Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

R K AGRAWAL

181 judgments delivered by benches including this judge.

CANARA BANK REP. BY ITS DEPUTY GEN. MANAGERversusC.S. SHYAM & ANR.

2017 INSC 83531 August 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The employee of Canara Bank filed an RTI application under Section 6 seeking details of transfers and postings of all clerical staff from 2002 to 2006, which included personal data of individual employees. The bank’s Public Information Officer rejected the request, invoking the exemption under Section 8(1)(j) of the RT

ANIL KUMAR SINGHversusV!JAY PAL SINGH & ORS.

2017 INSC 116130 November 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Anil Kumar Singh filed a civil suit for a permanent injunction over a parcel of land and obtained an ex‑parte temporary injunction. He later filed an application under Order XXIII Rule 1 of the CPC seeking to withdraw the suit, which the trial court allowed subject to payment of Rs 350 as costs to the defendant, a deci

PREM PRAKASHversusSANTOSH KUMAR JAIN & SONS (HUF) AND ANOTHER

2017 INSC 82730 August 2017Dismissed

The owner of a shop in Delhi filed an eviction petition under the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 alleging that the tenant had sub-let the premises to a third person who was in exclusive possession and that the tenant was in arrears of rent. The tenant contended that the third person was merely an employee working on comm

AHSANversusSTATE OF U.P.

2017 INSC 81929 August 2017Dismissed

On 8 October 2004, three accused, including the appellant Ahsan, entered the house of the victim's uncle armed with country‑made pistols and fired at family members, causing the death of a still‑born child and grievous injuries to others, including a head wound to Shahzad inflicted by Ahsan. The appellant was convicted

COMMON CAUSEversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2017 INSC 115228 November 2017Dismissed

The public‑interest litigation filed by Common Cause challenged the appointment of Shri Rakesh Asthana as Special Director of the CBI, alleging that the Selection Committee had not taken a decision and that the appointment was illegal, arbitrary and tainted by pending investigations. The Court examined the Delhi Specia

DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER & ANR.versusSATISH KANTILAL AMRELIA

2017 INSC 114828 November 2017Case Partly allowed

The respondent, a daily‑wage peon‑cum‑driver employed by the Gujarat Panchayat Department, was terminated in February 1992. He challenged the termination in both a civil suit and an industrial reference before the Labour Court, which held that the termination violated Section 25‑G of the Industrial Disputes Act and ord

M/S. BERGER PAINTS INDIA LTD.versusC. I. T. DELHI-V

2017 INSC 27928 March 2017Dismissed

Berger Paints India Ltd. claimed a deduction under section 35D of the Income Tax Act for preliminary expenses, treating the premium received on its issued share capital as part of the "capital employed in the business of the company". The Assessing Officer disallowed the claim, the Commissioner of Income Tax allowed it

AGARWAL TRACOM PVT. LTD.versusPUNJAB NATIONAL BANK & ORS.

2017 INSC 114627 November 2017Dismissed

Agarwal Tracom Pvt. Ltd. purchased assets of a defaulting borrower at a public auction conducted by Punjab National Bank (PNB) under the SARFAESI Act. After failing to pay subsequent installments, the bank forfeited Agarwal's deposit pursuant to Rule 9(5) of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002. Agarwal chal

BIJENDER & ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA & ANR.

2017 INSC 105827 October 2017Case Partly allowed

The case concerned the acquisition of over 300 acres of land in Haryana for residential and commercial development under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Collector determined compensation using the judicially recognised Belting System, fixing Rs 33 lakh per acre for land within two acres of the road and Rs 18 lakh p

ARIF KHAN @ AGHA KHANversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2018 INSC 42627 April 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was intercepted on a bus after a tip-off and, after being informed of his right to be searched before a Magistrate or Gazetted Officer, gave written consent to the police and was searched, leading to the seizure of about 2.5 kg of charas. He was convicted under Section 20 of the NDPS Act and sentenced to

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

2018 INSC 42327 April 2018Directions issued

M/s Carpet India, a carpet manufacturer, sold its products to an export house (IKEA Trading) which exported them abroad. The assessee claimed a deduction under Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on a par with a direct exporter, based on export incentives such as Duty Drawback and DEPB. The Assessing Officer all

GURNAM SINGH (D) THR. LRS.versusGURBACHAN KAUR (D) BY LRS. & ORS.

2017 INSC 40527 April 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a second appeal in which the original appellant and two respondents had died during its pendency. No application under Order XXII Rules 3(2) and 4(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 was filed to substitute their legal representatives within the prescribed 90‑day period. The Court held th

ANILKUMAR JINABHAI PATEL (D) THR. LRS. & ANR.versusPRAVINCHANDRA JINABHAI PATEL AND ORS.

2018 INSC 27327 March 2018Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered appeals challenging a High Court order that held a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was time‑barred. The petitioners, led by the late Anilkumar Patel, argued that the arbitral award dated 07‑07‑1996 had not been served on the other family members, so t

KARUNANIDHIversusSEETHARAMA NAIDU & ORS.

2017 INSC 27227 March 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appeal arose from a suit filed in 1988 by the great‑grandson and great‑granddaughter of Perumal Naidu (plaintiffs) seeking declaration and possession of properties that had been bequeathed by their great‑grandmother Alamelu Ammal to her sister Ramanujatha Ammal (defendant). The plaintiffs claimed that Alamelu held

INDIAN MACHINERY COMPANYversusM/S. ANSAL HOUSING & CONSTRUCTION LTD.

2016 INSC 9427 January 2016

The appellant Indian Machinery Co. filed a second complaint before the District Forum under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 after its first complaint was dismissed for default. The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission held the second complaint non‑maintainable, invoking a rule analogous to Order IX Rule 9(

NARENDRA & ORS.versusAJABRAO S/O NARAYAN KATARE (D) THROUGH LRS.

2017 INSC 105526 October 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiffs purchased a house in 1985 and sued the original defendant, who had been living in two rooms of the house even before the purchase, for a declaration of title and possession of the entire house. The trial court dismissed the suit, holding the defendant had acquired title by adverse possession; the first a

BHARATKUMAR RAMESHCHANDRA BAROTversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2018 INSC 26326 March 2018Dismissed

The appellant was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC and sentenced by the Sessions Court to ten years' rigorous imprisonment, which the State appealed under Section 377 of the CrPC for enhancement. The High Court, after serving notice and appointing an amicus curiae, enhanced the sentence to life imprisonment. T

POORANLAL & ANRversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2017 INSC 105125 October 2017Dismissed

The case arose from the beating of Hariya on 30 August 1990 by five persons, including Pooranlal and Gaya Prasad, who later died after 14 days of injuries. The trial court acquitted all five accused, but the High Court set aside the acquittal of Pooranlal and Gaya Prasad, convicting them under Section 304 Part II read

SURESH KUMAR WADHWAversusSTATE OF M.P. & ORS.

2017 INSC 105225 October 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant participated in a public auction of four nazul plots and deposited a Rs.3 lakh security as required by the public notice. After his bid was accepted, the State officer sent a letter imposing four "special terms and conditions" which the appellant had not been informed of earlier, and he refused to accept

RAM GOPAL DWIVEDIversusM/S KANPUR ELECTRICITY SUPPLY CO. LTD. THROUGH ITS GENERAL MANAGER

2017 INSC 66525 July 2017Dismissed

The appellants, Ram Gopal Dwivedi and others, were engaged as apprentices under the Apprentices Act, 1961 by Kanpur Electricity Supply Co. Ltd. (a unit of the U.P. State Electricity Board) and their services were terminated after completing a three‑year training period. The Labour Court held the termination illegal, or

PARMINDER SINGHversusGURPREET SINGH

2017 INSC 66425 July 2017Dismissed

The appellant, a co‑sharer of land, entered into a 1995 agreement to sell his share to his elder brother, the respondent, for Rs 5 lakhs, with Rs 4 lakhs paid upfront and the balance to be paid upon execution of the sale deed. The appellant failed to execute the deed and the respondent sued for specific performance, al

PUBLIC TRUST SHRI GEETA SATSANG BHAWANversusNAND LAL & ORS.

2017 INSC 66325 July 2017Case Partly allowed

The Shri Geeta Satsang Bhawan Trust filed eviction suits in 1999 against tenants for non‑payment of rent. At the time of filing, the Trust was not registered under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959, and the trial court nevertheless decreed in its favour. The appellate courts set aside the decree, holding that an unr

NARESH & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ORS.

