Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

RANJAN GOGOI

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

AMIT VASHISTHAversusSURESH AND ANOTHER

2017 INSC 83631 August 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner lodged a complaint under Section 228 of the Indian Penal Code alleging that the respondent, Suresh, assaulted the presiding officer during an adjudication proceeding under Section 7A of the Employees Provident Funds & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. The magistrate convicted

INDRA VIJAY ALOKversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2015 INSC 62031 August 2015Dismissed

The appellant, a Patwari, was accused of demanding bribes to effect a mutation of land records. The complainant testified that the Patwari first demanded Rs.1900, of which Rs.900 was paid by his mother, and later demanded an additional Rs.1000, which the complainant paid and was later recovered from the Patwari during

R. SUBRAMANIAMversusMURUGAPPA GOUNDER AND ORS.

2014 INSC 91731 January 2014Appeal(s) allowed

In a contempt proceeding before the Madras High Court, Respondents tendered an unconditional apology in the form of an affidavit, which the Single Judge accepted. Despite this acceptance, the Judge directed the Principal Secretary & Commissioner of Land Administration to initiate appropriate action against the contemno

BIR SINGHversusDELHI JAL BOARD & ORS.

2018 INSC 76630 August 2018Reference answered

The Supreme Court examined whether the Presidential Orders under Articles 341 and 342, which list Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) for each State or Union Territory (UT), limit a State or UT's power under Article 16(4) to provide reservation for backward classes. It held that reservation must be confined

ASHIQ HUSSAIN FAKTOOversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2016 INSC 63030 August 2016Dismissed

The petitioner, Ashiq Hussain Faktoo, was convicted by the Supreme Court in 2003 under TADA and the IPC for murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. Review and curative petitions filed earlier were dismissed. He subsequently filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking release on the ground of the doctrine of ex de

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (IMPORT), MUMBAIversusM/S. DILIP KUMAR AND COMPANY & ORS.

2018 INSC 64630 July 2018Reference answered

The case concerned the interpretation of Customs Notification No. 20/1999, under which the respondents claimed a concessional customs duty rate for imported vitamin E50 feed powder. The Customs department denied the benefit, classifying the goods under a higher duty heading, leading to a series of appeals up to the Sup

PATEL FIELD MARSHAL AGENCIES AND ANR.versusP.M. DIESELS LTD. AND ANR.

2017 INSC 115729 November 2017Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined a dispute over the trademark "Field Marshal" where the plaintiff sought injunction against the defendants for alleged infringement. The defendants challenged the validity of the plaintiff's trademark and filed rectification applications under the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958. The key

MOHAMMAD SADIQUEversusDARBARA SINGH GURU

2016 INSC 35529 April 2016Appeal(s) allowed

In the 2012 Punjab Legislative Assembly election, Mohammad Sadique was elected from the Bhadaur constituency, which is reserved for Scheduled Castes (SC). The election petitioner, Darbara Singh Guru, challenged Sadique's election on the ground that Sadique, being born to Muslim parents, could not claim SC status and th

GOA FOUNDATION & ANR.versusSTATE OF GOA & ANR.

2016 INSC 28129 March 2016Dismissed

The State of Goa acquired land for a tourism project and entered into an agreement under Section 41 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, which contained a clause prohibiting any construction on the acquired land. The hotel company later constructed a building, leading the Bombay High Court to order demolition, an order a

JABAL C. LASHKARI & ORS.versusOFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR & ORS.

2016 INSC 28029 March 2016Disposed off

The appellants, heirs of Durgaprasad Lashkari, sought to prevent the Official Liquidator from selling a 199‑year leasehold property of Prasad Mills Ltd., which was under winding‑up. The High Court held that the landlord could not evict on the ground of non‑payment of rent because the secured creditors were ready and wi

M/S. KOTHARI INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION LTD.versusTAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD & ANR.

2016 INSC 10429 January 2016Dismissed

M/s Kothari Industrial Corporation Ltd and other industrial units set up caustic soda plants in Tamil Nadu and were promised a concessional electricity tariff for the first five years by a government letter dated 29‑06‑1976. After the Tamil Nadu Revision of Tariff Rates on Supply of Electrical Energy Act, 1978 came int

PAWAN KUMAR & ANR. ETC.versusM/S HARKISHAN DASS MOHAN LAL & ORS

2014 INSC 6229 January 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The claimants, passengers in a jeep that collided with a fleeing truck, sought compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 after two of them were killed and one injured. The High Court held both the truck and the jeep responsible but apportioned liability 70% to the truck driver/owner and 30% to the jeep driver/own

LAXMIDHAR NAYAK AND ORS.versusJU GAL KISH ORE BEHERA AND ORS.

2017 INSC 115028 November 2017Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court considered an appeal by the sons and daughter of Chanchali Nayak, an agricultural labourer who died in a head‑on collision between a bus and a truck. The tribunal had awarded Rs 70,600 as compensation based on a monthly income of Rs 650 and a multiplier of 12, which the High Court affirmed but reduced

HEMUDAN NANBHA GADHVIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2018 INSC 90928 September 2018Dismissed

The appellant was convicted under IPC s.376(2)(f) for sexually assaulting a nine‑year‑old girl. The victim initially identified the appellant in a test identification parade (TIP) but later turned hostile and refused dock identification. The High Court upheld the conviction on the basis of the FIR, medical report, seme

MAR KOORILOS (DEAD) AND ANR. ETC.versusM. PAPPY (DEAD) AND ANOTHER ETC.

2018 INSC 75028 August 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, the Metropolitan of Quilon Diocese and a Vicar appointed by him, sued the parishioners of St. Mary's Church, Kattachira, seeking a declaration that they alone have the right to conduct religious services and manage the church and its cemetery, based on an assignment‑cum‑gift deed (Ext‑A3). The trial cou

SAMAJ PARIVARTANA SAMUDAYA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.

2017 INSC 81628 August 2017Disposed off

The Supreme Court considered an interlocutory application filed by the Federation of Indian Industries (Southern Region) seeking permission to sell iron‑ore and manganese‑ore in Karnataka without the e‑auction mechanism overseen by the Court‑appointed Monitoring Committee. The Court examined the past experience of ille

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, UJJAIN & ANR.versusBVG INDIA LIMITED AND ORS.

2018 INSC 26828 March 2018Disposed off

The Supreme Court delivered a judgment on 27 March 2018 in Municipal Corporation, Ujjain & Anr. v. BVG India Ltd. & Ors., allowing Civil Appeals Nos. 3330 and 3331 and dismissing Appeal No. 3332. After the judgment was reported, counsel for the appellant pointed out a typographic omission: the dismissal of Appeal 3332

HIMACHAL PRADESH FINANCIAL CORPORATIONversusANIL GARG AND OTHERS

2017 INSC 27728 March 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The Himachal Pradesh Financial Corporation (HPFC) sought recovery of two defaulted loans from Anil Garg and others. HPFC had earlier filed a money suit which was withdrawn in order to pursue faster recovery under the Himachal Pradesh Public Moneys (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1973. The respondent filed multiple writ petitio

SAHYADRI CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

2016 INSC 27728 March 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Sahyadri Co‑operative Credit Society Ltd. and Navhind Co‑operative Credit Society Ltd., had advanced loans to sugar factories Daulat Shetkari Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. and Tasgaonkar Sugar Mills Ltd. and obtained a pledge over sugar stock as security. When the factories defaulted, the Commissioner o

ADJUDICATING OFFICER, SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIAversusBHAVESH PABARI

2019 INSC 28928 February 2019Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the scope of Sections 15‑J and 15‑A to 15‑HA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 in a series of appeals arising from penalties imposed on Bhavesh Pabari, Shree Radhe and other respondents for violations of SEBI regulations. The principal issue was whether the factors liste

STATE OF M.P. & ANR.versusKEDIA GREAT GALEON LTD. & ANR.

2017 INSC 126728 February 2017Disposed off

The State of Madhya Pradesh issued a notice under Rule 4(41) of the Madhya Pradesh Distillery Rules, 1995 demanding Rs 13,24,189.50 as excess establishment charges from Kedia Great Galeon Ltd. for the years 1995‑96 to 1997‑98. The licensee filed a writ petition challenging the demand, relying on the Supreme Court's dec

LAL BABU PRIYADARSHIversusAMRITPAL SINGH

2015 INSC 103627 October 2015Dismissed

The appellant sought registration of the word "RAMAYAN" with a crown device for incense sticks, which the respondent opposed on the ground that the term is the title of a Hindu holy book. The Assistant Registrar dismissed the opposition, but the Intellectual Property Appellate Board set aside that order, prompting the

COMMON CAUSE : A REGISTERED SOCIETYversusUNION OF INDIA

2017 INSC 40827 April 2017Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined writ petitions filed by Common Cause and other NGOs seeking a declaration that Rule 10(1) and Rule 10(4)(i) of the Search Committee Rules, 2014 were ultra vires the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013 and that the appointment process for the Lokpal should be stayed until the pending Amendment Bil

JUST SOCIETYversusUNION OF INDIA

2017 INSC 41027 April 2017Dismissed

The petitioners, a society, challenged several provisions of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013, alleging they violated Articles 14 and 50 of the Constitution. The main contentions were that the Chief Justice of India or his nominee, as a mere member of the selection committee, should have primacy in appointing the Lo

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, UJJAIN & ANR.versusBVG INDIA LIMITED AND ORS.

