Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

R F NARIMAN

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

REENA HAZARIKAversusSTATE OF ASSAM

2018 INSC 102931 October 2018Leave Granted & Allowed

The appellant, Reena Hazarika, was convicted under Section 302 IPC for allegedly killing her husband, based largely on circumstantial evidence and the "last seen" theory. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined whether the prosecution had established a continuous chain of circumstances that left no reasonable hypothesis

PARMANAND SINGH (D) THR. LRS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2017 INSC 83331 August 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a descendant of former zamindars, claimed possession of about five acres of land since 1930. The State Government, on behalf of the Union of India, filed a suit under Section 180 of the United Provinces Tenancy Act, 1939, for recovery of possession and damages, which was later dismissed for default. Duri

M/S. INNOVENTIVE INDUSTRLES LTD.versusICICI BANK & ANR.

2017 INSC 83731 August 2017Dismissed

Innoventive Industries Ltd., a corporate debtor, defaulted on its financial obligations and a financial creditor (ICICI Bank) filed an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). The debtor argued that a notification under the Maharashtra Relief Undertakings (Special Provisions) Act,

T.P. MURUGAN (DEAD) THR. LRS.versusBOJAN

2018 INSC 65531 July 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, former directors of Maanihada Tea Produce Company, invested capital and later resigned, demanding repayment of their shares. The respondent issued a promissory note and two cheques on 7 August 2002 to discharge the alleged liability, but later stopped payment, leading to complaints under Section 138 of

VIJAY KUMAR JAINversusSTANDARD CHARTERED BANK & ORS.

2019 INSC 12231 January 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a former director of Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd., challenged the refusal of the resolution professional to furnish resolution plans and related documents to members of the suspended Board of Directors during the corporate insolvency resolution process. The Supreme Court examined the statutory scheme under

SUSHILA N. RUNGTA (D) LRS.versusTHE TAX RECOVERY OFFICER-16(2) AND ORS.

2018 INSC 102030 October 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners challenged a show‑cause notice issued under the Gold Control Rules, arguing that it should not survive the repeal of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 by the Gold (Control) Repeal Act, 1990. The central issue was whether a repeal simpliciter without an explicit saving clause automatically invokes Section 6 o

STAR INDIA PRIVATE LIMITEDversusDEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL POLICY AND PROMOTION & ORS.

2018 INSC 102230 October 2018Dismissed

Star India Private Limited challenged the Telecommunication (Broadcasting and Cable) Services Interconnection (Addressable Systems) Regulations, 2017 and the accompanying Tariff Order, alleging that TRAI had overstepped its jurisdiction by regulating the content, pricing and packaging of TV channels, which they argued

SUBED ALI AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF ASSAM

2020 INSC 56630 September 2020Dismissed

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

SAGAR SHARMA & ANR.versusPHOENIX ARC PVT. LTD. & ANR.

2019 INSC 109830 September 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants challenged a petition filed by the respondent under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) alleging a default of at least Rs.1,00,000. The lower tribunal had held that the IBC’s commencement on 1 December 2016 triggered the limitation period and applied Article 62 of the Limitation Act, tr

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

2020 INSC 47230 July 2020Disposed off

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

THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.versusBIHAR RAJYA BHUMI VIKAS BANK SAMITI

2018 INSC 64830 July 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appeal arose from a Section 34 petition challenging an arbitral award where the filing party had not issued the prior notice or filed the required affidavit under Section 34(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Patna High Court had held the provision mandatory and dismissed the petition, but the Su

Y. SAVARIMUTHUversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.

2019 INSC 59230 April 2019Disposed off

The appellant, a government contractor, entered into an agreement with the State of Tamil Nadu to strengthen a highway. The contract was partially terminated by the Superintending Engineer on 16‑12‑1999 for alleged lack of progress, leading the appellant to file a writ petition (dismissed) and subsequently a civil suit

GANESH SHAMRAO ANDEKAR & ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2017 INSC 25030 March 2017Directions issued

The appellants, Ganesh and Avinash Andekar, were convicted of murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC for the killing of their neighbour Raghunath, based on the testimony of the victim's daughter and wife who claimed to have witnessed the assault. The trial court had acquitted all accused, finding the

AUTHORIZED OFFICER, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE AND ANOTHERversusMATHEW K. C.

2018 INSC 7130 January 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant bank sought to set aside an interim order of the Kerala High Court that stayed proceedings under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act after the borrower, Mathew K.C., filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking regularisation of his loan. The Supreme Court examined whether the writ petition was maintaina

TOFAN SINGHversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2020 INSC 62029 October 2020Directions issued

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

THOMAS LAWRENCEversusTHE STATE OF KERALA & ORS.

2020 INSC 61729 October 2020Disposed off

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

M/S. CARAVEL SHIPPING SERVICES PVT. LTD.versusM/S. PREMIER SEA FOODS EXIM PVT. LTD.

2018 INSC 100829 October 2018Leave Granted & Allowed

The dispute arose from a multimodal transport Bill of Lading in which the respondent, Premier Sea Foods, filed a suit in Kochi to recover a sum, relying on the Bill of Lading as part of its cause of action. The appellant, Caravel Shipping Services, filed an application under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliatio

SWARAJ INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.versusKOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD.

2019 INSC 10829 January 2019Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered whether a secured creditor, Kotak Mahindra Bank, could file a winding‑up petition under the Companies Act, 1956 after obtaining a decree and recovery certificate from the Debts Recovery Tribunal. The petitioners argued that Sections 17, 18 and 34 of the Recovery of Debts Act barred the wind

M/S DEEP INDUSTRIES LIMITEDversusOIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LIMITED & ANR.

2019 INSC 129928 November 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Deep Industries Ltd, was contractually terminated by ONGC for allegedly supplying second‑hand equipment and was subsequently black‑listed for two years. The dispute was referred to arbitration, where the arbitrator stayed the blacklist order conditionally, and the first appeal under Section 37 was dismis

MAHESHWAR TIGGAversusTHE STATE OF JHARKHAND

2020 INSC 56428 September 2020Appeal(s) allowed

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

VIDYA DROLIA & ORS.versusDURGA TRADING CORPORATION

2019 INSC 29028 February 2019Matter referred to larger bench

The parties entered into a ten‑year tenancy agreement for godowns that contained an arbitration clause. When the lease expired, the landlord sought possession and invoked the arbitration clause, appointing an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The tenant appealed, arguing that th

CHHANGA @ MANOJversusSTATE OF M. P.

2017 INSC 18628 February 2017Dismissed

The appellant, Chhanga (Manoj), was part of a four‑person group that hurled two bombs at a shop where an informant was present, causing only minor injuries because the bombs exploded at a distance. The appellant shouted "kill him" and was charged under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code for attem

RAJAGOPALversusMUTHUPANDI @ THAVAKKALAI & ORS.

2017 INSC 19028 February 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Five accused attacked Rajagopal with deadly weapons, inflicting twelve serious injuries that led to the amputation of both his legs. Rajagopal, the injured eye‑witness, gave a detailed, uncontradicted testimony identifying each accused and describing the specific weapons used and injuries inflicted. The trial court con

PARASA KOTESWARARAOversusEEDE SREE HARI & ORS.

2017 INSC 18728 February 2017Dismissed

The case involved the murder of a woman whose decapitated body was recovered in a gunny sack from a canal. The Sessions Court convicted the two accused brothers on the basis of alleged motive, a "last seen" theory, recovery of the body, their absconding and false information given to the victim's father, and sentenced

HINDUSTAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED & ANR.DIA & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA

2019 INSC 128927 November 2019Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a batch of writ petitions filed by Hindustan Construction Company Ltd seeking to strike down Section 87 of the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2019 and the deletion of Section 26 of the 2015 Amendment, arguing that they revived an automatic‑stay of arbitral awards and removed th

KAMAL KANT JAINversusSURINDER SINGH (D) THR. LRS.