2018 INSC 41725 April 2018Disposed off

The accused Naresh, Suresh, Ashish and Rajendra were charged with attempting to murder and causing hurt by attacking Tej Singh with an axe in 1998. The Sessions Court acquitted them, but the High Court set aside the acquittal and convicted them under IPC sections 307/34, 323/34, 324/34 and 504, imposing imprisonment an

SHIV SINGH & ORS.versusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS.

2018 INSC 41525 April 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Himachal Pradesh issued a notification under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 to acquire land for a road project. The landowners (appellants) filed objections to the acquisition within the time prescribed by Section 15 of the Act

SRI SRINIVASAIAHversusH. R. CHANNABASAPPA (SINCE DEAD) BY HIS LRS. AND ORS.

2017 INSC 39625 April 2017Disposed off

The original plaintiff, M.N. Channavasavaiah, borrowed Rs.1,500 from B.M. Narayan Shetty and executed a deed of conditional sale on 28 July 1969, delivering possession of the land to the lender for five years with a condition that repayment would void the sale and reconvey the property. The lender later sold the land t

JAYAPRAKASH & ANR.versusT. S. DAVID & ORS.

2018 INSC 6125 January 2018Dismissed

The appellants filed a suit for specific performance of a sale agreement against four defendants. Defendants 1 and 2, the original owners, failed to sell the property and the suit proceeded ex parte, resulting in an ex parte decree. Defendants 3 and 4 successfully set aside the decree under Order 9 Rule 13, and the tri

SUBHASH CHANDER BANSALversusGIAN CHAND AND ORS

2018 INSC 5925 January 2018Dismissed

In 1988 the accused used a hockey stick to inflict injuries on Om Prakash and Ravinder Kumar. The trial court acquitted all five accused, but the High Court convicted four of them under Section 325 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, crediting the period they had already spent in custody and imposing a colle

FLORA ELIAS NAHOUM & ORS.versusIDRISH ALI LASKAR

2018 INSC 5525 January 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The landlords (appellants) owned a shop in Calcutta and leased it to the respondent, who later changed the business and allegedly sub‑let the premises to a third person without consent. The eviction suit was filed under the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956 on four grounds, including sub‑letting and unauthorized c

H. V. NIRMALA & ANR.versusR. SHARMILA & ANR.

2018 INSC 6025 January 2018Dismissed

The dispute concerned immovable property of the late Ramaiah Reddy, who executed a registered will on 12 March 1980 in favour of his minor children Sharmila and Umesh. A later will dated 20 May 1995, executed by the same testator, did not expressly revoke the 1980 will. Umesh filed a partition suit based on the 1995 wi

N. C. BANSALversusUTTAR PRADESH FINANCIAL CORPORATION & ANR.

2018 INSC 6225 January 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff, N.C. Bansal, filed a civil suit seeking a declaration and permanent injunction concerning a property. The trial court dismissed the suit as non‑maintainable; an appellate court remanded the matter for trial. After remand, the plaintiff filed three applications: (i) under Order 7 Rule 14 of the CPC to fil

KARNATAKA LIVE BAND RESTAURANTS ASSOCIATIONversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.

2018 INSC 5825 January 2018Dismissed

The Karnataka Live Band Restaurants Association challenged the Karnataka Police Act, 1963, and the Licensing and Controlling of Places of Public Entertainment (Bangalore City) Order, 2005, which required licences for restaurants displaying live band music, cabaret or discotheque. The Association claimed the Order viola

SURENDER SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

2018 INSC 6525 January 2018Matter referred to larger bench

The State of Haryana acquired about 520 acres of land spread across 15 villages for an expressway under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Land Acquisition Officer fixed a uniform compensation rate of Rs.12,50,000 per acre, which was later enhanced by the Reference Court to Rs.43,17,841 per acre. Both the landowners a

KANAKLATA DAS & ORS.versusNABA KUMAR DAS & ORS.

2018 INSC 5625 January 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants filed an ejectment suit under the West Bengal Tenancy Act to evict respondents Nos. 2‑5 for non‑payment of rent and other grounds. Respondent No.1, claiming co‑ownership of the suit premises, applied under Order I Rule 10(2) of the CPC to be impleaded as a co‑plaintiff. The trial court dismissed the appl

AJAYINDER SANGWAN & ORS.versusBAR COUNCIL OF DELHI

2017 INSC 114124 November 2017Directions issued

The Supreme Court was approached by a group of advocates (Ajayinder Sangwan & Ors.) who had submitted applications and law degrees for verification but whose degrees had not yet been verified by universities, fearing exclusion from the electoral roll for State Bar Council elections. The Court had earlier, on 23 August

RAMESH VERMA (D) TR. LRS.versusLAJESH SAXENA (D) BY LRS & ANR.

2016 INSC 105324 November 2016Dismissed

The case arose from a partition suit filed by the deceased Lajesh Saxena seeking a share in the joint Hindu family property. The trial court allotted shares, which the High Court altered by increasing the daughter’s share to one‑eighth and rejecting the validity of three wills under Section 68 of the Evidence Act. The

RAM CHAND (DECEASED) THROUGH L.RS. & ORS.versusUDAI SINGH@ DAYA RAM & ORS.

2017 INSC 80224 August 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff, represented by his legal heirs, sued the defendants for ownership and possession of agricultural land, claiming inheritance rights, while the defendants relied on a will. The trial court granted only symbolic possession to the plaintiff, and both parties appealed. The High Court dismissed the plaintiff's

B. L. PASSIversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI

2018 INSC 39724 April 2018Dismissed

The appellant, B.L. Passi, claimed a deduction under Section 80-O of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for fees received from Sumitomo Corporation, Japan, alleging that he provided specialized industrial and commercial knowledge, market information, and technical assistance in the form of blue‑prints for automobile die manufact

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IV, AHMEDABADversusM/S. SHREE RAMA MULTI TECH LTD.

2018 INSC 40324 April 2018Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered whether interest earned on share application money that a company is statutorily required to keep in a separate bank account until shares are allotted can be taxed as income from other sources or set off against public issue expenses. The respondent company had shown the interest as income,

THE COMMISSIONERversusMAHINDRA AND MAHINDRA LTD. THRG. M.D.

2018 INSC 40924 April 2018Dismissed

Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. obtained a loan of $650,000 from Kaiser Jeep Corporation to purchase tooling equipment. The loan, bearing 6% interest, was later waived by American Motor Corporation, the successor lender, resulting in a cash receipt of Rs 57,74,064 for Mahindra. The Income Tax Officer treated the waiver as tax

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD NO. 16 (2)versusM/S TECHSPAN INDIA PRIVATE LTD. & ANR.

2018 INSC 39624 April 2018Dismissed

M/s TechSpan India Private Ltd. filed its return for AY 2001‑02 declaring income from software development and human‑resource services, claiming common expenses and a deduction under s.10A. The assessing officer, after a show‑cause notice under s.143, rectified the assessment to nil tax. Later, the revenue issued a not

TAPAN KUMAR DUTTAversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, WEST BENGAL

2018 INSC 39524 April 2018Dismissed

The appellant, a partner in Nitya Kali Rice Mill, was subject to a search under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act at the firm’s premises, resulting in seizure of documents and cash. A notice under Section 158BC was issued to both the firm and the appellant on 9 September 1999, prompting the appellant to file a block re

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VIversusVIRTUAL SOFT SYSTEMS LTD.

2018 INSC 39924 April 2018Appeal(s) allowed

Virtual Soft Systems Ltd claimed a deduction for lease equalisation charges in its 1999-2000 income tax return. The Assessing Officer disallowed the deduction, but the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal allowed it, a decision upheld by the High Court. The Revenue appealed to the Supreme Court, questioning whether such a ded

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-1versusM/S CONTAINER CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD.

