches of a Mitakshara joint Hindu family that executed a partition deed in 1961. In 1969 the eldest brother of one branch, acting as Karta, and a cousin executed a relinquishment deed surrendering their branch's share in favour of the eldest uncle who had repaid a family mortgage. Four younge

SHEO NARAIN NAGAR & ORS.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2017 INSC 110113 November 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were first engaged on a daily‑wage basis in August 1993, later on a contractual basis in 1996, and were given the minimum pay‑scale in 2000. In 2006 they were conferred temporary status with retrospective effect from 2 October 2002. The Allahabad High Court directed that they be considered for regularisa

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusSANDEEP KUMAR ETC.

2019 INSC 103013 September 2019Disposed off

The case arose from the loss of two pistols during a T‑90 tank conversion exercise of the 71 Armoured Regiment at Pokhran. The accused soldiers, Neeraj Kumar Dhaka and Sandeep Kumar, were convicted by a District Court Martial for theft and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment and dismissal. The Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT

RAGHWENDRA SHARAN SINGHversusRAM PRASANNA SINGH (DEAD) BY LRS

2019 INSC 35713 March 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff and his brother executed a registered gift deed in 1981 transferring land to the appellant, the appellant's son. Neither the plaintiff nor his brother contested the deed for about 22 years; the appellant filed a partition suit in 2001, in which the plaintiff was a defendant. In 2003 the plaintiff filed a

GURNAM SINGH (D) BY LRS. & ORS.versusLEHNA SINGH (D) BY LRS.

2019 INSC 35613 March 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff filed a suit for perpetual injunction alleging ownership of land and challenged a will executed by the deceased brother. The trial court upheld the plaintiff's claim, but the first appellate court reversed that decision after re‑appraising the evidence and deeming the will genuine. The High Court, exercis

UMA MAHESH BANDEKAR AND ANOTHERversusVIVEK SADANAND MARATHE AND OTHERS

2019 INSC 35913 March 2019Appeal(s) allowed

After the deaths of Late Sadanand V. Marathe and his wife, their son filed inventory proceedings for their estate, which included a lease premises held by a partnership firm. The appellants, the deceased's daughters, objected to the exclusion of the lease premises from the inventory, arguing that as married daughters t

DENTAL COUNCIL OF INDIAversusBIYANI SHIKSHAN SAMITI & ANR.

2022 INSC 41912 April 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Dental Council of India (DCI) amended Regulation 6(2)(h) of its 2006 Regulations, mandating that new dental colleges be attached to a recognised medical college within a specified distance. Biyani Shikshan Samiti (respondent) challenged the amendment, alleging that the Council exceeded its statutory authority, and

CENTRAL COUNCIL FOR INDIAN MEDICINEversusKARNATAKA AYURVEDA MEDICAL COLLEGE AND OTHERS

2022 INSC 41611 April 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Karnataka Ayurveda Medical College sought Central Government permission to start postgraduate (PG) courses for the 2014‑15 academic year and later applied for the 2018‑19 session. The Union of India rejected the PG permission for 2018‑19 on grounds of lacking a central research laboratory and animal house, while gr

UNION OF INDIA & ANR.versusSHAIKH ISTIYAQ AHMED & ORS.

2022 INSC 3811 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

Shaikh Istiaq Ahmed was convicted in Mauritius for possession of heroin and sentenced to 26 years. He was transferred to India under the Repatriation of Prisoners Act, 2003 and sought to have his sentence reduced to 10 years, the maximum punishable term under Section 21(b) of the NDNDPS Act, invoking Section 13(6) of t

MURTHY & ORS.versusC. SARADAMBAL & ORS.

2021 INSC 86210 December 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased E. Srinivasa Pillai executed a will bequeathing his house to his only son S. Damodaran, excluding his daughters. The will was produced fifteen years after the testator's death by the son’s widow, C. Saradambal, who sought Letters of Administration, while the daughters contested its validity alleging fabric

THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERSversusPAWAN KUMAR AND OTHERS ETC.