2018 INSC 26827 March 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The Ujjain Municipal Corporation issued a two‑envelope tender for a 10‑year door‑to‑door municipal solid‑waste collection contract. Global Waste Management Cell Private Limited (GWMC) obtained the highest technical‑financial score (84.36) and was awarded the contract. Unsuccessful bidder BVG India Ltd. challenged the a

SATYA PAL ANANDversusSTATE OF M.P. & ORS.

2016 INSC 98826 October 2016Dismissed

The appellant, Satya Pal Anand, claimed inheritance of a plot allotted to his mother by a housing cooperative society, which after her death unilaterally executed and registered an Extinguishment Deed cancelling the allotment. He entered into a compromise deed receiving Rs.6.5 lakh, but also filed a dispute under the M

NAVJOT SINGH SIDHUversusOM PARKASH SONI & ORS.

2016 INSC 99026 October 2016Case Partly allowed

The 2009 Lok Sabha election for Amritsar was challenged in an election petition alleging three categories of corrupt practice: excess election expenditure on newspaper advertisements, excessive spending on public meetings, and assistance from a gazetted officer, along with a grievance about the Returning Officer's hand

JAGJIT SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2018 INSC 88326 September 2018Dismissed

Jagjit Singh was convicted under Section 304‑B IPC for dowry death after his wife and child drowned within seven years of marriage. The trial court and the Punjab and Haryana High Court upheld the conviction, reducing the sentence to seven years. The appellant appealed to the Supreme Court under Article 136, arguing la

UCO BANK AND ANR.versusDIPAK DEBBARMA & ORS.

2016 INSC 106425 November 2016Appeal(s) allowed

UCO Bank issued a sale notification under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 to auction mortgaged property. The borrowers, members of Scheduled Tribes, challenged the sale alleging that Section 187 of the Tripura Land Revenue and Land Reforms Act, 19

ASSOCIATE BUILDERSversusDELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

2014 INSC 80925 November 2014Appeal(s) allowed

Associate Builders entered into a construction contract with the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) for a housing project. After completing only part of the work, the contractor filed 15 claims for overheads, damages and price escalations, which were largely awarded by an arbitrator. The Single Judge of the Delhi High C

NARINDER SINGHversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2014 INSC 50925 July 2014Dismissed

The appellant, Narinder Singh, was accused of offering a bribe of Rs.10,000 to the Additional District Magistrate of Bharmour to obtain supply orders for double‑decker beds. The trial court acquitted him, but the High Court set aside that judgment, convicted him under Section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 198

AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKETING COMMITIEEversusBANNAMA (D) BY LRS.

2014 INSC 50825 July 2014Dismissed

Bannama, an elderly agriculturist, claimed a 7‑acre plot as her stridhan and sued for declaration of title and possession after her son, Nagi Reddy, fraudulently had the land mutated in his name and sold it to the Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee. The trial court and the Karnataka High Court held that Bannama w

MAYA DEVI (D) THROUGH LRS & ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA & ANR.

2018 INSC 6625 January 2018Case Partly allowed

The appellants challenged the compensation awarded for land acquired by the Haryana State Ware Housing Corporation under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The High Court had used a post‑notification sale deed (dated 27‑12‑1988) as an exemplar and applied a 67.5% deduction for development charges, arriving at Rs.2,19,413

UNITED LNDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.versusSUNIL KUMAR & ANR.

2017 INSC 114324 November 2017Hearing Adjourned

The appeal concerned a claim for compensation under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, filed by Sunil Kumar against United India Insurance Co. Ltd. The insurer attempted to defend the claim by alleging negligence of the driver/owner of the vehicle. The Supreme Court examined whether such a defence is permiss

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX IIversusM/S MODJPON LTD.

2017 INSC 114024 November 2017Dismissed

The Commissioner of Income Tax appealed against the orders of the Delhi and Punjab & Haryana High Courts which allowed M/s Modipon Ltd. to claim a deduction under Section 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the balance amount in its Personal Ledger Account (PLA) representing advance deposits of central excise duty. The

NEVADA PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH ITS DIRECTORversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

2019 INSC 107724 September 2019Reference answered

The Supreme Court examined whether the phrase “any property” in Section 102 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 includes immovable property. It held that the provision confers power only to seize movable property, as the word “seize” implies taking physical custody, which is impossible for immovable assets. The Cou

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusM. SELVAKUMAR & ANR.

2017 INSC 7224 January 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appeals challenged High Court orders that had granted physically‑handicapped candidates belonging to the OBC category three additional attempts in the Civil Services Examination, on the ground that the Government’s policy of increasing attempts for physically‑handicapped candidates of the General category from four

RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.versusSHASHI SHARMA & ORS.

2016 INSC 90923 September 2016Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether amounts paid to the dependents of a deceased government employee under the Haryana Compassionate Assistance Rules, 2006 should be deducted from compensation awarded under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for a fatal motor accident. The Court reiterated that compensation must be "just and

BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITEDversusVODAFONE ESSAR GUJARAT LIMITED

2016 INSC 90623 September 2016Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined multiple appeals filed by Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. (BSNL) against Vodafone Essar Gujarat Ltd., Bharti Airtel Ltd., and Tata Teleservices Ltd. concerning demands for interconnect usage charges on calls that allegedly lacked authentic Caller Line Identification (CLI). BSNL relied on a Departme

DHAL SINGH DEWANGANversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2016 INSC 90523 September 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Dhal Singh Dewangan was accused of murdering his wife and five daughters. The prosecution relied on statements of village witnesses (PWs 1,2,3,5) that they heard the appellant’s mother (PW‑6) accuse him, and on circumstantial evidence such as the presence of a blood‑stained knife and the appellant’s uncon

BHASKAR SHRACHI ALLOYS LTD. ETC.ETC.versusDAMODAR VALLEY CORPORATION & ORS. ETC.

2018 INSC 62923 July 2018Dismissed

The Damodar Valley Corporation (DVC), incorporated under the 1948 Act, had notified its own tariff before the Electricity Act, 2003 came into force. After the 2003 Act, the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) issued a tariff order, which DVC challenged before the Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal held that

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIAversusKISHORE R. AJMERA

2016 INSC 20123 February 2016Disposed off

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) appealed against several brokers and sub‑brokers, including Kishore R. Ajmera, for alleged manipulative and fraudulent trading in illiquid securities. The issues centered on whether the brokers could be held liable and penalised under the SEBI Act and its regulations de

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, BANK SECURITIES & FRAUD CELLversusRAMESH GELLI AND OTHERS

2016 INSC 13423 February 2016Case Partly allowed

The Central Bureau of Investigation appealed against orders that held the Chairman‑cum‑Managing Director and Executive Director of Global Trust Bank (a private bank before its 2004 amalgamation with Oriental Bank of Commerce) were not public servants for purposes of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act). The

OM AGGARWALversusHARYANA FINANCIAL CORPORATION AND OTHERS

2015 INSC 14723 February 2015Dismissed

The appellant, a promoter of a limited company, entered into a buy‑back agreement with Haryana Financial Corporation, which later issued a recovery notice under the Haryana Public Moneys (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1979 claiming arrears of land revenue. The appellant filed a civil suit seeking declaration that the agreemen

ISSAC @ KISHORversusRONALD CHERIYAN AND ORS.

2018 INSC 4823 January 2018Dismissed

The case involved the murder of a widow, Brijitha, during a robbery. Accused No.1 (the appellant) was living with the deceased and was arrested after giving a disclosure statement that led to the arrest of Accused No.2, who was later convicted of murder and robbery. The trial court acquitted Accused No.1, holding that

GULF GOANS HOTELS CO. LTD. & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2014 INSC 65622 September 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, owners of hotels and beach resorts in Goa, challenged demolition orders based on a series of government "guidelines" that prohibited construction within 500 metres of the high tide line. The Supreme Court examined whether these guidelines, issued between 1981 and 1986, qualified as law enforceable under

UNION OF INDIAversusBOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET IN INDIA & ORS.