2017 INSC 105727 October 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Kamal Kant Jain, entered into an agreement to purchase a property from the respondent, Surinder Singh, based on an authorisation letter that allowed a power of attorney holder to sell the land. The agreement required payment of earnest money, and both the authorisation letter and the agreement contained

JANAM SINGH KUDADA & ANR.versusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

2019 INSC 95627 August 2019Disposed off

Janam Singh Kudada and another filed a suit seeking a declaration that they were owners of half of the disputed land. The trial court, applying Wilkinson's Rule, decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiffs for the entire property based on the majority award of the Panchayat. The plaintiffs appealed, arguing that the d

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KARNAL (HARYANA)versusM/S CARPET INDIA, PANIPAT (HARYANA)

2018 INSC 42327 August 2019Disposed off

The Commissioner of Income Tax, Karnal appealed against judgments of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana which had held that supporting manufacturers were entitled to the same deduction under Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act as direct exporters, relying on the Baby Marine Exports decision. The Supreme Court examine

MOTU CONTEMPT PETITION (CRL.) NO. 1 OF 2019 IN RE: MR. MATHEWS NEDUMPARAversus.

2019 INSC 40927 March 2019

The Supreme Court, hearing a suo motu contempt petition (CrL.) No.1 of 2019, affirmed that advocate Mathews J. Nedumpara had committed contempt of court for statements made in the face of the Court. He tendered an affidavit of apology and was sentenced to three months' imprisonment, suspended on condition of future goo

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusVIRENDER LAL BAHRI & ORS.

2019 INSC 28727 February 2019Matter referred to larger bench

The Supreme Court examined the interpretation of the proviso in Section 24 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, to determine whether it applies to sub‑section 24(1)(b) or to 24(2). The petitioners (Delhi Development Authority) sought to conti

MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAM LTD.versusTATA COMMUNICATIONS LTD.

2019 INSC 28627 February 2019Dismissed

Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. (MTNL) entered into a purchase order with Tata Communications Ltd. for last‑mile connectivity, the contract stipulating that liquidated damages for delay could not exceed 12% of the contract value. Tata billed MTNL Rs 2,15,25,512 for services rendered, but MTNL unilaterally deducted a lar

VISHNU BHAGWAN AGRAWAL & ANR.versusNATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.

2017 INSC 105426 October 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Vishnu Bhagwan Agrawal, insured jute stock with National Insurance Co. and later purchased additional jute, seeking an increase in the sum insured. The insurer did not formally acknowledge the increase, leading to a dispute over whether the policy was effectively amended and whether the value of the jute

NAVEEN KAUSHIKversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

2018 INSC 41826 April 2018Disposed off

The Supreme Court heard a series of criminal appeals and special leave petitions filed by Naveen Kaushik against the Central Bureau of Investigation under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The principal issue concerned the interpretation of Section 19(3)(c) of the Act, which the Court revisited in light of its re

JOSEPH EASWARAN WAPSHARE & ORS.versusSHIRLEY KATHELEEN WHEELER

2019 INSC 27726 February 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Joseph Easwaran Wapshare, obtained a Succession Certificate under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, as the son and lineal descendant of the intestate Gorden Wapshare. The respondent, Shirley Katheleen Wheeler, who is the daughter of Beatrice (the wife of Edward Wapshare, Gorden's brother),

AARISH ASGAR QURESHIversusFAREED AHMED QURESHI & ANR.

2019 INSC 27026 February 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appeal arose from matrimonial proceedings where the husband alleged his wife had an extramarital affair and made those averments in anticipatory bail applications before the Sessions Court and the High Court. The High Court held that the statements were false, found a prima facie case of perjury under Section 340 o

CHANDANA DAS (MALAKAR)versusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.

2014 INSC 62325 September 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether Khalsa Girls High School, a Sikh‑run school in West Bengal, qualifies as a linguistic minority institution under Article 30 of the Constitution and consequently whether Rule 28 of the 1969 Management Rules governs its teacher appointments. The Court held that the school was founded by

JIGNESH SHAH & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2019 INSC 108025 September 2019Disposed off

The petitioners, shareholders of La‑Fin Financial Services Pvt. Ltd., challenged a winding‑up petition filed by IL&FS under Section 433(e) of the Companies Act, 1956, which had been transferred to the NCLT as a Section 7 application under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The dispute arose from a 2009 share pur

ASIAN RESURFACING OF ROAD AGENCY P. LTD. AND ANR.versusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

2018 INSC 41325 April 2018Disposed off

Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Ltd. and another appealed to the Supreme Court against a Delhi High Court order that stayed the framing of a charge under Section 19(3)(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The principal issue was whether the High Court had jurisdiction to grant such a stay in a challenge to th

AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX OFFICER &ANR.versusGOODRICKE GROUP LTD. &ANR.

2015 INSC 25825 March 2015Disposed off

The Agricultural Income Tax Officer appealed against a Calcutta High Court order that granted a refund of rural employment cess and education cess paid by tea estate owners, together with 12% interest, for periods before the West Bengal Taxation Laws (Second Amendment) Act, 1989. The Supreme Court examined whether the

UTTAR HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM LTD [UHBVNL]. & ANRversusADANI POWER LTD. & ORS.

2019 INSC 26125 February 2019Dismissed

The dispute concerned whether Adani Power Ltd. was entitled to an adjustment in its monthly tariff payments – including carrying costs – after the Ministry of Commerce and Industry withdrew SEZ duty and service‑tax exemptions in 2015‑16. The parties relied on Article 13 of their Power Purchase Agreements, which provide

SWISS RIBBONS PVT. LTD. & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2019 INSC 9525 January 2019Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of several provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, including the classification of financial versus operational creditors, the powers of the resolution professional, the evidentiary status of private information utilities, and the requirements of Se

ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX-I, NEW DELHIversusMIS. E-FUNDS IT SOLUTION INC.

2017 INSC 104824 October 2017Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether two US‑incorporated companies, eFunds Corp. and eFunds IT Solutions Inc., had a permanent establishment (PE) in India under the India‑US Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA). The Revenue argued that a fixed place of business, a service PE, and an agency PE existed through the In

HEERA LAL AND ANR.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2017 INSC 39024 April 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The wife, Lalita, committed suicide within five years of her marriage, alleging daily quarrels and dowry demands by her mother‑in‑law and father‑in‑law. A dying declaration recorded by a Sub‑Divisional Magistrate detailed the harassment and the in‑laws’ presence at the time of the act. The trial court acquitted the acc

COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIAversusM/S FAST WAY TRANSMISSION PVT. LTD.

2018 INSC 5424 January 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The Competition Commission of India (CCI) appealed against a penalty imposed on four Multi System Operators (MSOs) for terminating a cable‑TV broadcast agreement with a news channel, Day & Night News, alleging abuse of dominant position. The MSOs held about 85% of the cable‑TV subscriber base in Punjab and Chandigarh,

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 26(1) NEW DELHIversusS.R.M.B. DAIRY FARMING (P) LTD.

2017 INSC 113523 November 2017Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether Income Tax Circular No. 3 of 2011, which bars filing of High Court appeals where the tax impact is below Rs 10 lakh, applies retrospectively to appeals already pending before the circular came into force. The Court noted divergent views among High Courts and considered the National Li

NIKESH TARACHAND SHAHversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2017 INSC 113723 November 2017Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of Section 45(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, which imposes two additional conditions for granting bail when the offence involves a scheduled offence punishable with imprisonment of more than three years under Part A of the Schedule. The Court h

GOVIND PRASAD SHARMA & ORS.versusDOON VALLEY OFFICERS COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD

2017 INSC 79323 August 2017Disposed off

The appellants challenged the admission of a demarcation report prepared by a government agency during conciliation proceedings against the respondent. The High Court had allowed the report as evidence, but the Supreme Court examined whether this contravened Sections 75 and 81 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1

SHYAM SUNDER AGARWALversusP. NAROTHAM RAO AND ORS.

2018 INSC 63323 July 2018Disposed off

The dispute arose from a 2005 Memorandum of Understanding for the sale of shares, where Clause 12 referred to "Mediators/Arbitrators" making decisions on breaches. The appellant contended that Clause 12 constituted an arbitration clause under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Court examined Clauses 6, 8, 

VINOD KRISHAN KHANNA & ORS.versusAMRITSAR SWADESHI WOOLLEN MILLS PRIVATE LIMITED

2021 INSC 11023 February 2021Disposed off

The appellants, holding 14.62% of the paid‑up share capital of Amritsar Swadeshi Woollen Mills Pvt. Ltd., filed a company petition under ss. 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956 seeking to sell their shares. An independent valuer fixed the fair price at Rs 10.35 per share as of the petition filing date (14‑03‑2007).