2021 INSC 71310 November 2021Directions issued

The State of Bihar appealed against a National Green Tribunal (NGT) order that barred sand mining in Banka district until a District Survey Report (DSR) received approval from the State Expert Appraisal Committee (SEAC) and the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA). The Supreme Court examined whether th

GIRISH KUMARversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

2019 INSC 66510 May 2019Appeal(s) allowed

Girish Kumar, a senior assistant in the Maharashtra Zilla Parishads District Service, was promoted to Office Superintendent with effect from 7 Oct 2005. Respondent No.3, a junior assistant, was granted deemed dates of promotion under Rule 5 of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Regulation of Seniority) Rules, 1982 – senio

THE STATE OF RAJASTHANversusKANHAIYA LAL

2019 INSC 51010 April 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The victim Raju was attacked on the head with an axe by the accused Kanhaiya Lal and died from the injuries. The trial court convicted the accused under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for murder and sentenced him to life imprisonment. On appeal, the High Court reduced the conviction to Section 304 Part I, r

VIJAY MOHAN SINGHversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2019 INSC 50910 April 2019Dismissed

The appellant, Vijay Mohan Singh, was accused of pouring kerosene on his wife, causing fatal burns, and was charged under Sections 302 r/w 34, 498A, 304B r/w 34 of the IPC and Sections 3, 4, 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The trial court acquitted him, discarding the victim's dying declaration and other material evide

MS. XversusREGISTRAR GENERAL, HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANOTHER

2022 INSC 17110 February 2022Case Partly allowed

Ms X, an Additional District & Sessions Judge, was transferred mid‑term from Gwalior to Sidhi after a complaint by the District & Sessions Judge, allegedly following sexual harassment. She sought an eight‑month extension to allow her daughter to complete Class 12, but her representations were rejected without following

BHAGCHANDRAversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2021 INSC 8519 December 2021Case Partly allowed

The appellant Bhagchandra was convicted of murdering his two brothers and a nephew during a property dispute, with the prosecution relying on the ocular testimony of several rustic village witnesses who identified him as the assailant wielding an axe. The trial court sentenced him to death under IPC sections 302, 201 a

G H MADHAVIversusCHAGAN & ORS.

2020 INSC 6909 December 2020Appeal(s) allowed

Madhavi was appointed as a temporary teacher in a private secondary school on 16 July 1985, holding a BA and B.Ed., and was placed in Category ‘C’ of Schedule ‘F’. Chagan was appointed on 1 August 1985 as an assistant teacher with only a senior secondary certificate and a Diploma in Education, placing him in Category ‘

DELHI AIRPORT METRO EXPRESS PVT. LTD.versusDELHI METRO RAIL CORPORATION LTD.

2021 INSC 4649 September 2021Disposed off

The Delhi Airport Metro Express Pvt. Ltd. (DAMEPL) and Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. (DMRC) entered into a concession agreement for the Airport Metro Express Line. DMRC was served a termination notice for alleged defects in the civil structure, which DAMEPL claimed were not cured within the 90‑day period, leading t

K. N. NAGARAJAPPA & ORS.versusH. NARASIMHA REDDY

2021 INSC 4619 September 2021Dismissed

The appellants challenged two second appeals decided by the Karnataka High Court, which had reversed a trial court's decree in favour of the respondent concerning ownership of certain parcels of land. The High Court, invoking its power under Section 103 of the Code of Civil Procedure, re‑examined documentary evidence (

SHREYAS SINHAversusTHE WEST BENGAL NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF JURIDICAL SCIENCES & ORS.

2020 INSC 5419 September 2020Dismissed

Shreyas Sinha applied for admission to the West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences (NUJS) for the 2019‑2020 academic session, invoking the 30% reservation for West Bengal domiciles introduced by the West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences (Amendment) Act, 2018, which came into force on 21 Ma

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ORS.versusB. RANGA REDDY (D) BY LRS & ORS.

2019 INSC 8869 August 2019Appeal(s) allowed

Three civil suits involving the State of Andhra Pradesh were tried together, two of which (suits No. 274/1983 and 276/1983) were dismissed while the third (suit No. 141/1984) was decreed in favour of the plaintiffs. The State appealed the decree in the third suit, arguing that the findings on the title issue in the fir

THE DIRECTOR OF HORTICULTURE, ODISHAversusPRAVAT KUMAR DASH & ORS.

2019 INSC 8889 August 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents underwent pre‑service gardener training under a 1998 circular that expressly stated no guarantee of employment after training. The selection of 362 trainees out of 1,359 applicants was not transparent, and the circular did not create a statutory right to appointment. The State later terminated six appoi

BAHUDDESHIYA VIKAS SANSTHA THROUGH PRESIDENT B.B. KARANJEKAR & ORS.versusKU. JAYA & ORS.