2017 INSC 78622 August 2017Dismissed

The Union of India challenged the re‑telecast of live cricket feeds, shared by Star India and ESPN with Prasar Bharati under Section 3 of the Sports Broadcasting Signals (Mandatory Sharing with Prasar Bharati) Act, 2007, by cable operators under Section 8 of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995. The pet

TOLYA ETC.versusSTATE OF M.P. & ANR. ETC.

2014 INSC 55922 August 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were allotted surplus agricultural land by the State of Madhya Pradesh in 1973 under Section 35 of the Madhya Pradesh Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1960, which conferred Bhumiswami rights. Within two years they purportedly sold the land to the respondent by a deed that the appellants claim was wi

VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITYversusASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

2016 INSC 33222 April 2016Dismissed

Visvesvaraya Technological University (VTU) claimed exemption from income tax under Section 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Income Tax Act for assessment years 2004‑05 to 2009‑10, asserting that it is an educational institution solely for education and wholly or substantially financed by the Government. The university generated

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.versusSARVA SHRAMIK SANGH, SANGLI AND ORS.

2013 INSC 70821 October 2013Disposed off

The State of Maharashtra terminated the services of 256 workmen employed on 25 lift‑irrigation schemes after transferring the schemes to a sugar factory. The workmen claimed entitlement to reinstatement and backwages, arguing that the termination was a breach of Section 25N of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, while t

AVTAR SINGHversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2017 INSC 111621 July 2016Reference answered

The petitioners challenged the cancellation of their appointments and termination of service on the ground that they had either omitted or misrepresented information about criminal prosecutions, arrests, convictions or pendency of cases in the verification forms required for recruitment. The Supreme Court was asked to

SAMAJ PARIVARTANA SAMUDAYA & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.

2017 INSC 24121 March 2017Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered two interlocutory applications arising from its earlier orders directing the State of Karnataka to set up a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) and a Comprehensive Environment Plan for the Mining Impact Zone (CEPMIZ) to remediate the massive environmental damage caused by illegal iron‑ore mining

BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON LONDON BRANCHversusZENITH INFOTECH LIMITED

2017 INSC 16521 February 2017Disposed off

Zenith Infotech Ltd filed a reference under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 before the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR). The Registrar of the Board refused to register the reference on the ground that the company was not an "industrial company" within the meaning of

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIAversusSHRI KANAIYALAL BALDEVBHAI PATEL

2017 INSC 96320 September 2017Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether non‑intermediary front‑running—where a person receives confidential information about a forthcoming large block trade and trades ahead of it—constitutes a prohibited fraudulent or unfair trade practice under SEBI’s Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices Regulations, 2003

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHERversusRAGINI NARAYAN AND ANOTHER

2016 INSC 89120 September 2016Dismissed

The case concerned a declaration suit filed by Ragini Narayan seeking to be recognized as the Donor Trustee of the B.M.S. Educational Trust after the death of her husband, the original Donor Trustee B.S. Narayan. The dispute centered on a 1994 amendment to the trust deed that provided for succession by the senior most

AKALAKUNNAM VILLAGE SERVICE CO-OP. BANK LTD. AND ANOTHERversusBINU N. AND OTHERS

2014 INSC 55120 August 2014Dismissed

The Akalakunnam Village Service Co‑op Bank issued a notification to fill one Attender and three Peon posts, reserving one for SC/ST candidates, and conducted a written test and interview. Three applicants filed a writ petition challenging the notification, alleging non‑compliance with Rule 182(5) of the Kerala Co‑opera

RAMESH CHILWAL @ BOMBAYYAversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2012 INSC 29520 July 2012Disposed off

Ramesh Chilwal was convicted of murder under IPC s.302, offences under the Gangsters Act s.213 and the Arms Act s.27, and sentenced to life imprisonment, ten years rigorous imprisonment, and seven years rigorous imprisonment respectively, along with fines and compensation. The High Court affirmed these convictions and

VIJAY JAINversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2013 INSC 37020 June 2013Appeal(s) allowed

Vijay Jain and co‑accused were convicted under Section 8/21(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act for alleged possession of brown sugar seized during a police raid. The trial court and the High Court held that the seized contraband had been produced in court, despite the fact that the brown su

NEW INDIAASSURANCE CO. LTD.versusDR. SUKANTA KUMAR BEHERA & ORS.

2015 INSC 14220 February 2015Case Partly allowed

Dr. Sukanta Kumar Behera, a senior medical officer, suffered a motor vehicle accident on 9 September 2001 resulting in 60% permanent disability and multiple injuries. The insurer, New India Assurance Co. Ltd., appealed the High Court of Orissa's award of Rs.55,00,000 without any computation. The Supreme Court examined

RAJ KUMAR@ RAJUversusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI)

2017 INSC 5620 January 2017Case Partly allowed

The deceased woman was found dead with her jewellery missing; the appellant had been present in her house the night before the incident and was later arrested with the missing ornaments recovered from his possession. The prosecution relied solely on circumstantial evidence – the appellant’s presence, a "last seen" test

A.M. SANGAPPA @ SANGAPPAversusSANGONDEPPA & ANR.

2013 INSC 75919 November 2013Disposed off

The appellant, A.M. Sangappa, challenged a judgment of the Karnataka High Court in a regular first appeal (RFA No. 238 of 2004). The issue was whether the High Court had complied with the procedural requirements of Order 41 Rule 31 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which obliges a court hearing a regular first appe

SMT. SHAMIMversusSTATE (GNCT OF DELHI)

2018 INSC 83319 September 2018Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Shamim, was convicted for the murders of Pappu and Anisha under Sections 302, 307 and 34 of the IPC after the High Court reversed her trial‑court acquittal. The prosecution relied heavily on the testimony of the appellant's own daughter, who alleged that her mother had threatened the family and later adm

AVISHEK RAJA & ORS.versusSANJAY GUPTA

2017 INSC 48819 June 2017Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a large group of contempt petitions filed by newspaper establishments alleging that they had failed to implement the Majithia Wage Board Award, which had been upheld by the Court in a 2014 judgment. The petitioners claimed wilful disobedience of the award, seeking civil contempt under Section

KANCHAN UDYOG LIMITEDversusUNITED SPIRITS LIMITED

2017 INSC 48019 June 2017Dismissed

Kanchan Udyog Ltd. entered into a bottling agreement with United Spirits Ltd. for a non‑alcoholic beverage plant, relying on the respondent to supply concentrate. The agreement was terminated by United Spirits in March 1988 and the plant ceased operations in May 1989. The appellant claimed damages for loss of anticipat

ALLOKAM PEDDABBAYYA AND ANOTHERversusALLAHABAD BANK AND OTHERS

2017 INSC 48119 June 2017Dismissed

Allokam Peddabbayya and another bought a property in 1985 that was under an equitable mortgage created in 1979 by Defendants 3 and 4 in favour of Allahabad Bank. The bank foreclosed on the loan, obtained a decree in 1991 and the property was auctioned in 1993, with a sale certificate issued to the auction purchaser (De

WARYAM STEEL CASTINGS PVT. LTD.versusPUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LTD. AND ANR.

2017 INSC 48519 June 2017Dismissed

The appellants, arc‑furnace industries established before June 1995, were required to shift their power supply from 11 kV to 66 kV or pay a surcharge of 17.5% under a 1995 circular. A 1999 circular exempted pre‑1995 units from both conversion and surcharge. After the Electricity Act, 2003 came into force, the Punjab St

STATE OF HARYANAversusEROS CITY DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS

2016 INSC 6219 January 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Haryana issued notifications under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to acquire 129 kanals 14 marlas of land in Lakarpur, Faridabad for the expansion and systematic development of the Surajkund Tourist Complex, including a parking area. Earlier acquisition attempts in 1992 were dropped aft

VIVEK BATRAversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2016 INSC 97118 October 2016Dismissed

Vivek Batra, an Indian Revenue Service officer, was investigated by the CBI for possessing assets disproportionate to his known income. After a six‑year investigation, the Finance Ministry sought and eventually received a sanction for his prosecution on 9 October 2012, following advice from the Central Vigilance Commis

STATE OF JAMMU.AND KASHMIRversusM/S. TRIKUTA ROLLER FLOUR MILLS PVT. LTD.