VIDARBHA IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONversusM/S ANOJ KUMAR AGARWALA & ORS.

2019 INSC 8323 January 2019Disposed off

The Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation issued a tender for canal earthwork requiring a bank guarantee valid for 40 months. Respondent No.2 submitted the lowest bid but furnished a bank guarantee for only six months, later extending it by 34 months. The corporation accepted the bid despite the deviation. The Su

M/S. INDIAN FARMERS FERTILIZER CO-OPERATIVE LIMITEDversusM/S BHADRA PRODUCTS

2018 INSC 5323 January 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Indian Farmers Fertilizer Co‑operative Ltd., issued a tender for defoamers which was won by the respondent, Bhadra Products. After the respondent supplied the goods, a payment dispute arose and the parties went to arbitration. The sole arbitrator first decided the issue of limitation, holding the claim w

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

2020 INSC 55922 September 2020Appeal(s) allowed

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

SHIV RAJ GUPTAversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, DELHI-IV

2020 INSC 46122 July 2020Appeal(s) allowed

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

M/S LION ENGINEERING CONSULTANTSversusSTATE OF M.P. & ORS.

[2018] 6 S.C.R. 68322 March 2018Disposed off

The dispute concerned the execution of a works contract which was referred to an arbitrator who awarded in favour of M/s Lion Engineering Consultants. The State of Madhya Pradesh challenged the award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and sought to amend its objections after three years, whi

THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.versusM/S BRAHMAPUTRA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED

[2018] 6 S.C.R. 96222 March 2018Dismissed

The State of Bihar challenged the appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, arguing that the Bihar Public Works Contracts Arbitration Tribunal Act, 2008 excluded the Central Act for works contracts. The parties had a contract dated 22 June 2012 containing an arbitra

HAKEEM KHAN & ORS.versusSTATE OF M.P.

2017 INSC 25422 March 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from a violent clash during a panchayat election in Sehore, Madhya Pradesh, where a group of accused, armed with lathis and fasris, attacked members of the complainant party, resulting in one death and several injuries. The trial court acquitted all seventeen accused, reasoning that the incident occurred

ESSAR BULK TERMINAL LIMITED & ANR.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

2018 INSC 18722 February 2018Dismissed

Essar Bulk Terminal Ltd. challenged a Gujarat Government notification expanding Hazira port limits under Section 5 of the Indian Ports Act, claiming it would affect land it had reclaimed for its captive jetty. The Supreme Court held that the notification was issued in public interest and was within the statutory power,

MAHARASHTRA SEAMLESS LIMITEDversusPADMANABHAN VENKATESH & ORS.

2020 INSC 7622 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

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

FORECH INDIA LTD.versusEDELWEISS ASSETS RECONSTRUCTION CO. LTD.

2019 INSC 7722 January 2019Disposed off

Forech India Ltd. filed a winding‑up petition in the Delhi High Court in 2014 against a company, serving notice under Rule 26 of the Companies (Court) Rules. Later, a financial creditor (Respondent No.1) filed an insolvency petition under Section 7 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code (IBC) before the NCLT, which was ad

MOBILOX INNOVATIONS PRIVATE LIMITEDversusKIRUSA SOFTWARE PRIVATE LIMITED

2017 INSC 97521 September 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Mobilox Innovations Pvt Ltd, an operational creditor, filed an application under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) seeking initiation of corporate insolvency against Kirusa Software Pvt Ltd for an unpaid operational debt of Rs.20,08,202.55. The corporate debtor raised a dispute, alleging breach of a non‑di

M. D. FROZEN FOODS EXPORTS PVT. LTD. & ORS.versusHERO FINCORP LTD.

2017 INSC 97621 September 2017Dismissed

The appellants borrowed money from the respondent, securing the loan with seven immovable properties. Their loan account was declared a non‑performing asset and the parties’ contract contained an arbitration clause, leading the respondent to initiate arbitration while also issuing notices under Section 13 of the SARFAE

M/S SHANTI FRAGRANCESversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2017 INSC 97121 September 2017Hearing Adjourned

The appeal concerned the taxability of pan masala containing tobacco (gutka) under the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975, the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 and the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. The central issue was whether the specific entry introducing "Pan Masala and Gutka" in the rate schedule overrode the general exe

ANANT SON OF SIDHESHWAR DUKREversusPRATAP SON OF ZHAMNNAPPA LAMZANE & ANOTHER

2018 INSC 73821 August 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a 29‑year‑old driver earning Rs 8,500 per month, was injured in a motor‑vehicle collision that left him with 75% permanent disability, causing loss of livelihood. He claimed compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded a lump‑sum of Rs 7,00,000, which the Hi

SEJAL GLASS LTD.versusNAVILAN MERCHANTS PVT. LTD.

2017 INSC 78321 August 2017Disposed off

Sejal Glass Ltd. filed a civil suit seeking a money decree and recovery of TDS from Navilan Merchants Pvt. Ltd. and its directors. The defendants moved an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC, claiming the plaint disclosed no cause of action against the directors and seeking bifurcation of the suit. The trial

V. SREERAMA CHANDRA AVADHANI (D) BY LRS.versusSHAIK ABDUL RAHIM AND ANR.

2014 INSC 55521 August 2014Appeal(s) allowed

Sheikh Hussein executed a gift deed on 26‑04‑1952 gifting an immovable property to his wife Banu Bibi. The deed contained conditions restricting alienation and stipulating that the property would revert to the donor or his heirs if Banu Bibi had no children. After Banu Bibi sold the property to V. Sreeramachandra Avadh

RAGINI DWIVEDI @ GINI @ RAGSversusTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA

2021 INSC 3821 January 2021

Actress Ragini Dwivedi was arrested after a police search of her residence, which yielded only electronic devices and cigarettes, no narcotics. The prosecution relied on a statement by B.K. Ravishankar and alleged that she consumed drugs at parties, invoking Section 37 of the NDPS Act to deny bail, citing a total seizu

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

2020 INSC 6521 January 2020Disposed off

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

STANDARD CHARTERED BANKversusMSTC LIMITED

2020 INSC 7221 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

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

M/S EMKAY GLOBAL FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD.versusGIRDHAR SONDHI

2018 INSC 72420 August 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute arose between M/s Emkay Global Financial Services Ltd., a broker on the National Stock Exchange (NSE), and its client Giradhar Sondhi over securities transactions. An arbitration under NSE bye‑laws was held in Delhi, resulting in an award rejecting Sondhi’s claim. Sondhi filed a Section 34 application in th

UNION OF INDIAversusRAJENDRA N. SHAH AND ANOTHER

2021 INSC 34020 July 2021Disposed off

The Union of India challenged the Constitution (Ninety‑Seventh Amendment) Act, 2011 which inserted Part IXB (Arts.243ZH‑243ZT) on cooperative societies, arguing that it curtails the exclusive legislative power of States under Entry 32, List II and therefore required ratification by at least half of the States under Art

RELIANCE CELLULOSE PRODUCTS LTD.versusOIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LTD.

2018 INSC 62320 July 2018Disposed off

Reliance Cellulose Products Ltd. and ONGC entered into a contract for supply of CMC. A dispute arose over the price, which was referred to arbitration. The arbitrator fixed a higher price and awarded pre‑reference, pendente‑lite and future interest at 18% per annum. The Civil Judge reduced the interest to 10% and the G

PASL WIND SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITEDversusGE POWER CONVERSION INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

2021 INSC 26420 April 2021Disposed off

PASL Wind Solutions and GE Power Conversion India, both Indian companies, entered a settlement agreement that provided for arbitration under ICC rules with the seat in Zurich and the substantive law of India. A dispute over warranty claims was arbitrated, the arbitrator held the seat to be Zurich (with hearings in Mumb

BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LTD.versusMAHENDRA PRASAD JAKHMOLA & ORS.

2019 INSC 24420 February 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. (BHEL) was subject to the 24‑April‑1990 notification issued under the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970, and whether the workmen who were engaged through contractors were direct employees of BHEL. The Court held that BHEL’s Haridwar ope

RELIANCE COMMUNICATION LIMITED & ORS.versusSTATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS.