2019 INSC 8879 August 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Wainganga Bahuddeshiya Vikas Sanstha, terminated the services of respondent No.1, a lecturer appointed on an ad‑hoc basis under Section 59 of the Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994, on the ground of unsatisfactory performance. The termination was challenged before the College Tribunal, the High Court Sin

VITHAL TUKARAM KADAM AND ANOTHERversusVAMANRAO SAWALARAM BHOSALE AND OTHERS

2017 INSC 7219 August 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff executed a deed in 1953 that was styled as a sale of land for a nominal sum of Rs.700, but included a clause that the land would be returned if the amount was repaid within ten years. The parties were long‑time acquaintances, with the plaintiff having repeatedly borrowed money from the defendant, establis

DAHIBENversusARVINDBHAI KALYANJI BHANUSALI (GAJRA) (D) THR LRS & ORS.

2020 INSC 4509 July 2020Dismissed

The plaintiffs sold agricultural land to respondent No.1 in 2009 and alleged that only a small part of the sale consideration was paid, seeking cancellation of the sale deed. They filed the suit in December 2014, more than five years after the deed, claiming the cause of action arose only when they discovered alleged f

BEEMANENI MAHA LAKSHMIversusGANGUMALLA APPA RAO (SINCE DEAD) BY LRS.

2019 INSC 6569 May 2019Dismissed

The appellant, a vendor, entered into an agreement to sell land to the respondent, the vendee, on 30‑12‑1985, with part payment of Rs.55,000 and the balance to be paid within three months, subject to the vendor measuring the land and delivering the original sale deed and land‑ceiling clearance documents. The vendee pai

MANGATHAI AMMAL (DIED) THROUGH LRS ANDversusRAJESWARI & OTHERS

2019 INSC 6649 May 2019Case Partly allowed

The appeal arose from a partition suit where the plaintiffs claimed a three‑quarter share in several properties, alleging that the properties were purchased by the deceased husband, Narayanasamy Mudaliar, in his wife’s name using money from the sale of ancestral lands, thus constituting benami transactions. The trial c

KHETRI VIKAS SAMITIversusDIRECTOR COLLEGE EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

2019 INSC 6599 May 2019Appeal(s) allowed

Khetri Vikas Samiti, a society running Vinodini P.G. College, abolished the posts of lab assistant, sweeper, waterman and mechanic in 2003 due to heavy financial losses, paying the employees six months' salary and terminating them. The employees appealed to the Non‑Government Educational Tribunal under Section 19 of th

SHRIRAM TOMAR AND ANOTHER ETC.versusPRAVEEN KUMAR JAGGI AND OTHERS

2019 INSC 4989 April 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned promotion of officers from Scale I to Junior Management Scale II in a Regional Rural Bank. The bank’s selection committee fixed a benchmark of at least 12 marks out of 20 in both the interview and performance‑appraisal reports, in addition to the statutory 40 % minimum in the written test. Senior off

FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIAversusRIMJHIM

2019 INSC 5029 April 2019Dismissed

The Food Corporation of India (FCI) advertised for the post of Assistant Grade‑II (Hindi) requiring one year of translation experience. Respondent Rimjhim applied, was shortlisted and ranked sixth, but was not issued a final appointment letter. She filed a writ petition alleging that the FCI rejected her for not produc

SMT. P. LEELAVATHI (D) BY LRSversusV. SHANKARNARAYANA RAO (D) BY LRS

2019 INSC 4959 April 2019Dismissed

Smt. P. Leelavathi filed a partition suit claiming a one‑fourth share in the properties of her late father, alleging that the properties were purchased by her father but held in the names of her brothers, making them benami transactions. The trial court dismissed the suit, holding the properties were self‑acquired by t

ANURAG SONIversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2019 INSC 5039 April 2019Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Anurag Soni, had a romantic relationship with the prosecutrix and promised to marry her, while already being engaged to another woman. He lured the prosecutrix to his residence, engaged in sexual intercourse after she initially resisted, and later reneged on the marriage promise, marrying the other woman

IRAPPA SIDDAPPA MURGANNAVARversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2021 INSC 7078 November 2021Disposed off

The appellant, Irappa Siddappa Murgannavar, was convicted of raping and murdering a five‑year‑old girl, R, and disposing of her body in a stream. The prosecution relied on eyewitness accounts, the appellant’s own disclosure statement, and post‑mortem evidence to establish the crime. The Supreme Court held that the chai

IN RE: COGNIZANCE FOR EXTENSION OF LIMITATIONversus.