2017 INSC 77118 August 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Jammu & Kashmir issued a 1990 Government Order (GO) granting a 100% refund of Central Sales Tax (CST) to small‑scale industrial units for five years, which was later superseded by a 1993 GO restricting the refund. The respondents, M/s. Trikuta Roller Flour Mills, challenged the 1993 GO on the ground of pro

STATE OF KARNATAKAversusCOMMON CAUSE AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

2016 INSC 27118 March 2016Disposed off

The Supreme Court reviewed its earlier order dated 13 May 2015 that allowed publication of photographs of the President, Prime Minister and Chief Justice in government advertisements, subject to the authorities' decision. Upon hearing the parties, the Court extended the exception to include Governors and Chief Minister

SAFETY RETREADING COMPANY (P) LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, SALEM

2017 INSC 5418 January 2017Disposed off

Safety Retreading Company (P) Ltd entered into tyre retreading contracts and was assessed service tax on the total consideration, including material costs. The issue before the Supreme Court was whether service tax is payable on the entire amount or only on the service component as defined under the Finance Act, 1994.

MIS GANAPATHY & CO., BANGALOREversusTHE COMMISSIONER, INCOME TAX BANGALORE

2016 INSC 5218 January 2016Dismissed

Mis Ganapathy & Co. claimed deductions for service charges paid to Mis Universal Trading Company, a loss incurred in its film business, and a donation to Aparna Ashram. The Assessing Officer disallowed all three claims, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) reversed the disallowances, and the Karnataka High Court, e

ASSAM SANMILITA MAHASANGHA & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2014 INSC 87417 December 2014Directions issued

The Supreme Court examined writ petitions filed under Article 32 challenging the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, 1955, which was inserted to give effect to the Assam Accord. The petitioners, representing the people of Assam, argued that illegal migration from Bangladesh threatened the sove

DR. RAM LAKHAN SINGHversusSTATE GOVERNMENT OF UTTAR PRADESH THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY

2015 INSC 84117 November 2015Disposed off

Dr. Ram Lakhan Singh, a senior Indian Forest Service officer, was subjected to a vigilance enquiry, house raid and arrest without the prior approval of the Chief Secretary, as required by the State's procedural rules. The petitioner contended that the State violated his fundamental rights, unlawfully suspended him, and

BANK OF RAJASTHAN LTD.versusVCK SHARES & STOCK BROKING SERVICES LTD.

2014 INSC 64217 September 2014Matter referred to larger bench

The Supreme Court considered appeals by Bank of Rajasthan challenging the High Court's order that two civil suits filed by VCK Shares & Stock Broking Services be removed from the High Court's file. The bank had obtained a recovery certificate from the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) under Section 19 of the Recovery of Deb

THE STATE OF GUJARATversusNAVINBHAI CHANDRAKANT JOSHI ETC.

2018 INSC 61317 July 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Gujarat prosecuted two junior clerks for demanding and accepting a bribe in a trap operation to expedite a non‑agricultural land conversion. The complainant testified that J.D. Patel demanded Rs 1,000 (settled at Rs 500) and directed the complainant to hand the money to Navinbhai Joshi, whose shirt pocket

CENTURY METAL RECYCLING PVT. LTD. ANDversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2019 INSC 68317 May 2019Appeal(s) allowed

Century Metal Recycling Pvt. Ltd. regularly imported aluminium scrap for alloy production and declared a transaction value of Rs.81.31 per kg. The customs authorities rejected this value, citing a Valuation Alert and compelled the importer to consent to a valuation by the authorities, thereby waiving its right to provi

ABDUL KUDDUSversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2019 INSC 68417 May 2019Disposed off

The petitioners challenged a perceived conflict between sub‑paragraph (2) of paragraph 3 and paragraph 8 of the Schedule to the Citizenship (Registration of Citizens and Issue of National Identity Cards) Rules, 2003, contending that persons declared illegal migrants or foreigners could still appeal and be included in t

RAM SINGH & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA

2015 INSC 23117 March 2015Case Allowed

The Union Government issued a Gazette Notification on 4 March 2014 including the Jat community in the Central List of Other Backward Classes (OBC) for nine states, despite the National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC) advising against such inclusion. The petitioners challenged the notification, arguing that the N

UNITED BIOTECH PRIVATE LIMITEDversusORCHID CHEMICALS AND PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED AND ORS.

2018 INSC 3117 January 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court, hearing United Biotech Private Ltd's application, modified its earlier judgment dated 29 November 2017 concerning the interpretation of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958. The order substituted specific wording in paragraphs 13, 14 and 37 to correctly refer to the parties and the civil appeals

AHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONversusGTL INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. & ORS. ETC.

2016 INSC 115316 December 2016Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether Gujarat's municipal tax provisions could levy a tax on mobile telephone towers. The petitioners (Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation) argued that mobile towers are not "land or building" under Entry 49 of List II of the Seventh Schedule, rendering the tax ultra‑violet. The Court interpret

C.I.T. & ANRversusMIS YOKOGAWA INDIA LTD

2016 INSC 115216 December 2016

The Supreme Court examined the true nature of Section 1OA of the Income‑Tax Act, 1961, as amended by the Finance Acts of 2000 and 2003, to determine whether it confers an exemption or a deduction and at what stage the benefit should be applied. The Court considered whether the provision falls within the computation of

ADI SAIVA SIVACHARIYARGAL NALA SANGAM & ORS.versusTHE GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU &ANR.

2015 INSC 92916 December 2015Disposed off

The petitioners challenged a Government Order (G.O. No.118 dated 23‑05‑2006) that any Hindu with requisite qualifications could be appointed as an Archaka in Hindu temples, arguing that it violated Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution. The Court examined whether the appointment of Archakas must follow the prescriptio

K.B. RAMACHANDRA RAJE URS (DEAD) BY LRS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA& ORS. ETC.

2015 INSC 92816 December 2015Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the acquisition of 94 acres 28 gunthas of land in Vijayashreepura under the Mysore Improvement Act, 1903, which was used to allot 55 acres to JSS Mahavidyapeetha (respondent No.28). The Court found that the statutory requirement of a published scheme before issuing a preliminary notification

SHREYA VIDYARTHIversusASHOK VIDYARTHI & ORS.

2015 INSC 93416 December 2015Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined a dispute over a house purchased in 1961 by Rama Vidyarthi using insurance proceeds and other funds, questioning whether it was joint family property and how the shares should be apportioned. The appellant, Shreya Vidyarthi, argued that the High Court had decided the case ex‑parte and that a

MOHANLALversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB

2018 INSC 71416 August 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was convicted under Section 18 of the NDPS Act for possession of 4 kg of opium seized by a police Sub‑Inspector (PW‑1) who also acted as the informant. The investigation was riddled with irregularities: the informant‑officer retained the seized narcotics in private custody, failed to deposit them in the p

UNION OF INDIAversusM/S. AMBLCA CONSTRUCTION

2016 INSC 26516 March 2016Reference answered

The case concerned whether an arbitrator could award pendente lite interest when the underlying contract expressly barred interest on delayed payments. The dispute arose from a construction contract between the Union of India and M/s. Ambica Construction, which had undergone multiple arbitrations and court intervention

THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESHversusPARDEEP KUMAR ETC.

2018 INSC 16616 February 2018Appeal(s) allowed

On 27 January 2009, police stopped a car on the Manali‑Kullu highway and recovered a rucksack containing 18.85 kg of cannabis. The accused, Pardeep Kumar and another, were convicted under Section 20 read with Section 29 of the NDPS Act. The High Court acquitted them, holding that the prosecution failed to examine indep

SHAJAHANversusSTATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2018 INSC 15816 February 2018Case Partly allowed

The appellants were convicted under Section 396 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code for dacoity with murder after a robbery at a pawn‑broking shop in 2002, during which one victim was strangled. The trial court sentenced them to ten years' rigorous imprisonment, but the High Court enhanced the sentence to lif

UNION OF INDIAversusFACULTY ASSOCIATION OF ALLMS

[2014] 14 S.C.R. 165116 January 2014Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained review petitions filed by the Union of India challenging its earlier decision on reservation in faculty posts at AIIMS. The issue centered on whether Articles 15, 16 and 335 of the Constitution permit reservation in super‑specialty faculty positions. The Court clarified that the power to d

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusSHOBHA RAM

2013 INSC 3716 January 2013Disposed off

The State of Rajasthan prosecuted two brothers, A-1 and A-2, for murdering Trilokchand under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC, alleging a long‑standing dispute over a well. The trial court, relying on the sole eye‑witness PW‑6, convicted both brothers, holding that A‑1 threw stones while A‑2 sat on the victim’s chest, th

K.K.SHARMAversusHIGH COURT OF DELHI AND ORS.

2015 INSC 6315 December 2014Dismissed

The Supreme Court dismissed Civil Appeal No. 5838 of 2012 filed by K.K. Sharma and others against the High Court of Delhi’s orders dated 23 Oct 2009 and 1 Jun 2012. The High Court had been directed to implement a 1998 judgment that declared a 1988 amendment to the Delhi High Court Establishment Rules void for violating

VINAY PRAKASH SINGHversusSAMEER GEHLAUT & ORS.