2018 INSC 40024 April 2018Disposed off

M/s Container Corporation of India Ltd. (CONCOR) claimed a deduction under Section 80‑IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for profits earned from its Inland Container Depots (ICDs) for assessment years 2003‑04 to 2005‑06. The Assessing Officer rejected the claim, the Tribunal allowed deduction only for rolling stock and not

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAIT. JAYACHANDRANversusT. JAYACHANDRAN

2018 INSC 40124 April 2018Disposed off

The respondent, a stock broker approved by Indian Bank, was instructed to purchase securities on the bank's behalf and to use part of the proceeds to pay additional interest to certain public sector undertakings (PSUs) via demand drafts. The Assessing Officer treated the amount of Rs 14.73 crore, paid to the PSUs, as t

ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXversusBHARAT V. PATEL

2018 INSC 40624 April 2018Dismissed

The respondent, Bharat V. Patel, Chairman and MD of Procter & Gamble India, received Rs 6,80,40,724 on redemption of Stock Appreciation Rights (SARs) issued by P&G USA in 1997, before the Finance Act, 1999 amendment to Section 17(2) became effective on 1 April 2000. The Revenue argued that the amount should be taxed as

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-IIIversusHCL TECHNOLOGIES LTD.

2018 INSC 39824 April 2018Dismissed

HCL Technologies Ltd. claimed deductions under Section 10A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for freight, telecommunication, insurance and software development expenses incurred in exporting software and providing technical services abroad. The Assessing Officer excluded these expenses from the total turnover, leading to a h

J. BALAJI SINGHversusDIWAKAR COLE & ORS.

2017 INSC 38624 April 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Balaji Singh filed a suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction which was dismissed by the trial court. On appeal, the first appellate court allowed him to file additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27, set aside the trial court decree and remanded the case to the trial court for a fresh trial, invoking O

MANJU DEVIversusONKARJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA @ OMKARJEET SINGH & OTHERS

2017 INSC 127624 March 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Manju Devi, a Scheduled Caste woman, complained that the respondents assaulted her, outraged her modesty and insulted her caste, invoking Sections 323, 354, 452 of the IPC and Section 3(1)(xi) of the SC/ST Act. The High Court granted anticipatory bail to the respondents under Section 438 of the CrPC. The appellant chal

SMT. BAYANABAI KAWAREversusRAJENDRA S/O BABURAO DHOTE

2017 INSC 113623 November 2017Dismissed

The plaintiff purchased a plot from a housing cooperative society by a registered sale deed dated 29‑12‑1981 and was placed in possession. The defendant later encroached on the land and erected a hut, prompting the plaintiff to sue for possession and mesne profits. The trial court and first appellate court dismissed th

KANAILAL & ORS.versusRAM CHANDRA SINGH & ORS.

2017 INSC 79223 August 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants (defendants) challenged a summary dismissal of their second appeal by the Calcutta High Court, which had been filed against a decree granting partition to the plaintiffs. The High Court dismissed the appeal under Order 41 Rule 11 without stating facts, the parties' submissions, or reasons, and without id

AJAYINDER SANGWAN AND ORS.versusBAR COUNCIL OF DELHI & ORS.

2017 INSC 79523 August 2017Hearing Adjourned

The petitioners sought immediate elections to the State Bar Councils, arguing that the terms of the incumbent members had expired. The Bar Council of India (BCI) contended that elections could not be held until a verification process to weed out fake lawyers was completed, as mandated by the Advocates Act, 1961 and the

GORUSU NAGARAJU S/O APPARAOversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2018 INSC 25723 March 2018Dismissed

Gorusu Nagaraju was convicted of murder under IPC s.302 and of concealing the offence under s.201, based primarily on circumstantial evidence linking him to the victim's death. The trial court and the Andhra Pradesh High Court both upheld the conviction, relying on seven material circumstances, including the appellant'

NETRAM SAHUversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ANR.

2018 INSC 25823 March 2018Appeal(s) allowed

Netram Sahu was employed by the State of Chhattisgarh as a daily wager from 1 April 1986 and was regularized as a work‑charge employee on 6 May 2008, retiring on 30 July 2011 after a total service of 25 years 3 months. He claimed gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, and the Controlling Authority allowed hi

RAJESHWAR MAHTOversusALOK KUMAR GUPTA, G.M. M/S BIRLA CORPORATION LTD.

2018 INSC 19723 February 2018Disposed off

The employee Rajeshwar Mahto was terminated by Birla Corporation Ltd. and challenged the termination before an Industrial Tribunal, which held he was not a "workman". The High Court set aside that award, declaring him a workman, but the Supreme Court later allowed the corporation's appeal, reinstating the tribunal's de

DASHRATH @ JOLO & ANR. ETC.versusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2018 INSC 5123 January 2018Dismissed

On 3 August 2008, PW‑19 Birichram went to a neighbour's house for a child's birth celebration when the appellants, armed with battleaxes and sticks, threatened and assaulted him. The assault escalated, resulting in the deaths of three persons (Chedilal, Bablu, Bhuru) and injuries to two others, with weapons and blood‑s

DINSHAW RUSI MEHTA & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2017 INSC 25722 March 2017Disposed off

The Parsi Lying‑in‑Hospital (PLIH) charitable trust, after transferring its hospital to the Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP), entered into a lease with Krimson Health Ventures Private Limited (KHPL) to rebuild the hospital as a super‑specialty facility. The Charity Commissioner approved the scheme under section 36 of the B

LT. COL. PRASAD SHRIKANT PUROHITversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2017 INSC 78421 August 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Lt. Col. Prasad Shrikant Purohit, a serving Army officer, was accused of conspiring with others to plant a bomb in Malegaon in 2008, resulting in six deaths. The case was investigated first by the Anti‑Terrorist Squad (ATS) and later by the National Investigation Agency (NIA), leading to divergent charge‑sheets, with t

MUNICIPAL BOARD, SUMERPURversusKUNDANMAL & ORS.

2017 INSC 37621 April 2017Case Partly allowed

The Municipal Board of Sumerpur filed a writ petition challenging a Collector's order. The High Court Single Judge dismissed the petition in limine without issuing notice, stating no ground for interference, and the Division Bench similarly dismissed the appeal in limine without addressing the Board's submissions. The

HILL VIEW COLONY & ORS.versusSTATE OF NAGALAND & ORS.

2017 INSC 37821 April 2017Case Partly allowed

The Industrial Village Razhuphe filed a writ petition in the Gauhati High Court seeking cancellation of census records collected by the Dimapur Municipal Council and directions that the State of Nagaland not accept those records. The Single Judge ordered the cancellation and directed the Census Officer to conduct a fre

K. SLTARAM & ANR.versusCFL CAPITAL FINANCIAL SERVICE LTD. & ANR.

2017 INSC 24421 March 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent company borrowed Rs 900 lakhs from a consortium led by State Bank of Travancore (SBT). SBT assigned the debt to Kotak Mahindra Bank on 29‑03‑2006 but failed to inform the borrower. Unaware of this, the borrower later assigned a separate debt to Kotak and discovered the earlier assignment only when Kotak

SRI SHIVAJI BALARAM HAIBAITLversusSRI AVINASH MARUTHI PAWAR

2017 INSC 112620 November 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant purchased a shop and sued the respondent for possession, alleging the respondent occupied the shop without any right. The respondent denied the appellant's title and pleaded adverse possession, claiming long possession. The trial court and first appellate court held in favour of the appellant, finding the

APOLLO ZIPPER INDIA LIMITEDversusW. NEWMAN AND CO. LTD.

2018 INSC 38420 April 2018Appeal(s) allowed

Apollo Zipper India Ltd., which became the absolute owner of a commercial premises after a series of statutory transfers, served a quit notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act to its tenant, W. Newman & Co. Ltd., demanding arrears and vacant possession. The tenant sought leave to defend the summary evi

SK. BHIKAN S/O SK NOOR MOHD.versusMEHAMOODABEE W/O SK. AFZAL & ORS.

2017 INSC 15720 February 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute involved a brother (appellant) and his sister (plaintiff) over ownership of a family property in Aurangabad. The sister claimed inheritance under Mohammedan law, while the brother asserted that the property was self‑acquired through a registered sale deed and adverse possession. The trial court dismissed th

JAGTAR SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2015 INSC 43919 June 2015Dismissed

The appellant Jagtar Singh and his brother were involved in a land dispute with Harbans Singh (PW‑3). On 20 September 1996, after a revenue officer ruled in favour of PW‑3, the appellant assaulted PW‑3’s uncle Surinder Singh, striking him on the head, causing unconsciousness and later death due to shock and haemorrhage

PARADEEP PHOSPHATES LIMITEDversusSTATE OF ORISSA & ORS.