2021 INSC 1688 March 2021Disposed off

In a suo motu writ petition, the Supreme Court examined the extension of limitation periods granted due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Earlier orders had excluded the period from 15 March 2020 to a date to be fixed, allowing litigants extra time to file suits, appeals and other proceedings. Observing that the pandemic situa

MUBIN SHAIKHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

2018 INSC 1218 February 2018Disposed off

On 2 June 2014, Shaikh Mohsin was attacked and killed by a group of accused who allegedly targeted him because he belonged to a Muslim community. The Sessions Court rejected the accused's bail applications, finding that the assault was motivated by communal hatred and that the victims had no personal enmity with the ac

INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. & ORS.versusM/S. R.M. SERVICE CENTRE & ANR.

2019 INSC 12227 November 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The dealer, M/s R.M. Service Centre, held a retail licence for petrol, diesel, oil and grease. A joint inspection revealed a positive stock variation of High Speed Diesel beyond permissible limits and lack of reference density. Samples drawn were sent for testing; the first was dispatched five days after collection, ex

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusV. R. NANUKUTTAN NAIR

2019 INSC 12207 November 2019Dismissed

The case concerned V.R. Nanukuttan Nair, a former Navy sailor who was discharged after 10 years and 169 days of service, having been placed in a low medical category. He was granted a 50% disability pension but was denied the service element of that pension because he had not completed the 15 years of qualifying servic

MAHESH KUMARversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2019 INSC 8727 August 2019Appeal(s) allowed

Mahesh Kumar was convicted under Section 304-B IPC for the death of his wife, Omwati, alleged to be a dowry death. The prosecution's case relied mainly on statements of the deceased's father and brother, and on several letters written by the deceased, asserting continuous harassment and dowry demands. The Supreme Court

AMIR HAMZA SHAIKH & ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

2019 INSC 8747 August 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant sought permission under Section 302 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to conduct the prosecution for offences under Sections 498A, 406 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The magistrate declined the request without giving reasons, but the Bombay High Court granted the permission merely on the basis t

SERIOUS FRAUD INVESTIGATION OFFICEversusRAHUL MODI & ORS.

2022 INSC 1587 February 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) appealed against the Delhi High Court's order granting statutory bail to Rahul Modi and others, who had been arrested in connection with alleged offences under the Companies Act and the Indian Penal Code. The charge‑sheet was filed within the 60‑day period prescribed by Sec

PRADEEP KUMAR AND ANOTHERversusPOST MASTER GENERAL AND OTHERS

2022 INSC 1567 February 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants purchased Kisan Vikas Patras (KVPs) in joint names and, relying on an agent named Rukhsana, handed the certificates to her for transfer. Rukhsana encashed the KVPs at a different post office and received Rs. 25,54,000 in cash, which she kept. The appellants filed a consumer complaint; the NCDRC dismissed

KALINDI DAMODAR GARDE (D) BY LRS.versusMANOHAR LAXMAN KULKARNI (D) BY LRS. & ORS. ETC.

2020 INSC 1447 February 2020Dismissed

The case concerned the inheritance rights of three sons born to Laxman before his adoption in 1935 and a daughter born after adoption. After Laxman's death in 1987, the question arose whether the pre‑adoption sons could inherit the property of the adoptive family under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The Supreme Court

PARMESHWAR NANDA ETC.versusTHE STATE OF JHARKHAND THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY & ORS. ETC.

2020 INSC 1497 February 2020Disposed off

The appellants were employed under a centrally funded Adult Education/Non‑Formal Education Project in the undivided Bihar between 1978‑1990, and after the creation of Jharkhand their services were declared surplus and later absorbed as fresh appointees under a 2007 notification that denied seniority and pay protection.

MRS. X AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2017 INSC 1177 February 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Mrs. X, a 22‑year‑old woman, was about 24 weeks pregnant when a medical board diagnosed her fetus with bilateral renal agenesis and anhydramnios, conditions that rendered the fetus non‑viable and posed a risk to the mother's physical and mental health. She filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution seek

RAJESH PRASADversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR AND ANR. ETC.

2022 INSC 197 January 2022Case Partly allowed

The case concerned an appeal by Rajesh Prasad, the informant, against a High Court order that set aside the conviction and death sentences of three accused who had been found guilty under IPC s.302/34, 120B and the Explosive Substances Act s.3/4 for throwing bombs that killed his father and another victim. The High Cou

THE STATE OF TELANGANAversusSRI MANAGIPET @ MANGIPET SARVESHWAR REDDY

2019 INSC 13336 December 2019Disposed off

The State of Telangana filed a criminal appeal against a Hyderabad High Court order that partially quashed a charge‑sheet under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 against former OSD Sri Managipet @ Mangipet Sarveshwar Reddy for possessing assets disproportionate to his known income. The High Court had held that the