2019 INSC 125115 November 2019Directions issued

The petitioner sought enforcement of a Singapore arbitral award of about Rs.3,500 crore against respondents who owned Fortis Healthcare. The Supreme Court had earlier ordered a status‑quo on 11 August 2017, clarified on 31 August 2017 and modified on 15 February 2018, prohibiting any change in the shareholding of Forti

THE STATE OF HARYANAAND OTHERSversusHINDUSTAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LTD.

2017 INSC 91315 September 2017Dismissed

The Haryana government assessed Hindustan Construction Co. for the 1998-99 year under the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 and ordered a refund in May 2000. The 1973 Act was repealed by the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003 on 1 April 2003, which saved only pending proceedings. In June 2004, the tax authority exerci

GOVINDASWAMYversusSTATE OF KERALA

2016 INSC 87015 September 2016Case Partly allowed

The appellant was convicted of murder (Sec. 302 IPC), rape (Sec. 376 IPC), robbery (Sec. 394 read with Sec. 397 IPC) and assault (Sec. 447 IPC) for the assault and death of a 23‑year‑old woman on a moving train. DNA evidence linked the appellant's seminal stains and blood to the victim, establishing the rape beyond dou

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusMAHARANI USHADEVI

2015 INSC 49715 July 2015Appeal(s) allowed

Maharani Ushadevi, claiming to be the heir of the former Maharaja of Holkar, filed a suit seeking declaration of title and a permanent injunction over several birs, alternatively asserting Bhumiswami status under Section 158(2) of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code. The State of Madhya Pradesh contended that the disp

MANOHAR LAL SHARMAversusNARENDRA DAMODARDAS MODI & ORS.

2018 INSC 121614 December 2018Dismissed

The Supreme Court heard a group of writ petitions filed as public‑interest litigations challenging the Government of India's procurement of 36 Rafale fighter jets, seeking registration of an FIR, a court‑monitored investigation and quashing of the Inter‑Governmental Agreement on alleged corruption, pricing irregulariti

ROYAL ORCHID HOTELS LTD.versusKAMAT HOTELS (INDIA) LTD. & ORS.

2017 INSC 122814 December 2017Dismissed

Royal Orchid Hotels Ltd. sought registration of its 'Royal Orchid' trademark in class 42, which was initially refused by the Deputy Registrar on the ground that it was not the first user and that the mark was similar to the respondent's earlier 'Orchid' mark. The Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) set aside t

JOSEPHversusSTATE, REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE .

2017 INSC 122714 December 2017Disposed off

The case arose from a violent clash between two factions at a funeral in Perumanal village, where eleven accused attacked the complainant party, resulting in the death of the deceased (son of PW‑2). The trial court and the Madras High Court convicted all the accused under Section 302 IPC read with Section 149 IPC, invo

TOYOTO JIDOSHA KABUSHIKI KAISHAversusMIS PRIUS AUTO INDUSTRIES LTD. & ORS.

2017 INSC 123014 December 2017Dismissed

Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha, a Japanese automobile manufacturer, sued M/s Prius Auto Industries and partners in Delhi High Court for infringement of its registered marks (Toyota, Toyota Innova, Toyota Device) and for passing off of the unregistered mark 'Prius'. The trial judge granted a permanent injunction agains

SAMAJ PARIVARTANA SAMUDAYA & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.

2017 INSC 122614 December 2017Disposed off

The Supreme Court revisited its earlier orders that imposed an absolute ban on iron‑ore mining in Bellary, Chitradurga and Tumkur districts of Karnataka, later allowing limited mining under a capped Maximum Permissible Annual Production (MPAP). Lessees of Category A and B mines sought modification of the cap, arguing t

RAM KRISHAN GROVER AND OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2019 INSC 123914 November 2019Dismissed

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

KANTARU RAJEEVARUversusINDIAN YOUNG LAWYERS ASSOCIATION THR. ITS GENERAL SECRETARY AND ORS.

2019 INSC 124814 November 2019Directions issued

The petitioners sought a review of the Supreme Court's 28 September 2018 judgment in Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala, which struck down the exclusion of women aged 10‑50 from the Sabarimala temple. The Court examined whether any material error or patent mistake existed in the earlier judgment, parti

YASHWANT SINHA & ORS.versusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR & ANR.

2019 INSC 124214 November 2019Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained a review application filed by the Union of India seeking correction of two sentences in paragraph 25 of its 14‑December‑2018 judgment on the Rafale fighter‑jet procurement, and also considered the petitioners' claim that the Court had failed to order registration of an FIR and CBI investig

SUNIL KUMAR & ORS. ETC. ETC.versusTHE BIHAR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION & ORS. ETC. ETC.

2015 INSC 77014 October 2015Dismissed

The appellants challenged the Bihar Public Service Commission’s (BPSC) decision to use moderation rather than scaling in evaluating answer scripts for the 53rd‑55th Combined Competitive Examinations, alleging that the method violated a 2011 High Court order and the Supreme Court’s decision in Sanjay Singh. The Court ex

MOHINDER SINGHversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB

2018 INSC 70514 August 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was stopped while riding a scooter and a bag he was carrying was searched, revealing 7.04 kg of opium. The trial court acquitted him, holding that Section 50 of the NDPS Act was not complied with and that there was no trustworthy record of the contraband being produced before a magistrate. The High Court

SMT. USHA KAPOOR & ORS.versusGOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS.

2014 INSC 99114 August 2014Dismissed

The Government of India issued two notices in 2001‑2002 for the resumption of a 3.20‑acre bungalow site in the Allahabad cantonment, invoking powers under Order No.179 of the Governor‑General‑in‑Council dated 12 September 1836. The appellants, Smt. Usha Kapoor and others, contended that they owned the land by virtue of

ROJER MATHEWversusSOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD. & ORS.

2019 INSC 123613 November 2019Disposed off

The Finance Act, 2017, through Part XIV, amended 25 enactments to merge tribunals and delegate rule-making power to the Central Government regarding qualifications, appointment, and service conditions of tribunal members. The Supreme Court considered whether Part XIV could be passed as a Money Bill under Article 110, b

CENTRAL PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER,versusSUBHASH CHANDRA AGARWAL

2019 INSC 123313 November 2019Disposed off

The respondent, Subhash Chandra Agarwal, filed three RTI applications seeking information about (1) correspondence regarding the appointment of three Supreme Court judges who superseded seniority, (2) declaration of assets by judges pursuant to a 1997 resolution, and (3) correspondence about a Union Minister allegedly

JAYKRISHNA INDUSTRIES LTD. THROUGH DIRECTORversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

2017 INSC 109813 November 2017Dismissed

The dispute concerned the auction of a 10,000 sq. m. government plot in Powai, Mumbai, advertised by MHADA on 17‑Nov‑2004. Jaykrishna Industries Ltd. (appellant) was the highest bidder and its bid was provisionally accepted with a 25% deposit paid. The respondent, Popcorn Properties Ltd., obtained a High Court order al

ASSAM PUBLIC WORKSversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2019 INSC 89113 August 2019Directions issued

The Supreme Court examined the State Coordinator's report on the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam, specifically paragraphs 7(a), 7(b) and 7(c) which dealt with the exclusion or inclusion of descendants of Declared Voters (DV), Declared Foreigners (DF) and Persons Found to be Tribunals (PFT). The petitioners

NORTH EASTERN RAILWAY & ORS.versusTRIPPLE ENGINEERING WORKS

2014 INSC 54313 August 2014Dismissed

The North Eastern Railway terminated two contracts awarded to the respondent contractor in 1994, after which arbitration proceedings were initiated in 1996 under a clause that required the arbitrators to be gazetted railway officers. Despite the passage of nearly two decades, no arbitral award had been rendered, and th

PURSHOTTAM DAS TANDON DEAD BY LRS.versusMILITARY ESTATE OFFICER & ORS.

2014 INSC 54113 August 2014Dismissed

The appellant, the estate of the deceased, claimed ownership of a bungalow and the land on which it stood, asserting title derived from a purchase in 1848. The Union of India contended that an 1836 grant vested only the building in the appellant’s ancestors, with the land remaining subject to a right of resumption. The

COMMON CAUSEversusUNION OF INDIA

2015 INSC 40413 May 2015Disposed off

Common Cause and Centre for Public Interest Litigation filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking to restrain the Union and State governments from using public funds for advertisements that project individual functionaries or political parties, and asked the Supreme Court to lay down guidelines. The Court, invoking

K. K. MISHRAversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR.

2018 INSC 34113 April 2018Appeal(s) allowed

K.K. Mishra, a Congress spokesperson, allegedly made three statements about the Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh during a press conference. The State Government sanctioned the public prosecutor to file a complaint under Section 199(2) of the CrPC on the same day, leading to Mishra's conviction under Section 500 IPC for

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISEversusMADHAN AGRO INDUSTRIES (I) PVT. LTD.