2018 INSC 37719 April 2018Dismissed

Paradeep Phosphates Ltd., a public sector undertaking, raised the retirement age of its employees from 58 to 60 years in 1998 on a government directive to curb losses. When the financial situation did not improve, the government ordered a rollback to 58 years in 2001, and the company withdrew the earlier order in 2002

M/S. STANDARD ESSENTIAL OIL INDUSTRIES & ANR.versusFOREST RANGE OFFICER KASARGOD & ORS.

2018 INSC 37119 April 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, a sandalwood oil business, were seized of 125 kg of sandalwood oil by police and the Divisional Forest Officer ordered its confiscation under Section 69 of the Kerala Forest Act, 1961. The High Court upheld the confiscation, treating it as if it were made under Section 61A, which authorises confiscation

MAHAVEER KUMAR JAINversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

2018 INSC 37019 April 2018Appeal(s) allowed

Mahaveer Kumar Jain, a resident of Rajasthan, won a Rs.20 lakh prize in the 1986 Sikkim State lottery. The prize was taxed at source under the Sikkim State Income Tax Rules, 1948, and Jain claimed a deduction under Section 80TT of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer and subsequent authorities held that the

UNION OF INDIAversusM/S. VARINDERA CONSTRUCTIONS LTD. ETC.

2018 INSC 37519 April 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India contracted with M/s Varindera Constructions for residential construction, incorporating Clause 19 (no escalation reimbursement) and Clause 6.3 (no claim for excess wages) in the agreement. During performance, the Haryana government raised the minimum wages, and the contractor sought reimbursement for

MANGAMMAL @ THULASI AND ANR.versusT.B. RAJU AND ORS.

2018 INSC 37219 April 2018Case Partly allowed

The appellants, daughters of the late T.G. Basuvan, filed a suit for partition and possession of ancestral lands that had been leased and later sold by their brother, the respondent. The trial court dismissed the suit, holding the daughters were not entitled to partition, a decision upheld by the High Court. The Suprem

MADANURI SRI RAMA CHANDRA MURTHYversusSYED JALAL

2017 INSC 36619 April 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Madanuri Sri Rama Chandra Murthy filed a suit seeking cancellation of a sale deed, alleging that the land was Wakf property. The defendants moved an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC for rejection of the plaint, which the Wakf Tribunal allowed, finding the suit meritless and barred. The High Court set asid

P. SREEKUMARversusSTATE OF KERALA & ORS.

2018 INSC 24619 March 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a chief executive trustee of a charitable trust, was accused by a fellow trustee of defrauding the trust, leading to the registration of an FIR against the appellant, the trust treasurer and three bank officials. The appellant subsequently lodged a separate FIR against the treasurer alleging fraud and fo

SURAT SINGH (DEAD)versusSIRI BHAGWAN & ORS.

2018 INSC 17019 February 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a second appeal filed under Section 100 of the CPC by Siri Bhagwan against a decree favoring Murti Devi's heirs. The Punjab & Haryana High Court allowed the appeal without hearing the contesting respondent (Surat Singh, appellant No.4) and framed the substantial question of law only in its fi

DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE AND OTHERSversusPUSHPA LEKHUMAL TOLANI

2017 INSC 77218 August 2017Dismissed

The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) intercepted Ms. Pushpa Lekhumal Tolani at Delhi airport on a tip that she was carrying gold and diamond jewellery concealed in her baggage and attempting to pass through the Green Channel without duty. A search under the Customs Act, 1962 uncovered 44 jewellery items worth

VELAYUDHAN & ORS.versusMOHAMMEDKUTTY & ORS.

2017 INSC 35918 April 2017Case Partly allowed

The respondents filed a civil suit seeking a permanent injunction and, by implication, a declaration of title over certain land. The trial court decreed in their favour, but the first appellate court dismissed the suit. On second appeal, the High Court held the suit was only for a perpetual injunction and therefore did

AYAN CHATTERJEEversusFUTURE TECHNOLOGY FOUNDATION INC. & ORS.

2017 INSC 35818 April 2017Disposed off

The plaintiff filed a civil suit seeking declaration of tenancy and a permanent injunction, and during the suit applied for a temporary injunction under Order 39 of the CPC. The trial court granted the injunction, directing a status‑quo and finding the plaintiff prima facie in possession. On appeal, the High Court modi

DAGADABAI (DEAD) BY L.RS.versusABBAS @ GULAB RUSTUM PINJARI

2017 INSC 36018 April 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Dagadabai, the heir of the deceased Muslim landowner Rustum, filed a suit for possession of agricultural land against Abbas who claimed to be Rustum's adopted son and also pleaded adverse possession. The trial court and the first appellate court held that adoption is not recognized under Mohammedan law and that the def

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AHMEDABADversusEQUINQX SOLUTION PVT LTD.

2017 INSC 35718 April 2017Dismissed

Equinox Solution Pvt Ltd sold its entire running business, including assets and liabilities, in a single transaction on 31‑December‑1990 and claimed a deduction under Section 48(2) of the Income‑Tax Act, treating the sale as a slump sale of a long‑term capital asset. The Assessing Officer held that the transaction fell

M/S UNICHEM LABORATORIES LTD.versusRANI DEVI & ANR.

2017 INSC 36118 April 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Mis Unichem Laboratories Ltd., a company that provided housing to its industrial workers under the Uttar Pradesh Industrial Housing Act, 1955, sought eviction of Rani Devi and others who continued to occupy a quarter after the original allottee, Dharam Dev Yadav, retired and later died. The company filed a civil suit f

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX COCHINversusMIS TRAVANCORE COCHIN UDYOGA MANDAL

2017 INSC 76117 August 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The State Government fixed lease rent for land allotted to the assessee in 1988, which the assessee contested but was rejected in 1991. The assessee claimed a deduction of the accumulated lease rent in Assessment Year (AY) 1992‑93, arguing that the dispute was sub‑judice until the State’s final decision. The Assessing

BIR WATI & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2017 INSC 76217 August 2017Disposed off

The appellants, legal representatives of a deceased landowner, sought to challenge the compensation awarded under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, after their reference application under Section 18 was dismissed as time‑barred. They argued that, despite the dismissal, they were entitled to file an application under Sect

SMT. SUDAMA DEVI & ORS.versusVIJAY NATH GUPTA & ANR.

2018 INSC 35017 April 2018Dismissed

The landlord filed an eviction suit under Section 20(2)(a) of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 for non‑payment of rent. The trial court and the revisional court decreed eviction. The tenant appealed, contending that he was entitled to the relief of Section 20(4), wh

DINESH SINGH THAKURversusSONAL THAKUR

2018 INSC 35617 April 2018Dismissed

The husband, a U.S. citizen, filed a petition under Sections 13 and 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act in the Gurgaon Family Court seeking divorce, while the wife filed a divorce petition in a Florida court on grounds not available under Indian law. The husband then sued in the Gurgaon court for a permanent anti‑suit injunct

JALENDRA PADHIARYversusPRAGATI CHHOTRAY

2018 INSC 35117 April 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The husband filed a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1954, seeking divorce on grounds of desertion and cruelty, and the Family Court granted the divorce while ordering him to pay permanent alimony of Rs.15,00,000 to his wife. The husband appealed the alimony award to the High Court, which dismissed

THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.versusMODERN TENT HOUSE & ANR.

2017 INSC 74716 August 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Bihar filed a money suit seeking Rs 41,59,418 against Modern Tent House and others. The defendants denied the claim in their written statement and later applied under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to amend the statement by adding two paragraphs that merely elaborated facts already pl

LEKH RAJ (DEAD) THROUGH L.RS. & ORS.versusRANJIT SINGH & ORS.

2017 INSC 74616 August 2017Dismissed

The appellants filed a suit in 1962 seeking a declaration of customary rights over agricultural land under the Punjab Custom (Power to Contest) Act, 1920. The trial court dismissed the suit, but the appellate court in 1965 decreed in favour of the respondents, and the decree became final as no second appeal was filed.

VIRENDER KHULLARversusAMERICAN CONSOLIDATION SERVICES LTD. & ORS.