2019 INSC 24220 February 2019

The Supreme Court heard three contempt petitions filed by Ericsson India Pvt. Ltd. against Reliance Communications Ltd., Reliance Telecom Ltd. and Reliance Infratel Ltd. (collectively the Reliance Companies) for failing to honour a settlement of INR 550 crore that was ordered to be paid by 30 September 2018, with a lat

SANKALP RECREATION PRIVATE LIMITEDversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2019 INSC 106019 September 2019Dismissed

The Union of India acquired a 1053.5 sq.m. property in Mumbai under Section 269UD(1) of the Income Tax Act, but successive auctions from 1994 to 2017 failed to attract a buyer. Sankalp Recreation Private Limited (appellant) offered Rs.32.11 crore, which was rejected, and later bid Rs.30.21 crore—above the Rs.30 crore r

UNION OF INDIA & ANR.versusTARSEM SINGH & ORS.

2019 INSC 99619 September 2019Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether Section 3J of the National Highways Act, 1956, which excludes the Land Acquisition Act's provisions on solatium and interest, violates Article 14 of the Constitution. The Court held that solatium is an integral part of compensation for compulsory acquisition and that the 1997 amendmen

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

2020 INSC 49819 August 2020Disposed off

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

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

2020 INSC 49719 August 2020Dismissed

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

GOVERNMENT OF MAHARASHTRA (WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT) REPRESENTED BY EXECUTIVE ENGINEERversusM/S BORSE BROTHERS ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS PVT. LTD.

2021 INSC 19419 March 2021Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 applies to appeals filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, especially when those appeals are governed by Articles 116, 117 of the Limitation Act or by Section 13(1A) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. It overruled th

VITHALDAS JAGANNATH KHATRI (DEAD) THROUGH SMT. SHAKUNTALA ALIAS SUSHMA & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA REVENUE AND FOREST DEPARTMENT & ORS.

2020 INSC 20719 February 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, the heirs of the late Vithaldas Jagannath Khatri, challenged a declaration that 59 acres 35 guntas of their agricultural land were surplus under the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961. The dispute centred on a partition deed dated 31‑01‑1970, executed before the statutory cut‑

MANISH KUMARversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

2021 INSC 2819 January 2021Dismissed

The petitioners challenged Sections 3, 4, and 10 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Act, 2020, which introduced threshold requirements for allottees and certain financial creditors to initiate corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP), clarified that a corporate debtor can initiate CIRP against anot

M/S. GALAXY TRANSPORT AGENCIES, CONTRACTORS, TRADERS, TRANSPORTS AND SUPPLIERSversusM/S. NEW J.K. ROADWAYS, FLEET OWNERS AND TRANSPORT CONTRACTORS & ORS.

2020 INSC 71218 December 2020Disposed off

The Inspector General of Police, Kashmir Zone invited e‑tenders for supplying commercial vehicles. The appellant, Galaxy Transport, satisfied the technical criteria and was awarded the contract as the lowest bidder, while respondent JK Roadways was disqualified. JK Roadways challenged the award, arguing that the tender

GAURAV HARGOVINDBHAI DAVEversusASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY (INDIA) LTD. & ANR.

2019 INSC 105118 September 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant sought to initiate a corporate insolvency proceeding under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) to recover a debt that had become due on 21 July 2011. The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) admitted the application, applying Article 62 of the Limitation Act, 1963, which pertains to suit

VASANT GANPAT PADAVE (D) BY LRS. & ORS .versusANANT MAHADEV SAWANT (D) THROUGH LRS. & ORS

2018 INSC 120318 September 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, long‑time tenants of a parcel of agricultural land, sought to exercise their statutory right to purchase the land after the landlord, a widow, died and her interest passed to her heir. The lower courts held that the tenants had lost the right because they failed to give the required intimation under Sec

MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.versusNANU RAM ALIAS CHUHRU RAM & ORS.

2018 INSC 82818 September 2018Leave Granted & Disposed off

The deceased, a 24‑year‑old self‑employed motorcyclist, was killed when his bike was struck by a car driven by respondent No.3. The father and sister of the deceased filed a claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for compensation, which was initially awarded by the MACT at Rs.3,39,208. The Punjab & Har

GLAXO SMITHKLINE PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2017 INSC 63518 July 2017Appeal(s) allowed

GlaxoSmithKline Pharmaceuticals Ltd., a manufacturer of the bulk drug Betamethasone Disodium Phosphate, was granted an exemption under paragraph 28 of the Drugs (Prices Control) Order, 1987, valid up to 31‑December‑1994. After the exemption expired, the Union of India issued a show‑cause notice alleging that the compan

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANR.versusM/S. KETI CONSTRUCTION

2018 INSC 36018 April 2018Disposed off

The State of Madhya Pradesh and others filed a civil appeal (No. 4016 of 2018) challenging the High Court's dismissal of a revision petition filed by M/s Keti Construction. The appeal hinged on the applicability of a precedent set in Va Tech Escher Wyass Flovel Ltd. v. MPSE Board, which the High Court had relied upon.

PURI CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.

2018 INSC 36018 April 2018

Puri Constructions entered into a 1984 agreement to construct an assembly building in Madhya Pradesh. A dispute led the Delhi High Court to appoint an arbitrator who rendered an award in 1989, which was later made a rule of court and executed in 1991. The appellant appealed the execution, and the Delhi High Court linke

M/S GANGOTRI ENTERPRISES LTD.versusMADHYA PRADESH ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND ANR.

2018 INSC 36018 April 2018Disposed off

The Supreme Court considered an appeal by M/s Gangotri Enterprises Ltd. against the Madhya Pradesh Road Development Corporation concerning the interpretation of the Madhya Pradesh Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983. The Court clarified that the term “ascertained money” in Section 2(d) includes not only amounts alrea

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR.versusASHOKA INFRAWAYS LTD. & ANR.

2018 INSC 36018 April 2018Disposed off

The State of Madhya Pradesh appealed against an order of the Madhya Pradesh High Court that relied on an earlier judgment concerning the jurisdiction of arbitration tribunals under the Madhya Pradesh Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983. The Supreme Court observed that the earlier High Court judgment had been overrule

STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND ANR.versusM/S. KMC CONSTRUCTION LIMITED

2018 INSC 36018 April 2018Disposed off

The State of Chhattisgarh appealed against an order of the High Court that had directed the parties to approach the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for resolution of a dispute with M/S KMC Construction Limited. The Supreme Court examined whether the Madhya Pradesh Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983 (MP Act) c

TAMIL NADU POLLUTION CONTROL BOARDversusSTERLITE INDUSTRIES (I) LTD. & ORS.

2019 INSC 22018 February 2019Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether the National Green Tribunal (NGT) could entertain direct appeals (leapfrog appeals) against original orders of the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board (TNPCB) under the Air and Water Acts, specifically the refusal to renew consent for Sterlite Industries' copper smelter. The Court held

NATIONAL TRAVEL SERVICESversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI, VIII

2018 INSC 3518 January 2018Matter referred to larger bench

National Travel Services, a partnership firm, obtained a loan from Jetair Private Ltd and subscribed to its equity in the names of two partners, who were registered shareholders holding 48.19% of the shares but held them for the benefit of the firm. The firm challenged whether Section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act, as

AMERICAN METALLURGICAL COAL PTY LTD.versusMMTC LTD.

2020 INSC 70517 December 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved an international commercial arbitration under a Long‑Term Agreement for the supply of coking coal between Anglo American Metallurgical Coal Pty Ltd (appellant) and MMTC Ltd (respondent). The arbitral tribunal held that MMTC breached the contract by failing to lift 454,034 MT of coal at the agreed pric

G H SHREE CHAITANYA CONSTRUCTIONSversusSUDHIR POONAMCHAND PARAKH & ORS.