2018 INSC 33313 April 2018Directions issued

The case concerned the classification of 100% pure coconut oil packed in small retail containers. The Revenue argued that such packaging made the oil a "hair oil" falling under Chapter 33, Heading 3305, while the assessee contended it remained "coconut oil" under Chapter 15, Heading 1513. The Court examined the pre‑ an

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusSURENDRA PUNDLIK GADLING & ORS.

2019 INSC 18813 February 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Maharashtra sought to detain six accused under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) beyond the statutory 90‑day period, filing an application for a further 90‑day extension. The respondents claimed default bail, arguing that the public prosecutor’s report did not satisfy the proviso to Section 4

MS. INDIRA JAISINGversusTHROUGH SECRETARY GENERAL AND ORS.

2017 INSC 103112 October 2017Disposed off

The petitioners challenged the constitutionality of the practice of designating Senior Advocates under Section 16 of the Advocates Act, 1961 and Order IV Rule 2 of the Supreme Court Rules, alleging violations of Articles 14, 15, 18 and 21 of the Constitution. The Court examined whether the power to confer the designati

PARAKH VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITEDversusBAROMA AGRO PRODUCT AND OTHERS

2018 INSC 60212 July 2018Dismissed

Parakh Vanijya Private Ltd, the registered owner of the label mark “MALABAR” for Biryani Rice in Class‑30, sued Baroma Agro Product for infringement and passing off, alleging that the respondent’s use of “BAROMA MALABAR GOLD” was identical or deceptively similar. The High Court, noting that the registration of “MALABAR

INTERNATIONAL SPIRITS AND WINES ASSOCIATION OF INDIAversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

2019 INSC 17812 February 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The International Spirits and Wines Association of India challenged the Haryana Liquor License (Amendment) Rules, 2017 which introduced Rule 24(i‑eeee) creating a single L‑1BF licence for the entire state to trade in imported foreign liquor. The issue was whether the Financial Commissioner, acting under Section 59 of t

PARKASH CHANDversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2019 INSC 18212 February 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Parkash Chand, was convicted under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code for raping and intimidating the prosecutrix, PW2, based primarily on her testimony and alleged extra‑judicial confessions to witnesses PW4 and PW5. The FIR was lodged seven months after the alleged incident, and no contempor

STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD.versusCHOUDHARY TILOTAMA DAS & ORS.

2018 INSC 13012 February 2018Disposed off

The Steel Authority of India Ltd. (SAIL) unit Rourkela Steel Plant (RSP) introduced a Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) in 1999, allowing retiring employees to occupy their allotted official quarters on licence for 22 months. The 53 respondents, who retired under VRS, were later denied long‑term lease of these quarters

MAHARASHTRA HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYV. SHAPOORJI PALLONJI & COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS.versusSHAPOORJI PALLONJI & COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS.

2018 INSC 13412 February 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The Maharashtra Housing Development Authority (MHADA) issued an e‑tender for redevelopment work. Shapoorji Pallonji & Co. Pvt. Ltd. (the first respondent) claimed it uploaded its technical and financial bids on the portal, pressed the ‘freeze button’, but did not receive an acknowledgement. The National Informatics Cen

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE,versusM/S GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD.THROUGH ITS SECRETARY

2018 INSC 50011 May 2018Reference answered

The Supreme Court answered three questions referred by a larger bench concerning the relationship between Sections 3 and 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and the definition of "transaction value". It held that Section 4’s levy measure, including the statutorily defined transaction value, is not subordinate to Section

COMMISS"IONER OF INCOME TAX. MUMBAIversusAMITABH BACHCHAN

2016 INSC 40611 May 2016Disposed off

The Revenue (Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai) challenged the orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and the Bombay High Court that set aside a suo motu revision order passed by the Commissioner under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The issues were whether a show‑cause notice is a condition precedent to

HC PRADEEP KUMAR RAI AND ORS.versusDINESH KUMAR PANDEY AND ORS. ETC.

2015 INSC 39811 May 2015Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the promotion of Constables and Head Constables to Sub‑Inspectors in Uttar Pradesh, where the selection process was governed by a series of Government Orders (23‑01‑1999, 03‑02‑1999, 27‑02‑1999) that superseded the earlier Uttar Pradesh Police Regulations, 1976. Unsuccessful candidates challe

VARINDER KUMARversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2019 INSC 17011 February 2019Dismissed

Varinder Kumar was seized on his scooter with two gunny bags containing charas. The trial court acquitted him, citing non‑production of the seizure seal and alleged violations of CrPC s.100(4) and NDNDPS Act ss.50, 52, 57. The Himachal High Court reversed the acquittal, convicting him under s.20(ii)(c) NDPS and imposin

STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ORS.versusRAJIV BERRY & ORS.

2016 INSC 58910 August 2016Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined two civil appeals arising from the acquisition of land for the expansion of the Uttarakhand Secretariat. The State of Uttarakhand invoked the urgency clause under Section 17(4) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, initially dispensing with the opportunity to object under Section 5A, but later a

MOTIRAM PADU JOSHI AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2018 INSC 59410 July 2018Dismissed

The case arose from a factional clash in which the deceased, Machindra Joshi, was attacked with swords, knives and a motorcycle chain by the appellants Motiram Padu Joshi, Ratan Maruti Vaskar, Devidas Maruti Vaskar and Ramnath Joshi, leading to his death. The trial court acquitted all accused, holding that the eyewitne

YASHWANT SINHA & ORS.versusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR & ANR.

2019 INSC 50510 April 2019

The petitioners challenged the CBI's reliance on three documents that were allegedly taken without authorization from the Ministry of Defence and marked secret under the Official Secrets Act. The respondents argued that the review petition was untenable because the documents violated Sections 3 and 5 of the Official Se

AMBIKAPATHI AMMAL & ANR.versusSRI KANDASWAMY KOIL BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER THIRUPORUR

2015 INSC 18710 March 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Ambikapathi Ammal & Anr., claimed ownership of certain lands on the basis of Patta No.1 and sued Sri Kandaswamy Koil (by its executive officer) for possession. The respondents argued that they were permanent ryots under the Tamil Nadu Estates Land Act, 1908, that the land formed part of an estate abolis

PREMIER BREWERIES LTD., KARNATAKAversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COCHIN

2015 INSC 18410 March 2015Dismissed

Premier Breweries Ltd., a manufacturer of alcoholic beverages, claimed deductions under Section 37 of the Income Tax Act for commissions paid to agents for securing supply orders from state marketing corporations. The Assessing Officer disallowed the claim, which was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals) but reversed by

K V.S. RAOversusC.B.I & ORS

2014 INSC 18010 March 2014Case Allowed

The petitioners sought transfer of two criminal proceedings pending in the Special Court, Lucknow, to the Special Court, Delhi, arguing that the cases were similar in nature and that most witnesses were medical officers, with the ultimate decision taken at the ministerial level in Delhi. The CBI opposed the transfer, c

POOJA BHATIAversusVISHNU NARAIN SHIVPURI & ANR.

2014 INSC 17910 March 2014Appeal(s) allowed

Vishnu Narayan Shivpuri was charged under IPC sections 342, 326‑8 and 506 for allegedly throwing sulphuric acid on his wife, Pooja Bhatia. The Sessions Court denied his bail, but the High Court later released him on bail. After his release, the Superintendent of Police submitted a counter‑affidavit stating that Shivpur

EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ARULMIGU CHOKKANATHA SWAMY KOIL TRUST VIRUDHUNAGARversusCHANDRAN & ORS.

2017 INSC 12510 February 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff claimed to have purchased 2.73 acres of land that he said formed part of Survey No. 188 and sought a declaration of title and a mandatory injunction to have his name entered in the revenue records. The trial court and the first appellate court held that the plaintiff had not correctly described the suit p

M SIDDIQ (D) THR LRSversusV. MAHANT SURESH DAS & ORS

2019 INSC 12319 November 2019Disposed off

The instant appeals arose from five suits between 1950 and 1989 over a 1500 sq yard land in Ayodhya, claimed by Hindus as the birthplace of Lord Ram (Ram Janmabhumi) and by Muslims as the site of the Babri Masjid. The Allahabad High Court had directed a three-way partition of the disputed site, which the Supreme Court

G H SHIA CENTRAL BOARD OF WAQF U PversusSUNNI CENTRAL BOARD OF WAKF (SLP

2019 INSC 12329 November 2019Dismissed

The Shia Central Board of Waqf Uttar Pradesh filed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) before the Supreme Court challenging a civil judgment dated 30 March 1946 passed by the Civil Judge, Faizabad. The petition was filed after an inordinate delay of 24,964 days, and the petitioner failed to provide a satisfactory explanatio

OM PRAKASH SHARMA@O.P. JOSHIversusRAJENDRA PRASAD SHEWDA & ORS.