2016 INSC 60016 August 2016Dismissed

The appellants shipped men's apparel consignments to American Consolidation Services Ltd. (ACS), which acted as an agent of the buyer, Zip Code Inc., a subsidiary of Coronet Group Inc. The goods were delivered to Zip Code Inc. without payment being made to the bank, leading the appellants to claim compensation under th

IBI CONSULTANCY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITEDversusDSC LIMITED

2018 INSC 34916 April 2018Disposed off

The petitioners, IBI Consultancy India Private Limited and its parent IBI Group, entered into six contracts with DSC Limited for toll and traffic management systems on two highway projects. The contracts contained an arbitration clause stipulating that disputes be referred to an independent arbitrator in Delhi. After t

MOHAMMAD YUSUF AND OTHERS ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

2018 INSC 34716 April 2018Dismissed

The State of Haryana acquired 46 acres of land in Firozpur village for a Mini Secretariat under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The initial award valued the land at Rs 16 lakhs per acre, but a reference court enhanced the valuation to Rs 72 lakhs per acre and imposed a 60% deduction for development and waiting period,

MANIMEGALAIversusTHE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER) ADI DRAVIDAR WELFARE

2018 INSC 34416 April 2018Disposed off

The Tamil Nadu government acquired 4.63 acres of Manimegalai's land for house sites for landless Adi Dravidians. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded Rs. 400 per cent, which the appellant challenged. A reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act resulted in a Subordinate Judge fixing compensation at Rs. 2,50

MOHD. ALIversusSTATE OF H.P. AND OTHERS

2018 INSC 34616 April 2018Dismissed

Mohd. Ali was employed as a casual labourer on a muster‑roll at an agricultural seed farm from 1980 to 1991, completing the statutory 240 days of work only in the years 1980‑1982 and 1986‑1989. He ceased work in 1991 without informing his employer. In 2005 he sought relief under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Ac

SHIVAJI YALLAPPA PATILversusSRI RANAJEET APPASAHEB PATIL & OTHERS

2018 INSC 34216 April 2018Dismissed

Four joint owners of agricultural land agreed to sell their shares to two co‑owners, but two owners died and the widow (Respondent No.3) recorded her husband's share in her name. The remaining co‑owners executed a sale deed in favour of the plaintiffs (Respondents Nos.1 & 2) and took possession of the land, while Respo

LALITESHWAR PRASAD SINGH & ORS.versusS. P. SRIVASTAVA (D) THR. LRS.

2016 INSC 114715 December 2016Remitted to Lower Court

The plaintiff Shailendra Prasad Srivastava filed a suit for declaration of title over certain lands against Baidya Nath Prasad Verma, which the trial court dismissed. The High Court, acting as the first appellate court, reversed the trial court's decision and decreed in favour of the plaintiff, but it neither framed sp

DR.KAZIMUNNISA (DEAD) BY L.R.versusZAKIA SULTANA (DEAD) BY L.R.& ORS.

2017 INSC 111515 November 2017Case Partly allowed

Two pending land‑grabbing suits (LGC No.41/1998 and LGC No.50/2004) were filed under the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 concerning the same parcel of land. The Special Court dismissed the first suit and allowed the second, leading to conflicting orders. The High Court clubbed the writ petitions un

CHIRAG M. PATHAK & ORS. ETC.ETC.versusDOLLYBEN KANTILAL & ORS.

2017 INSC 111415 November 2017Disposed off

Six FIRs were lodged in different police stations in Gujarat against five cooperative housing societies and the accused family members for alleged offences under the IPC. The accused filed criminal applications under Section 482 of the CrPC in the Gujarat High Court, which quashed five of the FIRs on the ground that th

ANANTHESH BHAKTA REPRESENTED BY MOTHER USHA A.BHAKTA & ORS.versusNAYANA S. BHAKTA & ORS.

2016 INSC 102615 November 2016Dismissed

The dispute concerned benefits under a retirement deed and a partnership deed of a beedi‑manufacturing firm, both containing arbitration clauses. The defendants filed an application under Section 8(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking to refer the matter to arbitration, but did not attach the origin

KHUMBARAMversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

2015 INSC 103215 October 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Khumbha Ram, sought to challenge the acquittal of his daughter’s husband and others for the death of his daughter Kamla, which occurred within seven years of marriage and was alleged to involve dowry harassment. The trial court acquitted the accused, finding insufficient evidence of harassment and no med

TANVI SARWALversusCENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION AND . ORS.

2015 INSC 100015 June 2015Case Allowed

The Supreme Court examined petitions under Article 32 challenging the All India Pre‑Medical and Pre‑Dental Entrance Test 2015, alleging that a criminal syndicate used electronic gadgets to transmit answer keys to candidates during the exam. Investigation reports identified a network involving over 300 devices, 358 mobi

KHATOON & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF U.P. THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY & ORS.

2018 INSC 14815 February 2018Dismissed

The State of Uttar Pradesh acquired large tracts of land for industrial development under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, prompting many landowners to file writ petitions challenging the acquisition. The Allahabad High Court, in Gajraj & Ors. v. State of U.P., upheld the acquisition but ordered additional compensation

AUTO CARSversusTRIMURTI CARGO MOVERS PVT. LTD. & ORS.

2018 INSC 15015 February 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff filed a civil suit in the Calcutta High Court for recovery of money and, after failing to serve the defendants by ordinary means, obtained permission to serve them by substituted service through newspaper publication. The summons published on 25 November 2014 instructed the defendants to appear within 15

KURUKSHETRA UNIVERSITYversusPRITHVI SINGH

2018 INSC 14315 February 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The University terminated security guard Prithvi Singh, a daily‑rated employee, after a departmental enquiry found him guilty of misconduct for misbehaving with a research scholar. The Labour Court, on reference under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, held that the enquiry was illegal, treated the termination

G. SARASWATHI & ANR.versusRATHINAMMAL & ORS.

2018 INSC 14215 February 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants filed a civil suit seeking specific performance of an agreement, which the trial court decreed in their favour. The High Court single judge set aside that decree, and the appellants filed a Letters Patent Appeal (LPA) before the Division Bench of the High Court. The Division Bench dismissed the LPA by a

MADAN MOHANversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

2017 INSC 123314 December 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Madan Mohan filed an application under Section 193 CrPC seeking the summoning of Ashish Meena and Vimal Meena as accused in a case already pending against two other persons. The Sessions Judge issued non‑bailable warrants against the two respondents. They filed a revision under Section 197 CrPC in the High Court, but t

PREM GIRIversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2017 INSC 123414 December 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Prem Giri, charged with offences under several sections of the IPC, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the High Court of Rajasthan. The Single Judge of the High Court dismissed the application, merely stating that, in view of the overall facts, bail was not proper,

SUNKAMMA (D) BY LRS.versusS. PUSHPARAJ (D) BY LRS.

2017 INSC 122514 December 2017Dismissed

The dispute concerned possession of site No. 47 in Bangalore. The plaintiff, S. Pushparaj, claimed possession based on an agreement of sale dated 09‑09‑1986 and a registered general power of attorney dated 03‑05‑1988 executed by the seller, Madhavan Pillai (PW‑2). The defendants, Sunkamma, alleged that these documents

KAMINI JAISWALversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2017 INSC 111214 November 2017Dismissed

The petitioners, including a member of the Commission for Judicial Accountability and Reforms, filed successive writ petitions alleging that an FIR implicated senior judicial functionaries and that the Chief Justice of India (CJI) should not hear or assign the matter. They sought a Special Investigation Team and the re

STATE OF UTTARAKHANDversusJAIRNAIL SINGH

2017 INSC 110513 November 2017Dismissed

The State of Uttarakhand appealed a High Court order acquitting Jairnail Singh of charges under IPC s.307 (attempt to murder) and Arms Act s.25(1‑A). The Session Court had convicted Singh, but the High Court set aside the conviction, citing material infirmities such as the failure to forensic‑test the recovered pistol,

DHARAMPAL (DEAD) THR. LRS.versusPUNJAB WAKF BOARD & ORS.

2017 INSC 89913 September 2017Dismissed

The Punjab Wakf Board sued Dharampal (deceased) and others for possession of land it owned. Dharampal's heirs claimed title by adverse possession, asserting continuous possession since 1953 through his father. The lower courts initially upheld the board's claim, rejecting the adverse possession plea. On appeal, the Sup

M/S OSWAL WOOLLEN MILLS LTD.versusM/S OSWAL AGRO MILLS LTD.

2018 INSC 33713 April 2018Dismissed

The dispute between Oswal Woolen Mills Ltd. and Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. arose from a breach of an agency agreement and was referred to arbitration under the Arbitration Act, 1940. Two arbitrators could not agree on an award, so the matter was referred to an umpire who awarded damages to the respondent. The appellant late

SUCHA SINGH SODHI (D) THR. LRS.versusBALDEV RAJ WALIA & ANR.