2019 INSC 77317 July 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff, Shree Chaitanya Constructions, filed a suit for specific performance against eight members of a family. The trial court rejected the suit and ordered a refund; the plaintiff appealed. The High Court set aside the trial court’s order and decreed specific performance, but the respondent (Defendant No.5) la

SEELAN @ JEYASEELANversusTHE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2020 INSC 70316 December 2020Dismissed

The petitioner, Seelan @ Jeyaseelan, was convicted for raping a six‑year‑old girl. He filed a Special Leave Petition contending that the charge was framed only under Section 376(1) of the Indian Penal Code, which does not carry the mandatory ten‑year minimum punishment prescribed in Section 376(2)(f). The Supreme Court

STATE BANK OF INDIAversusSANTOSH GUPTA AND ANR. ETC.

2016 INSC 115716 December 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI) could be applied in the State of Jammu & Kashmir. The High Court had held that key provisions of SARFAESI were ultra‑vires Parliament because they conflicted with Sectio

COUNCIL OF THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIAversusSHRI GURVINDER SINGH & ANR.

2018 INSC 107116 November 2018Leave Granted & Disposed off

The Council of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India filed a complaint against Chartered Accountant Gurvinder Singh for allegedly selling 100 shares and transferring them to his own name, an act that was settled between the parties but nevertheless proceeded before the Disciplinary Committee. The Committee fo

HARI MOHAN SHARMA & ANR.versusCHARANJEET SINGH REKHI & ORS. ETC.

2018 INSC 106716 November 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff filed two suits for specific performance against Charanjeet Singh Rekhi (deceased) and his wife Manjit Kaur, claiming they were parties to a sale agreement. Two other individuals, also named Charanjeet Singh Rekhi from Moradabad and Uttarakhand, filed Interlocutory Applications asserting that they were th

STATE OF U.P.versusSUDHIR KUMAR SINGH AND ORS.

2020 INSC 60316 October 2020Disposed off

The Uttar Pradesh State Warehousing Corporation repeatedly cancelled e‑tenders for handling and transport of foodgrains, eventually terminating the contract awarded to Sudhir Kumar Singh (Respondent No.1). Singh filed a writ petition under Art.226 challenging the cancellation, alleging a breach of the audi alteram part

HARIBHAI MALAVIYA AND ORS.versusTHE STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR.

2019 INSC 114616 October 2019Disposed off

An FIR alleging land‑grab and extortion was filed in 2009, leading to a police investigation and a charge‑sheet. After the magistrate took cognizance and issued summons, the accused applied under s.173(8) CrPC for further investigation and for the magistrate to order a fresh FIR; the magistrate rejected these applicati

NEETU KUMAR NAGAICHversusTHE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS

2020 INSC 54916 September 2020Case Allowed

Neetu Kumar Nagaich, the mother of a 21‑year‑old law student who died under suspicious circumstances, filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking a de novo investigation of the homicide after alleging serious deficiencies in the Rajasthan police investigation and the filing of a closure report. The Supreme Court not

JUGUT RAMversusTHE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2020 INSC 54716 September 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Jugut Ram, was convicted under Section 302 IPC for murder after assaulting the deceased with a lathi during a land dispute, the victim dying a day later. He appealed, arguing that a lathi is a common village implement and that the prosecution failed to prove an intention to cause death, relying on relate

TERAPALLI DYVASAHATA KUMARversusS.M. KANTHA RAJU (DEAD) THR. LRS. & ANR.

2017 INSC 74816 August 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Terapalli Dyvasahata Kumar, filed a petition under Section 23 of the Andhra Pradesh Societies Registration Act, 2001, seeking declarations and injunctions concerning the management of a society. The District Court allowed the petition, holding that "District Court concerned" should be interpreted using t

AZIZIA BEE @ SHAIK MUJEEB (D) THR. LRS.versusGOVT. OF A.P. & ORS.

2017 INSC 74916 August 2017Disposed off

The petitioners claimed ownership of land in Survey No. 129/45/D, Hyderabad, based on a 1961 compromise decree and a 1962 sale deed in favour of their mother. The State Government had recommended issuance of supplementary sethwars for this parcel. The land had been caught up in urban land ceiling proceedings, but both

M/S. R. K. INDUSTRIES (UNIT-II) LLPversusS.C/S.T SHIPBREAKERS ASSOCIATION & ORS.

2019 INSC 76816 July 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The Gujarat Maritime Board issued a tender to auction eight vacant ship‑recycling plots, reserving four for ST and two for SC candidates. The SC/ST Shipbreakers Association challenged the reservation, arguing that the 2015 Regulations required reservation to be calculated on the total number of plots (20) rather than t

BHARAT BROADBAND NETWORK LIMITEDversusUNITED TELECOMS LIMITED

2019 INSC 53716 April 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether the proviso to Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 could be invoked to validate an arbitrator who had become ineligible under the Seventh Schedule. The Court held that the proviso applies only when, after a dispute arises, the parties execute an express written

JAYANT VERMA & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2018 INSC 15916 February 2018Directions issued

The petition challenged the constitutional validity of Section 21A of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, which bars courts from reopening bank loan transactions on the ground of excessive interest. The petitioners argued that the provision violated Article 14 and undermined State Debt Relief Acts that provide relief to

SAMIR AGRAWALversusCOMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA & ORS.

2020 INSC 70015 December 2020Disposed off

Samir Agrawal, an independent law practitioner, filed an information under Section 26(2) of the Competition Act, 2002 alleging that Ola and Uber engaged in price‑fixing and resale price maintenance through their algorithmic pricing. The Competition Commission of India (CCI) dismissed the complaint, finding no prima fac

ACTION ISPAT AND POWER PVT. LTD.versusSHYAM METALICS AND ENERGY LTD.

2020 INSC 69915 December 2020Dismissed

Action Ispat and Power Pvt. Ltd. filed a winding‑up petition against Shyam Metalics and Energy Ltd. for unpaid dues. The Company Judge admitted the petition, appointed an Official Liquidator and seized the appellant's premises. State Bank of India, a secured creditor, filed an IBC application and sought transfer of the

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusPFIZER LIMITED AND ORS.

2017 INSC 124815 December 2017Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether the Central Government must obtain prior advice from the Drugs Technical Advisory Board (DTAB) before invoking the power under Section 26A of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 to prohibit, restrict or regulate a drug or cosmetic in public interest. The Court held that Section 26A is a

MACQUARIE BANK LIMITEDversusSHILPI CABLE TECHNOLOGIES LTD.

2017 INSC 124115 December 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined two pivotal questions arising under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: (i) whether the requirement in Section 9(3)(c) to attach a certificate from the financial institution confirming non‑payment of an operational debt is a mandatory condition precedent, and (ii) whether a demand notic

ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY (INDIA) LIMITEDversusBISHAL JAISWAL & ANR.

2021 INSC 25415 April 2021Disposed off

The Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Ltd., a consortium of lenders, filed a Section 7 application before the NCLT seeking initiation of corporate insolvency proceedings against Corporate Power Ltd. after the latter defaulted on its loans. The NCLT admitted the application, relying on entries in the debtor's balance

SUSHILABEN INDRAVADAN GANDHI & ANR.versusTHE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED & ORS.

2020 INSC 33615 April 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Sushilaben Gandhi, claimed compensation under a Motor Vehicles Act claim for the death of her husband, Dr. Alpesh I. Gandhi, who died in a bus accident owned by the Rotary Eye Institute. The insurer, New India Assurance, denied liability invoking a limitation of liability clause that excludes deaths occu

SECUNDERABAD CANTONMENT BOARDversusM/S B. RAMACHANDRAIAH & SONS

2021 INSC 18615 March 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The Secunderabad Cantonment Board entered three contracts with M/s B. Ramachandraiah & Sons that contained arbitration clauses. After final payments were made in early 2003, the contractor sought reimbursement for price variations and, in November 2006, demanded the appointment of an arbitrator, reiterating the demand

PT. BATESWARI DAYAL MISHR SHIKSHAversusMADHYA PRADESH NURSES REGISTRATION COUNCIL & ORS.

2019 INSC 38815 March 2019Dismissed

The appellant, a society running Dayal Nursing College, Gwalior, which has been offering B.Sc (Nursing) since 2006, applied for recognition to run B.Sc and M.Sc (Nursing) courses for the 2018‑19 academic session. The Madhya Pradesh Nurses Registration Council (SNRC) rejected the application on the ground that the onlin

BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET IN INDIAversusKOCHI CRICKET PVT. LTD. AND ETC.