2015 INSC 7589 October 2015Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined a dispute over a property in Purulia that had been purchased by Jagannath Joshi with his funds but registered in his wife Moni Debi's name. The Court held that such a purchase, made for the wife's security, is a benami transaction where the wife is the real owner. The plaintiff's claim that h

VASANT BALU PATIL & ORS.versusMOHAN HIRACHAND SHAH & ORS.

2015 INSC 7579 October 2015Dismissed

The plaintiffs filed suits for injunction against construction companies and later amended them to seek a declaration of title over 14.5 acres of land, claiming inheritance from their grandfather Amarsi Gujjar. The defendants, impleaded later, denied the plaintiffs' title, asserting that the land was held on behalf of

PUNE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ANR.versusKAUSARBAG COOP. HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. & ANR.

2014 INSC 6979 October 2014Dismissed

The case concerned a claim by Kausarbag Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. for Transferable Development Rights (TDR) on a 3.5‑acre parcel that had been acquired by the State under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and shown as an existing garden in the development plan. The Society argued that under Development Control Regu

STATE OF ORISSA AND ANR.versusFAKIR CHARAN SETHI DEAD THROUGH LRS AND ORS.

2014 INSC 6969 October 2014Disposed off

The respondents claimed tenancy rights over a 4.16‑acre plot based on a 1942 lease (Hatapatta) from the ex‑ruler and alleged continuous possession and cultivation even after the land vested in the State under the Orissa Estate Abolition Act, 1951. The State contested the authenticity of the lease, rent receipts, tenanc

M/S POPAT & KOTECHA PROPERTY & ORS.versusASHIM KUMAR DEY

2018 INSC 6809 August 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The landlord filed an eviction suit under the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997, alleging that the tenant defaulted on his share of municipal taxes assessed under the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980. The tenancy agreement of 1991 had incorporated municipal taxes into rent, but the 2001 amendment to the 199

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERSversusLAFARGE DEALERS ASSOCIATION AND OTHERS

2019 INSC 7349 July 2019Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether sales‑tax exemption/deferment granted to cement manufacturers under the Madhya Pradesh Commercial Tax Act, 1994, would continue to apply after the bifurcation of the erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh into the reorganised State of Madhya Pradesh and the new State of Chhattisgarh. The C

RUPALI DEVIversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2019 INSC 4869 April 2019Disposed off

Rupali Devi left her matrimonial home after enduring cruelty by her husband and his relatives and sought refuge at her parental home. She filed a complaint under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code alleging cruelty. The central issue was whether the courts at the location of the parental home have jurisdiction to ent

KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD AND ANRversusKURIEN E. KALATHIL AND ANR.

2018 INSC 2249 March 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The Kerala State Electricity Board (KSEB) contracted with Kurien E. Kalathil to construct a dam, after which a government notification raised minimum wages, leading the contractor to claim labour‑escalation charges with interest (Ex.P‑20) and additional work charges (Ex.P‑59). The High Court ordered KSEB to pay amounts

ASSOCIATION OF VICTIMS OF UPHAAR TRAGEDYversusSUSHIL ANSAL AND ANOTHER

2017 INSC 1239 February 2017Disposed off

The case arose from the 1997 Uphaar cinema fire that killed 59 people. Sushil Ansal (the licencee) and his brother Gopal Ansal were convicted under Sections 304‑A, 337, 338 and 36 of the IPC and sentenced to two years' rigorous imprisonment, which the Delhi High Court reduced to one year. The Supreme Court, in a two‑ju

M/S. KAILASH NATH ASSOCIATESversusDELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ANR.

2015 INSC 229 January 2015Appeal(s) allowed

M/s. Kailash Nath Associates, the highest bidder in a Delhi Development Authority (ODA) public auction, deposited 25% earnest money (Rs 78 lakhs) and was later asked to pay the balance 75% with interest. ODA extended the payment deadline twice, but eventually cancelled the allotment and forfeited the earnest money, cit

ASHARFIversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2017 INSC 12058 December 2017Case Partly allowed

Asharfi was convicted by the trial court and the Allahabad High Court for rape (IPC s.376(2)(g)) and for an offence under Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, the latter attracting a life sentence. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined the evidence of the prosecutrix, a witness and medical repor

NARINDER S. CHADHA & ORS.versusMUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI & ORS.

2014 INSC 8448 December 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a circular issued by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai that added Condition No.35 to licences for eating houses, prohibiting the sale of tobacco and any apparatus such as hookah, and imposing specific dimensions for smoking areas. The Court held that Section 6 of the Cigarettes Act

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusGANDIBA BEHERA

2019 INSC 12268 November 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, Union of India and others, challenged several High Court judgments that had allowed Gramin Dak Sevaks (GDS) who were later regularised as Group D or other regular postal employees to count their GDS service towards the ten‑year qualifying service required for pension under the Central Civil Services (P

SUZUKI PARASRAMPURIA SUITINGS PVT. LTD.versusTHE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR OF MAHENDRA PETROCHEMICALS LTD. (IN LIQUIDATION) AND OTHERS

2018 INSC 9378 October 2018Leave Granted & Dismissed

Suzuki Parasrampuria Suitings Pvt. Ltd. (the appellant) was assigned the debt of Mahendra Petrochemicals Ltd. (MPL) by IFCI for a nominal sum and sought substitution as a secured creditor under the SARFAESI Act. The Company Judge rejected the application, holding that the appellant was not a bank, financial institution

RAM BAHAL &ANR.versusDEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION AZAMGARH & ORS.

2015 INSC 7508 October 2015Dismissed

The appeal concerned plots in Azamgarh where the appellants claimed ownership by adverse possession and payment of compensation, while the respondents sought expunction of the appellants' names from revenue records. The Consolidation Officer ordered expunction, the Settlement Officer later recorded the appellants as Se

AVENUE SUPERMARTS PVT. LTD.versusMRS. NISCHINT BHALLA & ORS.

2015 INSC 7538 October 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The suit concerned the administration of the estate of the deceased Durga Devi Hitkari, wherein a property at Chembur was to be sold. The appellant, Avenue Supermart Ltd., submitted the highest bid of Rs.20,15,00,000, which was accepted by all parties and an order dated 10‑02‑2009 by the single judge of the Bombay High

YELLAPU UMA MAHESWARI &ANR.versusBUDDHA JAGADHEESWARARAO & ORS.

2015 INSC 7558 October 2015Case Partly allowed

In a partition suit, the defendants sought to introduce two unregistered documents (Exhibit B‑21, a deed of memorandum, and Exhibit B‑22, an agreement) to prove the division of property. The trial court and the Andhra Pradesh High Court held the documents inadmissible, reasoning that they were compulsorily registerable

NARAYAN LAXMAN PATILversusM/S GALA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS.

2015 INSC 7518 October 2015Dismissed

The appellant, Narayan Laxman Patil, sought entry of his and six others' names in the "other rights" column of the Record of Rights for 11 acres of land in Village Eksar, claiming long uninterrupted possession and cultivation. The original owner, Kamlakar Narayan Samant, had sold the land to Gala Construction Co., whic

RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPN.versusALEXIS SONIER & ANR.

2015 INSC 7528 October 2015Disposed off

The claimant, an American citizen, was injured when a Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation bus struck him during a peace march in India. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal awarded compensation, including US$125,348.01 for medical expenses covered by California's Medi‑Cal program, and Rs.10 lakhs for a lifelong a

J. THANSIAMAversusSTATE OF MIZORAM & ORS.

2015 INSC 6518 September 2015Dismissed

J. Thansiama filed a suit for declaration of title against the State of Mizoram. The trial court held that the Limitation Act, 1963 did not apply to Mizoram and allowed the suit. The Gauhati High Court reversed this, holding that the Limitation Act was applicable and dismissed the suit as time‑barred. On appeal, the Su

LEELA RAJAGOPAL & ORS.versusKAMALA MENON COCHARAN & ORS.

2014 INSC 6128 September 2014Dismissed

The mother, K.P. Janaki Amma, executed two wills in 1981 and 1982 bequeathing a house to her daughter Kamala Menon and granddaughter Geetha, expressly excluding her sons. The sons challenged the validity of the later will, alleging undue influence, suspicious circumstances such as the daughter’s involvement in executio

SHAMANNA AND ANOTHERversusTHE DIVISIONAL MANAGER THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ORS.