2018 INSC 33813 April 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The original plaintiff, Sucha Singh, filed a suit for permanent injunction against the defendant in 1996, which he later withdrew with the court's permission to pursue appropriate proceedings before a competent forum. He subsequently filed a fresh suit for specific performance of the same agreement, which the defendant

SHIVA KANT JHAversusUNION OF INDIA

2018 INSC 33913 April 2018Disposed off

Shiva Kant Jha, a CGHS pensioner, sought reimbursement of Rs.13,84,440 incurred for emergency cardiac and stroke treatment in non‑empanelled hospitals. The CGHS authorities denied most of the claim on technical grounds, citing lack of prior approval and non‑empanelment. The petitioner filed a writ under Article 32 alle

KERALA AYURVEDA PARAMPARYA VAIDYA FORUMversusSTATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS

2018 INSC 33613 April 2018Dismissed

The Kerala Ayurveda Paramparya Vaidya Forum, an association of traditional practitioners of Ayurveda, Siddha and Unani, challenged the Travancore‑Cochin Medical Practitioners Act, 1953 which barred them from practising unless they were registered under the Act. The Forum argued that they had long‑standing custom, inher

MR. RANVIR DEWANversusMRS. RASHMI KHANNA & ANR.

2017 INSC 121912 December 2017

The deceased B.R. Dewan owned a house which he bequeathed by will: the ground floor to his son Ranvir, the first floor to his daughter Rashmi, and a "life interest" to his second wife, Mrs. Pritam, to reside and collect rent. After his death, a dispute arose and Ranvir (appellant) and his mother sought a declaration th

HIMANGNI ENTERPRISESversusKAMALJEET SINGH AHLUWALIA

2017 INSC 103812 October 2017Dismissed

The landlord filed a civil suit seeking eviction of the premises leased to the defendant, Himangni Enterprises. The lease deed contained an arbitration clause, prompting the defendant to file an application under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to refer the dispute to arbitration. The trial cour

P. KARUPAIAH (D) THRversusTHE GENERAL MANAGER THRUUVALLUVAR TRANSPORT CORPORATION LTD.

2017 INSC 103512 October 2017Dismissed

P. Karupiah, a driver employed by the General Manager Thiruvalluvar Transport Corporation Ltd., was dismissed after being convicted in a murder case, but was later acquitted by the High Court and reinstated. The employer refused to pay back wages for the period of dismissal, prompting the employee to file a writ petiti

STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ANR.versusMANDIR SRI LAXMAN SIDH MAHARAJ

2017 INSC 88612 September 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Bharat Bhushan Bharti, calling himself the Mahant and Manager of the ancient Sri Laxman Sidh Maharaj temple, filed a civil suit seeking a declaration of ownership over the temple and its surrounding five‑acre land and a permanent injunction restraining the State and the Divisional Forest Officer from interfering with h

SIVAKAMI & ORS.versusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.

2018 INSC 22612 March 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, owners of 1.52 acres of land, challenged a 1985 acquisition of their land by the State of Tamil Nadu under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Single Judge of the Madras High Court allowed the writ petition and quashed the acquisition but gave no reasons or discussion of the issues. The Division Bench

RASHTRIYA !SPAT NIGAM LTD.versusM/S. PRATHYUSHA RESOURCES & INFRA PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANR.

2016 INSC 15912 February 2016Appeal(s) allowed

Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Ltd., a Government of India undertaking, awarded a transport contract to Prathyusha Resources & Infra Pvt. Ltd. The contract was extended and a dispute arose over the base year for price escalation, leading to arbitration where the arbitrator ruled in favour of the respondent. The district court s

SMT. K. A. ANNAMMAversusTHE SECRETARY, COCHIN CO-OPERATIVE HOSPITAL SOCIETY LTD.

2018 INSC 2612 January 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The employee of a Kerala co‑operative hospital was dismissed and challenged the termination before the Labour Court under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (ID Act). The Labour Court set aside the dismissal, but the employer obtained a writ setting aside the award. The Supreme Court examined whether a service dispute b

MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIAversusJSS MEDICAL COLLEGE & ANR.

2016 INSC 4312 January 2016Disposed off

The Supreme Court heard an appeal by the Medical Council of India against JSS Medical College for flouting its earlier 2012 order. The college had allowed students to continue their MBBS studies despite being directed to halt admissions. The Court allowed the current batch, who had completed four years, to finish their

BARUN CHANDRA THAKURversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION AND OTHERS

2017 INSC 121411 December 2017Dismissed

The appellant, a grieving father, challenged the grant of anticipatory and interim bail to the top management executives of Ryan International School, who were accused in the murder of his 7‑year‑old son. The respondents filed bail applications in the Bombay High Court and later in the Punjab & Haryana High Court, whic

MIHIR KUMAR HAZARA CHOUDHURYversusLIFE INSURANCE CORPN. & ANR.

2017 INSC 88111 September 2017Dismissed

M.K. Hazra Chowdhury, an Assistant of Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC), was found to have issued premium receipts to policyholders without actually receiving the premiums. He admitted the act in his reply, citing workload and family pressures, and sought leniency. A departmental enquiry under Regulation 39 of

INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIAversusM. S. RATHI

2017 INSC 60211 July 2017Dismissed

The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) sought reprimand of M.S. Rathi, a chartered accountant, for issuing certificates that allegedly showed the CIF value of imported raw materials instead of their actual value and for issuing such certificates without the units maintaining proper books of accounts. Th

MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIAversusCHRISTIAN MEDICAL COLLEGE VELLORE & ORS.

2016 INSC 30211 April 2016Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained review petitions filed against its own 18 July 2013 judgment in the Christian Medical College case. The petitioners argued that the earlier decision ignored binding precedents and was pronounced without intra‑bench discussion. The Court, invoking the principle from Sheonandan Paswan that a

UNITED FINANCE CORPORATIONversusM.S.M. HANEEFA

2017 INSC 4511 January 2017Appeal(s) allowed

United Finance Corporation, the decree‑holder, purchased a property at a court auction and sought delivery of possession under Order XXI Rule 95 of the CPC. The judgment‑debtor filed applications to set aside the sale and obtained a stay of execution, which was later dismissed on 9 July 2003. The appellant filed the po

CAMPAIGN FOR JUDICIAL ACCOUNTABILITY AND REFORMSversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

2017 INSC 109110 November 2017Matter referred to larger bench

The Supreme Court clarified that the Chief Justice of India (CJI) is the sole authority to constitute benches and allocate cases, a principle derived from the State of Rajasthan v. Prakash Chand judgment and applicable to the Supreme Court. The Court held that a two‑judge bench cannot direct the composition of a bench

NAGAR PALIKA RAISINGHNAGARversusRAMESHWAR LAL & ANR.

2017 INSC 102410 October 2017Dismissed

The municipal corporation (Nagar Palika Raisinghnagar) had issued a patta in 1957 to the respondent's grandfather for a 100x100 sq. ft. parcel of land. The respondent, as the grandson and current possessor, filed a suit seeking a permanent injunction to prevent the corporation from dispossessing him, alleging that the

BABITA BADASARIA & ORSversusPATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS.

2016 INSC 25810 March 2016Directions issued

The Supreme Court upheld its earlier order directing demolition of the unauthorized floors of a multi‑storeyed building constructed by Saket Housing Ltd. in Patna, noting massive deviations from the sanctioned plan, including excess floors and FAR. The petitioners, owners of flats in the building, sought to have the so

MANAGEMENT OF BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LTD.versusM. MANI

2017 INSC 10889 November 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. (BHEL) dismissed two drivers, M. Mani and the late T.A. Mathivanan, after a departmental enquiry found them guilty of theft of a heavy machine while on duty. The employees were later acquitted of the theft charge in a criminal trial under IPC s.379. They challenged their dismissals in a La

KERALA PRIVATE HOSPITAL ASSOCIATIONversusSTATE OF KERALA & ORS.

2017 INSC 10909 November 2017Dismissed

The State of Kerala constituted a Private Hospital Industrial Relations Committee under Section 9 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 to revise minimum wages for employees of private hospitals and allied institutions. The committee comprised equal numbers of employer and employee representatives, but several of the employer

NADIMINTI SURYANARAYAN MURTHY (DEAD) THROUGH LRS.versusKOTHURTHI KRISHNA BHASKARA RAO & ORS.