2018 INSC 23815 March 2018Dismissed

The Board of Control for Cricket in India filed a Section 34 challenge to arbitral awards dated June 2015, and the award creditors sought execution. The award debtor argued that the pre‑amended Section 36 imposed an automatic stay on execution until the Section 34 petition was decided, while the High Court applied the

SIDDARAJUversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.

2020 INSC 3615 January 2020Disposed off

The Supreme Court considered a batch of cases concerning whether persons with disabilities (PWD) are entitled to reservation in promotion under the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995. The petitioners argued that the 2005 Office Memorandum limiting reservation in promotion and the principle in Indra Sawhney v. Union of

M/S SAM BUILT WELL PVT. LTD.versusDEEPAK BUILDERS & ORS.

2017 INSC 123214 December 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute concerned a notice inviting tenders (NIT) for constructing an educational campus, which required bidders to have completed similar large‑scale projects. Respondent No. I was found ineligible by three expert committees, a finding upheld by the Single Judge of the High Court. The Division Bench, however, set

INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITEDversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ANR.

2017 INSC 110914 November 2017Disposed off

Indian Oil Corporation Limited (IOCL) imports crude oil into Bihar, refines it and sells petroleum products to two oil marketing companies (BPCL and HPCL) and to local retailers. IOCL pays Entry Tax when the products enter the Patna local area but claims that Value Added Tax (VAT) should be set off against this Entry T

CHRISOMAR CORPORATIONversusMJR STEELS PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR.

2017 INSC 90514 September 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Chrisomar Corporation supplied bunkers to the vessel M.V. Nikolaos‑S owned by Third Element Enterprises and sued for unpaid invoices, leading to the vessel's arrest. The parties entered a settlement on 18 January 2000, but the vessel was re‑arrested on 2 May 2000 when payment was still outstanding. Respondent No. 1 (MJ

K. KISHANversusM/S VIJAY NIRMAN COMPANY PVT. LTD.

2018 INSC 71014 August 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant (KCPL) challenged a Section 9 petition filed by the respondent (Vijay Nirman) which sought to treat an arbitral award as an undisputed operational debt. The award, favouring the respondent, was under challenge in a Section 34 petition under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. The Supreme Court held that

STATE BANK OF INDIAversusV. RAMAKRISHNAN & ANR.

2018 INSC 71114 August 2018Appeal(s) allowed

State Bank of India (SBI) sought recovery of a loan from a corporate debtor whose managing director, V. Ramakrishnan, had also given a personal guarantee. After the corporate debtor defaulted, SBI invoked SARFAESI provisions and the debtor filed an insolvency petition under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) 2016

ARJUN PANDITRAO KHOTKARversusKAILASH KUSHANRAO GORANTYAL AND ORS.

2020 INSC 45314 July 2020Dismissed

The appellant, Arjun Panditrao Khotkar, was elected to the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly but his election was challenged on the ground that two of his nomination papers were filed after the statutory deadline. The High Court relied on video recordings of the Returning Officer's office, produced by the Election Commi

MANMOHAN ATTAVARversusNEELAM MANMOHAN ATTAVAR

2017 INSC 61814 July 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Manmohan Attavar, contested an ex‑parte interim order of the Karnataka High Court that allowed the respondent, Neelam Manmohan Attavar, to occupy his Bengaluru premises under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The respondent claimed to be the appellant’s wife/companion and sought a

CHINTALAPATI SRINIVASA RAJUversusSECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA

2018 INSC 51014 May 2018Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined multiple appeals arising from the Satyam scandal, where the appellant, Chintalapati Srinivasa Raju, a former executive and non‑executive director of Satyam Computer Services Ltd (SCSL) and co‑brother of its chairman, was shown cause for insider trading under SEBI (Prohibition of Insider Tradi

SIDDHARTH CHATURVEDIversusSECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA

2016 INSC 26014 March 2016Matter referred to larger bench

The appellants were penalised by SEBI for alleged insider‑trading violations involving small share transactions. They contended that the penalty was excessive because the default was merely technical, with no disproportionate gain, loss, or repetitive nature, and argued that Section 15A (as amended in 2002) must be rea

SIRAJUL HOQUEversusTHE STATE OF ASSAM & ORS.

2019 INSC 19914 February 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Sirajul Hoque, was declared a foreigner by the Foreigner's Tribunal on the ground of a discrepancy in his grandfather's name and the fact that his father later resided in a different village. The High Court upheld this declaration, holding that the appellant's written statement was inadequate and failed

M/S. DAFFODILLS PHARMACEUTICALS & ANR.V. STATE OF U.P. & ANR.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR

2019 INSC 136613 December 2019Appeal(s) allowed

M/s Daffodills Pharmaceuticals, a bidder for a state tender to supply medicines, was barred from any local procurement by an order dated 21‑08‑2015 issued by the Principal Secretary, Government of Uttar Pradesh, on the ground that a FIR and CBI inquiry existed against a former director. Daffodills contended that the cr

M/S SHRIRAM EPC LIMITEDversusRIOGLASS SOLAR SA

2018 INSC 81613 September 2018Dismissed

The parties obtained an ICC arbitral award in London ordering RioGlass Solar to pay Shriram EPC Ltd €4.36 million. Shriram filed a petition under Section 47 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to enforce the foreign award in India, while RioGlass contended that the award was unenforceable because it had not b

LAUREL ENERGETICS PVT. LTD.versusSECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA

2017 INSC 61613 July 2017Dismissed

Laurel Energetics Pvt. Ltd. (appellant) acquired 18% of Rattan India Infrastructure Ltd., the target company, in July 2014 at Rs 6.30 per share. In October 2015 it made an open offer to acquire the remaining shares at Rs 3.20 per share. SEBI held that the acquisition was not exempt under Regulation 10 of the SEBI Subst

LALDHARI MISTRI (DEAD) THR. LRS. & ANR.versusVIJAY KUMAR

2017 INSC 61113 July 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute involved a residential house in Munger, Bihar, owned by Hira Mistry, whose eviction decree against tenant Surendra Narayan Sinha was eventually reversed. An agreement to sell the house to Vijay Kumar was executed in 1983 while eviction proceedings were pending, leading to a specific‑performance suit in 1986

GHANASHYAM MISHRA AND SONS PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH THE AUTHORIZED SIGNATORYversusEDELWEISS ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED THROUGH THE DIRECTOR & ORS.

2021 INSC 25013 April 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court considered the corporate insolvency case of Orissa Manganese & Minerals Ltd., where the National Company Law Tribunal approved a resolution plan submitted by GMSPL. The Court examined whether, after approval of a resolution plan under Section 31 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (I&B Code), the pl

M/S. INOX RENEWABLES LTD.versusJAYESH ELECTRICALS LTD.

2021 INSC 25113 April 2021Disposed off

Inox Renewables Ltd entered into a purchase order with Jayesh Electricals Ltd containing an arbitration clause that designated Jaipur as the venue of arbitration. The parties later mutually agreed to shift the arbitration venue to Ahmedabad, which the arbitrator recorded in the award. A Section 34 petition was filed in

RAMBABU SINGH THAKURversusSUNIL ARORA & ORS.

2020 INSC 17713 February 2020Disposed off

The petitioners alleged that political parties had failed to comply with the Supreme Court’s directions in Public Interest Foundation v. Union of India, which required disclosure of pending criminal cases of candidates. The Court examined data showing a rise in the proportion of MPs with criminal cases and noted the pa

VIJAY KARIA & ORS.versusPRYSMIAN CAVI E SISTEMI SRL & ORS.

2020 INSC 17813 February 2020Dismissed

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals of Vijay Karia and others against the Bombay High Court’s order enforcing four LCIA awards arising from a joint‑venture dispute with Prysmian Cavi E Sistemi SRL. The Court held that none of the grounds pleaded under Section 48 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – inclu

JAIPUR METALS & ELECTRICALS EMPLOYEES ORGANIZATION THROUGH GENERAL SECRETARY MR. TEJ RAM MEENAversusJAIPUR METALS & ELECTRICALS LTD. THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR & ORS.