2018 INSC 6788 August 2018Case Partly allowed

The appellant's son died in a motor vehicle accident while being driven by an unlicensed driver, and the claim petitioners sought compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act. The Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.3,55,500 and, invoking the "pay and recover" doctrine, directed the insurer to pay the amount and later recover it f

NANDKISHORE LALBHAI MEHTAversusNEW ERA FABRICS PVT. LTD. & ORS.

2015 INSC 4908 July 2015Dismissed

The appellant, Nandkishore Lalbhai Mehta, entered into a sale agreement with the respondents for a plot in Mahim, subject to obtaining consent from the Mill Mazdoor Sabha (labour union) and various statutory permissions. The union refused consent, and the respondents declared the agreement cancelled and offered to retu

SHIV NANDAN MAHTOversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

2013 INSC 4498 July 2013Appeal(s) allowed

Shiv Nandan Mahto was appointed as a clerk in a school in 1979, but an inspection report mistakenly recorded him as a librarian. When the school was taken over by the State of Bihar in 1983, his services were not transferred because the librarian post was not approved. Despite representations, he was not posted to any

M/S STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, RAIPUR

2015 INSC 8918 May 2019Dismissed

The Steel Authority of India Ltd (SAIL) cleared goods between January 2005 and July 2006 on a price fixed by a circular, later revised retrospectively by an escalation clause, leading SAIL to pay differential excise duty of Rs.142.78 crore. The Commissioner demanded interest under Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act

GURWINDER SINGH @ SONU ETC.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR.

2018 INSC 4578 May 2018Case Partly allowed

Two families assembled near a tubewell to settle a land dispute when a verbal altercation escalated into a scuffle. Gurwinder Singh fetched an axe from an adjacent room and, while Satnam Singh restrained the victim, struck Harbhajan Singh on the head, causing severe head injuries; both accused also sustained injuries.

GODREJ & BOYCE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LIMITEDversusDY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX & ANR.

2017 INSC 4518 May 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd. claimed that interest expenditure incurred to earn dividend income (exempt under s.10(33) because tax is paid by the dividend‑paying company under s.115‑0) could not be disallowed under s.14A of the Income‑Tax Act. The Revenue argued that s.14A barred deduction of any expenditure i

SIGNODE INDIA LIMITEDversusCOMMR.OF CEN. EXCISE & CUSTOMS - II

2017 INSC 2148 March 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Signode India Ltd. performed packaging of goods within the manufacturing unit of its principal manufacturer. The Revenue argued that this constituted "cargo handling service" under Section 65(23) of the Finance Act, 1994 and sought service tax for the period before the 2005 amendment. The appellant contended that its a

ALOK KUMAR VERMAversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2019 INSC 368 January 2019Disposed off

The Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) and the Government of India issued orders on 23 October 2018 divesting Director Alok Kumar Verma of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) of his powers, functions and supervisory role. The Director challenged the legality of these orders, arguing that under Section 4B(2) of th

DEVI LALversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2019 INSC 298 January 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the murder of Dharam Chand, for which four persons were charged. Babu Lal and Devi Lal were convicted by the trial court and the High Court on the basis of three eyewitness testimonies and an extra‑judicial confession by Babu Lal, while the other two accused were acquitted. On appeal, the Supreme Cou

TIN PLATE DEALERS ASSOCIATION PVT. LTD. & ORS.versusSATISH CHANDRA SANWALKA & ORS.

2016 INSC 9597 October 2016Disposed off

The dispute involved the Sanwalka group, who alleged oppression by the Gupta group after the latter took control of Tin Plate Dealers Association Pvt. Ltd. The Sanwalka group filed a company petition under ss.397/398 of the Companies Act, 1956 challenging the forfeiture of their shares, the issuance of bonus shares out

NAWAL KISHORE SHARMAversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2014 INSC 5347 August 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a former seaman of the Shipping Corporation of India, was declared medically unfit and his registration was cancelled by the Shipping Department in Mumbai. He filed a writ petition in the Patna High Court seeking disability compensation, claiming that a refusal letter was sent to his residence in Gaya, B

LOK PRAHARI THROUGH ITS GENERAL SECRETARYversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2018 INSC 4557 May 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The petition challenged Section 4(3) of the Uttar Pradesh Ministers (Salaries, Allowances and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1981, as amended in 2016, which grants former Chief Ministers a lifetime right to government accommodation. Earlier, the Supreme Court had struck down the 1997 Rules that provided similar benefit

RUPAJAN BEGUMversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2017 INSC 11795 December 2017Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined the validity of certificates issued by Gram Panchayat (GP) Secretaries, countersigned by revenue officials, for married women who migrated to other villages. These certificates were listed as supporting documents for claims of inclusion in the National Register of Citizens (NRC) under Section

KAMALAKHYA DEY PURKAYASTHA AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS .

2017 INSC 11845 December 2017Disposed off

The petitioners filed writ petitions under Article 32 seeking a judicial definition of the phrase “originally inhabitants of the State of Assam” in Clause 3(3) of the Schedule to the Citizenship (Registration of Citizens and Issues of National Identity Cards) Rules, 2003, and directions on how such persons should be id

DR. ASHWANI KUMARversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

2019 INSC 10075 September 2019Disposed off

Dr. Ashwani Kumar, a former Law Minister, filed a miscellaneous application seeking a Supreme Court direction to Parliament to enact a comprehensive law against custodial torture, invoking the UN Convention against Torture and arguing that such torture violates Article 21 of the Constitution. The Court noted that the m

SHRIDHAR NAMDEO LAWANDversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2013 INSC 5115 August 2013Disposed off

The appellant, Shridhar Namdeo Lawand, was convicted under Sections 7 and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and appealed to the High Court. The High Court disposed of the appeal without the appellant being present and without examining the evidence, relying solely on the State’s counsel. The Supreme Court he

SHYAM LALversusDEEPA DASS CHELA RAM CHELA GARIB DASS

2016 INSC 4965 July 2016Appeal(s) allowed

Shyam Lal held an agricultural lease from 29 May 1996 to 28 May 2005, but the lease was not registered. After the lease expired he continued to occupy the land and filed a suit for injunction to restrain the landlord from ousting him. The landlord cross‑claimed a mandatory injunction for vacation, arguing that the tena

GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LIMITEDversusTARINI INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. & ORS.

2016 INSC 5005 July 2016Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether a tariff fixed under a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) is immutable and beyond the review of the State Electricity Regulatory Commission (SERC). The Court held that tariff determination is a statutory function of the SERC under Section 86(1)(b) of the Electricity Act, 2003 and is subje

M. P. POWER MANAGEMENT COMPANY LTD.versusRENEW CLEAN ENERGY PVT. LTD. & ANR.

2018 INSC 3075 April 2018Dismissed

M.P. Power Management Company Ltd. (appellant) issued an RFP for 300 MW of solar power and entered into a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) with Renew Clean Energy Pvt. Ltd. (respondent No.1). The respondent could not obtain the originally allotted land, obtained a new site after the appellant approved a change of locatio

THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS.versusMIS. GUJARAT AMBUJA CEMENTS LTD. & ORS.

2017 INSC 9914 October 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Himachal Pradesh appealed against a High Court order that had held Mis Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd. entitled to reimbursement of Peak Load Exemption Charge (PLEC) under the power‑tariff‑freeze incentive granted to industrial units. The cement unit, which began commercial production on 26‑Sept‑1995, was supp

COMMISSIONER OF TRADE AND TAXES AND ORS.versusMIS AHLUWALIA CONTRACTS (INDIA) LTD.

2017 INSC 9984 October 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the Delhi Tax Compliance Achievement Scheme (Amnesty Scheme) under Section 107 of the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004. The Additional Commissioner, acting as the "Designated Authority", issued a show‑cause notice under clause 8 of the Scheme alleging false declaration by MIS Ahluwalia Contracts. The

LT. GOVERNOR OF DELHI & ORS.versusMATWAL CHAND (D) THR. LRS.

2015 INSC 6384 September 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The subject land was originally evacuee property that was acquired by the Central Government under Section 12 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 and placed in the compensation pool. It was subsequently auctioned to the respondents, who obtained provisional possession and later a sale c

S. T. SADIQversusSTATE OF KERALA& ORS.

2015 INSC 914 February 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appeal concerned the constitutional validity of Section 6 of the Kerala Cashew Factories Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1995, which declared that ten cashew factories acquired earlier would stand transferred to the State notwithstanding any court judgment. The petitioners argued that the provision directly nullified

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