2017 INSC 10159 October 2017Disposed off

The plaintiff (respondent No. I) entered into a genuine sale agreement on 18‑01‑1983 with defendants Nos.1‑5 for a house, paying Rs.1,000 as advance. Instead of executing the sale deed, the defendants sold the same house to defendant No.6 on 09‑02‑1983, relying on a purported earlier agreement dated 04‑01‑1983, which t

MOFIL KHAN & ANR.versusSTATE OF JHARKHAND

2014 INSC 10169 October 2014Dismissed

Mofil Khan and two co‑accused brutally murdered eight members of their own family, including women, children and a physically disabled boy, to obtain property. The trial court sentenced them to death, a decision affirmed by the Jharkhand High Court. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined whether the "rarest of rare" doc

DAYA KISHAN JOSHI & ANR.versusDYNEMECH SYSTEMS PVT. LTD.

2017 INSC 7269 August 2017Disposed off

The appellant, father of a deceased employee, claimed compensation under the Employees' Compensation Act, 1923 after the employee died in a road accident while returning from a field assignment. The Commissioner and the High Court dismissed the claim, holding the accident was not "arising out of and in the course of em

UMA PANDEY & ANR.versusMUNNA PANDEY & ORS.

2018 INSC 3149 April 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiffs, members of a family, filed a partition suit for agricultural land which was decreed in their favour by the trial court. The defendants appealed and the first appellate court reversed the decree, relying on a document labelled Ex‑A. The plaintiffs then filed a second appeal, which the Patna High Court di

BHARATIYA JANATA PARTY WEST BENGALversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.

2018 INSC 3189 April 2018Disposed off

The Bharatiya Janata Party (West Bengal) filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking a mandamus directing the West Bengal State Election Commission (SEC) to issue nomination forms electronically, allow email submissions, and provide police and para‑military protection, alleging that its candidates were barred from c

STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.versusRAFIQ MASIH (WHITE WASHER)

2014 INSC 4798 July 2014

The State of Punjab filed a Special Leave Petition challenging a High Court order that barred recovery of excess pensionary payments made to the respondent, a white washer, on the ground that the employee had not committed fraud. The Supreme Court examined the apparent conflict between earlier decisions: Shyam Babu Ver

UMMERversusPOTTENGAL SUBIDA & ORS.

2018 INSC 2198 March 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an elderly man, was served with an ex parte decree by a family court for alleged non‑payment of gold ornaments and maintenance. He applied under Order IX Rule 13 of the CPC to set aside the decree and sought condonation of delay, but both applications were dismissed. He then filed a miscellaneous appeal

SUMAN SINGHversusSANJAY SINGH

2017 INSC 2158 March 2017

The husband filed a petition for divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, alleging multiple instances of cruelty by his wife. The alleged incidents were largely isolated, occurred many years before the petition, and were condoned by the parties as they continued to live together and had two children.

BHARGAVI CONSTRUCTIONS & ANR.versusKOTHAKAPU MUTHYAM REDDY & ORS .

2017 INSC 8677 September 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Bhargavi Constructions filed a civil suit for specific performance of a land sale, which was later settled by a written compromise and an award was passed by a Lok Adalat on 22‑08‑2007. The plaintiffs later alleged fraud and misrepresentation in obtaining that award and instituted a suit seeking its declaration as void

BHUPENDRA KUMAR CHIMANBHAI KACHIYA PATELversusDIVISIONAL CONTROLLER GSRTC NADIAD

2018 INSC 2187 March 2018Dismissed

The Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (GSRTC) and the Union of its workers entered into a settlement on 21‑12‑1989, wherein Clause 20 prescribed that Badali Kamdars would be regularised and absorbed into the permanent conductor cadre after completing 180 days of continuous service in that cadre. Several Badali K

FARIDABAD COMPLEX ADMINISTRATIONversusM/S IRON MASTER INDIA (P) LTD.

2017 INSC 2047 March 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The municipal corporation (Faridabad Complex Administration) appealed to the Supreme Court against the High Court of Punjab and Haryana's dismissal of its second appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The corporation sought to overturn a decree that had upheld a suit filed by MIS Iron Master Ind

MOHAN KUMARversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.

2017 INSC 2057 March 2017

Mohan Kumar purchased land in 1941 and later the State and municipal authorities constructed temples, latrines and other structures on it. The Collector ordered removal of the encroachments and suggested allotting alternate land, but the valuation of the appellant’s land (Rs 150 per sq m) was lower than that of the pro

ONGC MANGALORE PETROCHEMICALS LTD.versusM/S ANS CONSTRUCTIONS LTD. & ANR.

2018 INSC 1117 February 2018Appeal(s) allowed

ONGC Mangalore Petrochemicals Ltd. awarded a construction contract to ANS Constructions Ltd. The contractor paid the final bill of Rs.20.34 crore after receiving a No Dues/No Claim Certificate on 21 September 2012. The contractee later withdrew the certificate on 24 October 2012 alleging it was obtained under duress an

THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESHversusTRIBHUWAN & ORS.

2017 INSC 10786 November 2017Case Partly allowed

In 1980 a violent altercation in Azamgarh resulted in the death of Ram Lagan and injuries to Baij Nath. Six persons, including Tribhuwan, were tried; Tribhuwan was convicted under Section 325 IPC read with Section 149 and sentenced to four years rigorous imprisonment by the Sessions Court. The Allahabad High Court uphe

SURESH KUMAR THROUGH GPAversusANIL KAKARIA & ORS.

2017 INSC 10776 November 2017Dismissed

The appellant, Suresh Kumar, claimed that an agreement dated 24‑04‑1980 and a purported will of the original allottee, Ved Prakash Kakaria, entitled him to purchase a 114‑acre plot allotted by HUDA. After Kakaria's death, his heirs (respondents 1‑3) sold the land to respondent 4, prompting the appellant to file a suit

ADIVEPPA & ORSversusBHIMAPPA & ANR.

2017 INSC 8626 September 2017Dismissed

The appellants, nephews of the deceased family head, sued their uncle and aunt seeking a declaration that certain agricultural lands (Schedules B and C) were self‑acquired and a partition of other lands (Schedule D) claimed to be ancestral. The respondents contended that all the lands were ancestral and that an oral pa

MRS. A. KANTHAMANIversusMRS. NASREEN AHMED

2017 INSC 2026 March 2017Dismissed

The appellant, owner of a Chennai property, entered into a sale agreement with the respondent on 5 March 1989, received more than 50% of the purchase price and promised to execute the sale deed by 31 December 1989. The appellant later refused to execute the deed, prompting the respondent to file a suit for specific per

UNION OF INDIA & ANR.versusPUSHPAVATHI & ORS. ETC.

2018 INSC 1036 February 2018Dismissed

The Union of India acquired land in Pondicherry for a university and determined compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Some landowners, dissatisfied with the compensation, obtained a higher award from a civil court under Section 18, after which the Collector re‑determined compensation but refused to pay sta

HARBANSLAL MALHOTRA & SONS PVT. LTD.versusKOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPN. & ANR.

2017 INSC 8545 September 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Harbanslal Malhotra & Sons Pvt Ltd owned a two‑storey building with appurtenant land and was assessed for municipal tax under the Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act, 1980. The Assessing Officer fixed the annual valuation at Rs 59,400 for AY 1988‑89 and Rs 4,25,600 for AY 1994‑95. The Municipal Assessment Tribunal uphel

S. N. D. P. SAKHAYOGAMversusKERALA ATMAVIDYA SANGHAM

2017 INSC 8535 September 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff, a charitable society, filed a suit against another society and a person seeking a declaration that a sale deed concerning a piece of land was void. The plaintiff applied to the trial court for permission to prosecute the suit in a representative capacity under Order I Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedur

MAHARAJA AMRINDER SINGHversusTHE COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX

2017 INSC 8525 September 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Maharaja Amrinder Singh, a wealth‑tax assessee, challenged the High Court’s order that set aside the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal’s decision in his favour and restored a penalty assessment for the years 1981‑84. The revenue had appealed to the High Court under Section 27‑A of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957, which the Suprem

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.versusKISHOR M. GADHAVE PATIL & ORS.