DARSHAN SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2019 INSC 13276 December 2019Dismissed

The deceased, Surjit Kaur, was found dead in a jute bag with her face disfigured by acid; she had inherited land and was not receiving lease money from her son, providing a motive for the accused. The prosecution relied on extra‑judicial confessions recorded by a witness, medical evidence of a fractured hyoid bone and

RAJESH KUMAR DWIVEDIversusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2019 INSC 13316 December 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant applied for the post of Instructor (Fitter) in a Government Industrial Training Institute, where the eligibility required a certificate in the trade from the National Council for Vocational Training (NCVT). He possessed three separate NCVT certificates – a basic one‑year Mechanical Trade, a six‑month Fitt

DHARMENDRA PRASAD & ORS.versusSUNIL KUMAR & ORS.

2019 INSC 13326 December 2019Disposed off

The Uttarakhand Pey Jal Nigam, a statutory body created under the Uttar Pradesh Water Works and Sewer Arrangement Act, 1975, appointed Junior Engineers in several categories using separate merit lists. Although the higher‑merit candidates (appellants) were appointed later than some lower‑merit candidates (respondents),

KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSIONversusK.N. RADHAMANI & ORS. ETC.ETC.

2021 INSC 4466 September 2021Dismissed

The dispute concerned the educational qualification required for in‑service candidates applying for clerk/cashier posts in Kerala cooperative banks where the starting salary exceeded Rs 250 per month. The candidates contended that SSLC (or equivalent) was sufficient, while the Kerala Public Service Commission (KPSC) ar

DR. SRIDIP CHATTERJEEversusDR. GOPA CHAKRABORTY & ORS.

2019 INSC 8676 August 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The University advertised a post of Assistant Professor in Physical Education (Yoga Therapy) requiring a Post Graduate Diploma in Yoga or Yoga Therapy. Dr. Sridip Chatterjee applied with a Post Graduate Diploma in Yoga Education and was selected by a Selection Committee of subject experts, and later an Equivalence Comm

INDIAN SOCIAL ACTION FORUM (INSAF)versusUNION OF INDIA

2020 INSC 2906 March 2020Disposed off

The Indian Social Action Forum (INSAF), a registered society, challenged the constitutionality of Sections 5(1) and 5(4) of the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010 and Rules 3(i), 3(v) and 3(vi) of the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Rules, 2011, alleging vagueness and violation of Articles 14, 19(1)(a), 19(1

VIVEK MUDGILversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2018 INSC 11525 December 2018Dismissed

Vivek Mudgil was appointed Principal of a college after being selected in a 2002 panel, but he had only 9 years 3 months of teaching experience, short of the 10‑year requirement stipulated in the U.P. Secondary Education Services Selection Board Rules, 1998. His foreign study leave (1992‑1996) could not be counted as t

C. BRIGHTversusTHE DISTRICT COLLECTOR & ORS.

2020 INSC 6335 November 2020Dismissed

The appellant C. Bright challenged a Kerala High Court order that held Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, which obliges a District Magistrate to deliver possession of a secured asset within 30 days (extendable to 60), is a directory provision. The Supreme Court examined the language of the provision, the purpose of the Ac

HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LIMITEDversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2020 INSC 6345 November 2020Appeal(s) allowed

A complaint was lodged in 1989 alleging adulteration of Dalda Vanaspati Ghee manufactured by Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL). The trial magistrate initially absolved the company’s directors and continued prosecution against the nominated officer, Nirmal Sen, who was later convicted under the Prevention of Food Adulter

HITESH VERMAversusTHE STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ANR.

2020 INSC 6365 November 2020Disposed off

The appellant, Hitesh Verma, challenged a charge‑sheet filed under Sections 452, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(e) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, alleging that the FIR was based on a property dispute and was false. The High Court dismissed his petition under Sec

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusLT. COL. OM DUTT SHARMA (RETD.) DEAD THROUGH LRS & ORS.

2019 INSC 12055 November 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India appealed against an Armed Forces Tribunal order that had granted One Rank One Pension (OROP) to Lt. Col. Om Dutt Sharma (deceased) and other personnel who served in the Army Postal Service (APS) on deputation from the Department of Posts. The respondents argued that, as temporary commissioned officer

SHAIKH ANSAR AHMAD MD. HUSAINversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2021 INSC 6145 October 2021Dismissed

The appellants challenged a Bombay High Court order that disposed of two public‑interest litigations concerning a housing scheme in Naldurg, alleging that the court failed to give reasons for its operative part and that they were not heard before criminal proceedings were initiated against them. The Supreme Court noted

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