2018 INSC 119612 December 2018Leave granted

The employees' union of Jaipur Metals & Electricals Ltd challenged a High Court order that refused to transfer winding‑up proceedings, filed under Section 20 of the Sick Industrial Companies Act, to the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and set aside an NCLT order admitting a Section 7 insolvency application by Alch

FEDERATION OF HOTEL AND RESTAURANT ASSOCIATIONS OF INDIAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2017 INSC 121712 December 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The Federation of Hotel and Restaurant Associations of India challenged the applicability of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976, its 1985 Enforcement Act and the Legal Metrology Act, 2009 to the sale of packaged water bottles served in hotels and restaurants at prices above the printed MRP. The Single Judg

BIKRAMJIT SINGHversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB

2020 INSC 58912 October 2020Appeal(s) allowed

A hand grenade attack at a public gathering in Amritsar resulted in three deaths and 22 serious injuries. Bikramjit Singh was arrested, remanded to custody, and after 90 days (which expired on 21‑02‑2019) he applied for default bail; the Sub‑Divisional Judicial Magistrate dismissed the application, claiming he had alre

FERRODOUS ESTATES (PVT.) LTD.versusP. GOPIRATHNAM (DEAD) & ORS.

2020 INSC 58612 October 2020Appeal(s) allowed

Ferro... Ltd. entered into a 1980 agreement to sell land to the defendants, which required the vendor to obtain permission under the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1978. The defendants failed to secure the permission, prompting the appellant to sue for specific performance. The High Court initially g

G H PAM DEVELOPMENTS PRIVATE LTD.versusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2019 INSC 75512 July 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Pam Developments Private Ltd., was awarded a sum of Rs.2.87 crore by an arbitrator in a dispute with the State of West Bengal over a highway repair contract, but the award remained unpaid. The State filed a Section 34 petition challenging the award and later sought a stay of its operation under the amend

ANANT SINGH @ ANANT KUMAR SINGHversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

2017 INSC 34212 April 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a convicted history‑sheeter, was first detained under the Bihar Control of Crimes Act, 1981 on 5 September 2016. That order was revoked on 17 September 2016, and a second detention order was issued on 21 September 2016 on the same grounds that existed before the revocation. The appellant challenged the s

STATE OF GOA & ANR.versusFOUZIYA IMTIAZ SHAIKH & ANR.

2021 INSC 17912 March 2021Disposed off

The State of Goa appointed its Law Secretary as State Election Commissioner (SEC) to oversee municipal elections that had been postponed due to COVID‑19. The SEC, acting under this dual role, issued a reservation order on 4 February 2021 and a subsequent election schedule, which were challenged in writ petitions allegi

INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAIversusVENKATESH PREMISES COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.

2018 INSC 23212 March 2018Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether receipts such as non‑occupancy charges, transfer charges and common‑amenity‑fund contributions received by a premises cooperative society from its members are taxable as business income or exempt under the doctrine of mutuality. The Court held that the doctrine of mutuality, based on

USHA ANANTHASUBRAMANIANversusUNION OF INDIA

2020 INSC 17612 February 2020Appeal(s) allowed

Usha Anandhasubramanian, former MD & CEO of Punjab National Bank, was subject to a CBI charge sheet for alleged negligence in preventing the Nirav Modi fraud. The NCLT, and subsequently the NCLAT, ordered a freeze of her assets under Sections 241, 337 and 339 of the Companies Act, 1956, invoking the Tribunal's power to

M/S SCG CONTRACTS INDIA PVT. LTD.versusK. S. CHAMANKAR INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD. & ORS.

2019 INSC 18712 February 2019Appeal(s) allowed

In a commercial suit, the plaintiff sought recovery of Rs. 6.94 crore. The defendant was served on 14 July 2017 but failed to file a written statement within the statutory 120‑day period. The trial court initially extended time to 15 December 2017 on condition of payment of costs, and later, despite the amendment to th

B.K. EDUCATIONAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITEDversusPARAG GUPTA AND ASSOCIATES

2018 INSC 95611 October 2018

The Supreme Court considered an appeal by B.K. Educational Services Pvt. Ltd. challenging the applicability of the Limitation Act, 1963 to applications under Sections 7 and 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) and the retrospective effect of the newly inserted Section 238A. The Court examined the Insolvency La

VEDANTA LTD.versusSHENZEN SHANDONG NUCLEAR POWER CONSTRUCTION CO. LTD.

2018 INSC 95911 October 2018Leave Granted & Disposed off

Vedanta Ltd entered into four EPC contracts with Shenzen Shandong Nuclear Power Construction Co. Ltd for a 210‑MW co‑generation plant. After termination of the contracts, the Chinese company invoked the arbitration clause and obtained an award granting sums in INR and EUR, with interest at 9% for the first 120 days and

M.M. AQUA TECHNOLOGIES LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-III

2021 INSC 39711 August 2021Leave Granted & Allowed

M.M. Aqua Technologies Ltd., unable to meet interest obligations on loans, entered a rehabilitation plan and issued convertible debentures to financial institutions in lieu of the interest due. The company claimed a deduction under Section 43B(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, arguing that the issuance of debentures cons

M/S ICOMM TELE LTD.versusPUNJAB STATE WATER SUPPLY & SEWERAGE BOARD & ANR.

2019 INSC 34111 March 2019Appeal(s) allowed

M/S ICOMM TELE Ltd. was awarded a water supply contract by the Punjab State Water Supply & Sewerage Board, which contained an arbitration clause requiring a 10% "deposit-at-call" before invoking arbitration. The company challenged this clause as arbitrary, discriminatory, and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution

CHINTELS INDIA LTD.versusBHAYANA BUILDERS PVT. LTD.

2021 INSC 7611 February 2021Appeal(s) allowed

Chintels India Ltd. filed an application under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to set aside an arbitral award, but the single judge of the Delhi High Court refused to condone the delay in filing the application and dismissed it. The appellant challenged that order by invoking section 37(1)(c) o

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE, GOAversusM/S ADANI EXPORTS LTD.

2020 INSC 16411 February 2020Disposed off

The Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, Goa appealed against M/s Adani Exports Ltd. challenging a High Court decision on an application under Section 130A of the Customs Act, 1962. The issue was whether the High Court is statutorily obliged to call for a statement of the case from the Appellate Tribunal before

BGS SGS SOMA JVversusNHPC LTD.

2019 INSC 134910 December 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners BGS SGS SOMA JV sought to enforce an arbitral award concerning a hydro‑electric project, while the respondent NHPC Ltd filed a Section 34 petition in the Faridabad court to set aside the award. The petitioners applied under Section 151 CPC to have the petition returned to the appropriate court, and the

BRAJESH SINGHversusSUNIL ARORA & ORS.

2021 INSC 38810 August 2021Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained a contempt petition filed by Brajesh Singh alleging that several political parties wilfully disobeyed the Court's order dated 13‑02‑2020, which required parties to disclose the criminal antecedents of their candidates and the reasons for their selection, within 48 hours of nomination. The

GEMINI BAY TRANSCRIPTION PVT. LTD.versusINTEGRATED SALES SERVICE LTD. & ANR.

2021 INSC 39210 August 2021Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether a foreign arbitral award could be enforced against entities that were not signatories to the underlying arbitration agreement in a dispute between a Hong Kong representative (ISS) and an Indian company (DMC) over commission payments. The Court held that Section 47(1)(c) of the Arbitra

KAY BOUVET ENGINEERING LTD.versusOVERSEAS INFRASTRUCTURE ALLIANCE (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED

2021 INSC 39410 August 2021Appeal(s) allowed

Kay Bouvet Engineering Ltd. (appellant) contested a Section 9 petition filed by Overseas Infrastructure Alliance (India) Private Ltd. (respondent) which sought initiation of corporate insolvency proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). The dispute centred on an advance payment of Rs 47.12 crore

B. VIJAYA BHARATHIversusP. SAVITRI & ORS.

2017 INSC 73410 August 2017Dismissed

The plaintiff entered into an agreement to sell a property with the first defendant, paying two‑thirds of the price in advance and agreeing that the defendant would execute a General Power of Attorney for the plaintiff's husband. On 13 March 1992 the defendant repudiated this by refusing to register the Power of Attorn

NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OFversusGAYATRI JHANSI ROADWAYS LIMITED

2019 INSC 74410 July 2019Disposed off

The National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) and Gayatri Jhansi Roadways Limited entered into a 2006 contract that contained a detailed fee schedule for arbitrators. After a dispute arose in 2017, NHAI invoked a newer NHAI circular (dated 01‑06‑2017) that amended the fee amounts, while the arbitral tribunal, relying

R LAKSHMIKANTHAMversusDEVARAJI

2019 INSC 74710 July 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The parties entered into a sale agreement for a suit property at Rs.3.65 lakh, with the buyer paying an advance and Rs.60,000, while the seller was to clear the mortgage and deliver title documents before the balance could be paid. The buyer sent registered letters and a legal notice urging the seller to fulfill his ob

SRI ANTHONY ALIAS ANTHONY SWAMYversusTHE MANAGING DIRECTOR, K.S.R.T.C.