2017 INSC 8595 September 2017Disposed off

The State of Maharashtra appointed fifteen advocates as Additional Government Pleaders, Assistant Government Pleaders or Additional Public Prosecutors for the Aurangabad Bench of the High Court. On 28 August 2015 the State cancelled these appointments under Rule 30(5) of the Maharashtra Law Officers (Appointments, Cond

M/S RAPTAKOS, BRETT & CO. LTD.versusM/S GANESH PROPERTY

2017 INSC 8575 September 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, MIS Rapta­kos, Brett & Co. Ltd., occupied premises leased to it until 1985. The respondent, Mis Ganesh Property, sued for possession and mesne profits in 1986; the court decreed possession in its favour but declined the mesne‑profit claim because the respondent did not press it. Subsequent appeals allowe

SIDDALINGAYYAversusGURI. LINGAPPA & ORS.

2017 INSC 8555 September 2017Dismissed

Siddalingayya sued the respondents for Rs 45,000 damages alleging illegal demolition of his construction. The respondents failed to file a written statement within the time fixed, and the trial court refused to extend the deadline, proceeding to decree in favour of the plaintiff. The respondents appealed, and the High

AJAYINDER SANGWAN AND ORS.versusBAR COUNCIL OF DELHI & ORS.

2018 INSC 975 February 2018Disposed off

The Supreme Court disposed of a series of interlocutory applications filed in the matter of Ajayinder Sangwan v. Bar Council of Delhi concerning the conduct of Bar Council elections across several states. The Court upheld the Bar Council of India's constitution of committees to oversee elections, rejecting a request to

AJAYINDER SANGWAN AND ORS.versusK. K. MOHAN

2018 INSC 985 February 2018Dismissed

The petitioners, Ajayinder Sangwan and others, filed a contempt petition under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, alleging that the Bar Council of India (BCI) willfully disobeyed Supreme Court orders dated 14 December 2017, 23 August 2017 and 24 November 2017 concerning the election schedule for State Bar Councils. The

DINESHBHAI CHANDUBHAI PATELversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

2018 INSC 55 January 2018Disposed off

The complainants, members of a Rathore family, alleged that Dineshbhai Patel and others fraudulently obtained bogus powers of attorney and transferred their jointly owned land in Surat. Three separate complaints led to the registration of an FIR on 6 June 2016, charging offences under the IPC and the Scheduled Castes a

NATIONAL KAMGAR UNIONversusKRAN RADER PVT. LTD. & ORS.

2018 INSC 35 January 2018Disposed off

The National Kamgar Union (appellant) challenged the closure of Kran Rader Pvt. Ltd.'s manufacturing unit, alleging that more than 100 workers were employed and that the employer failed to comply with Section 25-K of Chapter VB of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Industrial Court had held that 115 workers were em

OM PRAKASHversusRELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE AND ANR.

2017 INSC 10014 October 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant insured a truck with Reliance General Insurance, which was stolen on 23 March 2010. While assisting police in the search, the appellant delayed filing the insurance claim until 31 March 2010, citing an eight‑day gap due to police involvement. The insurer rejected the claim on the basis of a policy conditi

RAJASTHAN WAKF BOARDversusDEVKI NANDAN PATHAK & ORS.

2017 INSC 4394 May 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The Rajasthan Wakf Board filed an appeal against a High Court order that set aside a Wakf Tribunal decree declaring a disputed parcel of land to be Wakf property. The dispute centered on whether the suit land was part of the "Kauria Wali Masjid" Wakf and, if so, whether its sale by a non‑Wakf party was void under the W

THE DIRECTOR, PRASAR BHARATIversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THIRUVANTHAPURAM

2018 INSC 2983 April 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The Director, Prasar Bharati (Doordarshan) entered into agreements with several advertising agencies, paying them a 15% commission on advertising revenue for the assessment years 2002‑03 and 2003‑04. The Assessing Officer held that the payments fell within the definition of "commission" under Section 194H of the Income

SMT. SHAKUNTALA BAI & ORS.versusMR. MAHAVEER PRASAD

2015 INSC 4692 July 2015Dismissed

The deceased Kanhaiya Lal executed three wills, the last dated 15 November 1978, bequeathing his property to his adopted son Mahaveer Prasad. The non‑adopted family members challenged the 1978 will as a forgery and claimed the earlier registered will of 23 December 1974 was the last valid testament. The trial court hel

MURUGANversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2018 INSC 4402 May 2018Dismissed

The appellant Murugan was convicted under Sections 364 and 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC for the murder of his father-in-law, Murugan, after the main accused Kumar, who had a motive to marry Kumar's daughter, invited the victim for dinner and killed him. The prosecution proved a motive, the invitation, the dinner

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAIversusS. AJIT KUMAR

2018 INSC 4392 May 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The Revenue (Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai) conducted a search of the assessee S. Ajit Kumar’s premises on 17 July 2002 and, on the same day, a survey of the builder, Elegant Constructions and Interiors Ltd., whose premises revealed a cash payment of Rs 95.16 lakhs that had not been accounted for. The Assessing O

CHILAMKURTI BALA SUBRAHMANYAMversusSAMANTHAPUDI VIJAYA LAKSHMI & ANR.

2017 INSC 4272 May 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an auction purchaser, bought a schedule property attached in execution of a decree for a loan granted by State Bank of India to the judgment debtor, Samanthapudi Vijaya Lakshmi. The property was proclaimed for sale on 5 October 1999, a 15‑day notice was issued, and the auction was held on 17 November 199

MODERN DENTAL COLLEGE AND RESEARCH CENTRE & ORS.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.

2016 INSC 2672 May 2016Dismissed

The appellants, a group of private unaided medical and dental colleges, challenged the Madhya Pradesh Niji Vyavasayik Shikshan Sanstha (Pravesh Ka Vinimayan Avam Shulk Ka Nirdharan) Act, 2007 and the accompanying admission and fee fixation rules, alleging that the provisions on common entrance test (CET), fee regulatio

CAMPAIGN FOR JUDICIAL ACCOUNTABILITY AND REFORMSversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2017 INSC 10911 December 2017Dismissed

The Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms filed a public‑interest litigation seeking a writ of mandamus directing the Supreme Court to constitute a Special Investigation Team, headed by a retired Chief Justice of India, to probe an FIR (RCIO(A)/2017‑AC.III) alleging conspiracy and bribes to obtain a favourab

KUNDAN LAL & ANR.versusKAMRUDDIN & ANR.

2016 INSC 10871 December 2016Dismissed

The plaintiff, Kamruddin, sued for possession of a 120‑sq‑yd property (Khasra No. 270) alleging he was a tenant of the Punjab Wakf Board since April 1990. He claimed the defendants illegally occupied the land while he was away during communal riots. The defendants argued they had taken possession from a person named Sh

RAMVILAS (DEAD) THR. LRS. & ANR.versusKARIM KHAN & ANR.

2016 INSC 10851 December 2016Dismissed

The respondent-plaintiff obtained a loan from the appellants and executed a deed titled a Sale Deed on 14‑06‑1972, which was later alleged to be a mortgage by conditional sale. The parties also signed an agreement that the sale would be cancelled and the land returned if the loan (Rs.5,000) was repaid by 14‑06‑1973; th

APPARAJU MALHAR RAOversusTULA VENKATAIAH@ VENKAT RAO (DEAD) & ORS.

2017 INSC 8421 September 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff filed a suit for perpetual injunction over a parcel of land, which the trial court decreed in his favour. The defendants successfully appealed, and the first appellate court set aside the trial court decree. The plaintiff then filed a second appeal before the High Court, which restored the trial court dec

CHANDRA BHAWAN SINGHversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2018 INSC 4351 May 2018Dismissed

The case involved the murder of Satyawati, who was allegedly killed by her in‑laws for refusing to pay dowry. Four family members were tried; Jwala Singh was acquitted while Tribhuwan Singh, Makoi Devi and Chandra Bhawan Singh were convicted by the trial court. The High Court upheld the convictions of Tribhuwan Singh a

UNION OF INDIAversusHARDY EXPLORATION AND PRODUCTION (INDIA) INC

2018 INSC 8651 May 2018Directions issued

The Union of India challenged an international commercial arbitration award in favour of Hardy Exploration and Production (India) Inc. by filing an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The respondent argued that Indian courts lacked jurisdiction because the arbitration agreement s

ARUN KUMARversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

2017 INSC 4191 May 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, son of the deceased, challenged the acquittal of four accused persons charged with murder, attempt to murder and rioting under Sections 302, 34, 201 and 307 IPC. The trial court had acquitted all accused despite the prosecution's evidence from 13 witnesses. The High Court dismissed the appeal without a d

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