2020 INSC 42110 June 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a painter, was injured in a bus accident caused by the driver’s negligence, resulting in amputation of his left leg. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded Rs 4,08,850 as compensation, which the Karnataka High Court enhanced to Rs 5,10,350. The appellant contended that the award was grossly inadequat

MUKUL SHARMAversusORION INDIA (P) LTD. THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR

2016 INSC 40010 May 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Mukul Sharma, entered into a sale deed with Orion India for a specified built‑up area of a building. A dispute arose over whether the term "built‑up area" included common areas such as lifts, corridors and lobbies. Initially the plaintiff understood it to include common areas, but later raised a dispute

GARWARE WALL ROPES LTD.versusCOASTAL MARINE CONSTRUCTIONS & ENGINEERING LTD.

2019 INSC 51110 April 2019Appeal(s) allowed

Garware Wall Ropes Ltd. entered into a sub‑contract with Coastal Marine Constructions & Engineering Ltd. that contained an arbitration clause but the sub‑contract was not stamped. When the respondent filed a petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of an arbitrator, the Bo

KAPICO KERALA RESORTS PVT. LTD.versusSTATE OF KERALA & ORS.

2020 INSC 3010 January 2020Dismissed

The Kerala High Court barred the development of resorts on two backwater islands, Vettila Thuruthu (Vaamika) and Nediyathuruthu, in Vembanad Lake, invoking the Kerala Coastal Zone Management Plan and the Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) Notifications of 1991 and 2011. The Supreme Court had earlier dismissed special leave

THE SECRETARY, KERALA STATE COASTAL MANAGEMENT AUTHORITYversusDLF UNIVERSAL LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS ADELIE BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.) & ORS.

2018 INSC 2110 January 2018Disposed off

The Kerala State Coastal Management Authority (KCZMA) challenged DLF Universal Ltd's multi‑storey residential project on the banks of Chilavannurkayal, alleging violations of the Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) Notification and lack of prior CRZ clearance. The Kerala High Court initially ordered demolition, but a Divisio

PIONEER URBAN LAND AND INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2019 INSC 8899 August 2019Disposed off

The Supreme Court considered a batch of writ petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Second Amendment) Act, 2018, which classifies home‑buyers/allottees of real‑estate projects as "financial creditors" under the Code, thereby permitting them to invoke Section 7 and to be

THE PEERLESS GENERAL FINANCE AND INVESTMENT COMPANY LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

2019 INSC 7329 July 2019Appeal(s) allowed

Peerless General Finance and Investment Co. Ltd. floated collective investment schemes where subscribers deposited money that was to be repaid with interest and could be forfeited under certain clauses. For assessment years 1985-86 and 1986-87 no forfeiture occurred, yet the company recorded the subscription receipts a

M/S UTKAL SUPPLIERSversusM/S MAA KANAK DURGA ENTERPRISES & ORS.

2021 INSC 2429 April 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute arose from a Tender Call Notice issued by the SCB Medical College Hospital, Cuttack, which required bidders to submit a "valid labour licence". M/s. Utkal Suppliers (appellant) was awarded the contract, while M/s. Maa Kanak Durga Enterprises (respondent No.1) was disqualified for not having a contract‑labou

P. EKNATHversusY. AMARANATHA REDDY @ BABU & ANR.

2017 INSC 12629 February 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The case involves the double murder of a 12‑year‑old girl and her 50‑year‑old father, and attempted murders of two other family members, allegedly committed by Y. Amaranatha Reddy using a sickle. The trial court convicted the accused under Sections 302, 307 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code, relying on eyewitness testim

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR.versusU.P. STATE BRIDGE CORPORATION LTD.& ANR.

2020 INSC 6868 December 2020Disposed off

The Madhya Pradesh Public Works Department issued a tender for a 7.473 km flyover and received bids from UPSBC, Rajkamal Builders and Rachana Construction. UPSBC was rejected on the ground that it omitted the fact of an FIR and charge‑sheet relating to a collapsed bridge, which the court held to be a material fact that

M/S BANGALORE CLUBversusTHE COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX & ANR.

2020 INSC 5368 September 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The Bangalore Club, a social club, challenged an assessment that it was liable to wealth tax under Section 21AA of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957. The Assessing Officer and the CIT (Appeals) held the club liable, but the Appellate Tribunal set aside those orders. The Supreme Court examined the meaning of "association of pers

U.P. STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATIONversusRAJENDRI DEVI & ORS.

2020 INSC 4178 June 2020Appeal(s) allowed

A 45‑year‑old cyclist was killed when a bus hired by the Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (UPSRTC) struck him. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) held the accident resulted from the driver’s rash and negligent driving and awarded Rs 1.65 lakhs plus interest as compensation. The High Court, relying

CHANDRAKANTA TIWARIversusNEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD. & ANR.

2020 INSC 4198 June 2020Appeal(s) allowed

On 18 March 2004 the son of the claimant, who was a pillion rider, died in a road accident. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) held the insurer liable under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and awarded Rs.1.99 lakh with interest, using a multiplier of 8 based on the claimant's age. The High Court set

ADDISSERY RAGHAVANversusCHERUVALATH KRISHNADASAN

2020 INSC 4188 June 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The tenant, Addissery Raghuvan, occupied two shop rooms in a building owned by the landlord, Cheruvalath Krishnadasan, who filed eviction petitions under Sections 11(2)(b), 11(8) and 11(4)(ii) of the Kerala Building (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, claiming a bonafide need for additional accommodation. The trial cou

SSANGYONG CONSTRUCTION CO. LTD.versusNATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA (NHAI)

2019 INSC 6478 May 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) awarded a construction contract to Ssangyong Engineering & Construction Co. Ltd., which included a price‑adjustment formula based on the Wholesale Price Index (WPI) old series. When the Ministry of Industrial Development stopped publishing the old series and introduced a

STATE BANK OF INDIAversusM/S. JAH DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. & ORS.

2019 INSC 6528 May 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether borrowers classified as wilful defaulters under RBI's 2015 Revised Circular could be represented by lawyers before the in‑house committees that determine such classification. The Court held that the First and Review Committees are administrative bodies, not tribunals vested with judic

PRAVIN ELECTRICALS PVT. LTD.versusGALAXY INFRA AND ENGINEERING PVT. LTD.

2021 INSC 1668 March 2021Case Partly allowed

Pravin Electricals alleged that no consultancy agreement dated 7 July 2014 existed with Galaxy Infra, while Galaxy claimed such an agreement, containing an arbitration clause, was executed and sought appointment of a sole arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Delhi High Court

MONSANTO TECHNOLOGY LLC THRU THE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE MS. NATALIA VORUZ & OTHERSversusNUZIVEEDU SEEDS LTD. THRU THE DIRECTOR & OTHERS

2019 INSC 358 January 2019Disposed off

Monsanto Technology LLC sued Nuziveedu Seeds Ltd. for permanent and temporary injunctions alleging infringement of its patented cotton biotechnology (patent No. 214436) and misuse of its trademarks. The defendants filed a counter‑claim under Section 64 of the Patents Act seeking revocation of the patent on the ground t

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, KOLHAPURversusMIS. CHAPHALKAR BROTHERS PUNE

2017 INSC 11987 December 2017Dismissed

The State of Maharashtra introduced a subsidy scheme for multiplex theatre complexes by amending the Bombay Entertainment Duty Act, 1923, granting a three‑year exemption from entertainment duty followed by a two‑year partial remission. The Commissioner of Income Tax assessed the subsidy received by Mis. Chaphalkar Brot

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