Supreme Court of India

15,092 judgments

Year:
Showing 2020 — 1206 judgments found

Bra nch Ma nag e r, Ba ja j Allia nz L ife Insura nc e Compa ny L td a nd Othe rs v. Da lbir Ka ur

09 Oct 2020 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Indu Malhotra; Indira Banerjee

The Supreme Court held that non-disclosure of a serious pre-existing ailment and hospitalization in a life insurance proposal form justifies repudiation of the claim under Section 45 of the Insurance Act, 1938, setting aside the consumer commission's contrary decision.

civil appeal_allowed Significant life insurance utmost good faith non-disclosure material facts

Branch Manager, Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Company Ltd and Others v. Dalbir Kaur

09 Oct 2020 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Indu Malhotra; Indira Banerjee
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court held that suppression of material pre-existing ailments in a life insurance proposal justifies repudiation of the claim within two years under Section 45 of the Insurance Act, setting aside the consumer commission's contrary decision.

civil appeal_allowed Significant insurance contract utmost good faith non-disclosure material facts

Ashish Seth v. Sumit Mittal

09 Oct 2020 · Ashok Bhushan; M. R. Shah · 2020 INSC 585

The Supreme Court directed the Mittal and Seth Groups to fulfill their respective obligations under a settlement agreement for license renewal and EDC payments, warning of contempt for non-compliance, and mandated availing a government one-time settlement scheme.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Memorandum of Settlement license renewal External Development Charges One Time Settlement Scheme

Ashish Seth v. Sumit Mittal

09 Oct 2020 · Ashok Bhushan; M. R. Shah

The Supreme Court directed the Mittal and Seth Groups to fulfill their respective obligations under the settlement for license renewal and EDC payment, enforcing compliance through contempt proceedings if necessary.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Memorandum of Settlement license renewal External Development Charges One Time Settlement Scheme

MISS A v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANR.

08 Oct 2020 · Uday Umesh Lalit; Vineet Saran; S. Ravindra Bhat

The Supreme Court held that copies of victim statements under Section 164 CrPC cannot be furnished to the accused before the court takes cognizance, to protect victim safety and investigation integrity in sexual offence cases.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 164 CrPC victim statement disclosure to accused sexual offences

MISS A v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANR.

08 Oct 2020 · Uday Umesh Lalit; Vineet Saran; S. Ravindra Bhat

The Supreme Court held that copies of victim statements recorded under Section 164 CrPC cannot be furnished to the accused before cognizance and issuance of process, emphasizing confidentiality in sexual offence cases.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 164 CrPC victim statement confidentiality sexual offences copy of statement to accused

Ankita Kailash Khandelwal & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

08 Oct 2020 · Uday Umesh Lalit; Vineet Saran; Ajay Rastogi

The Supreme Court relaxed bail conditions preventing medical postgraduate students accused in a criminal case from attending their college, upholding their fundamental right to education while safeguarding the trial process.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail conditions Article 21 right to education Section 437(3) CrPC

Satya Deo @ Bhoorey v. State of Uttar Pradesh

07 Oct 2020 · S. Abdul Nazeer; Sanjiv Khanna · 2020 INSC 577

The Supreme Court held that juvenility is determined by the age on the date of offence under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000, and set aside the life sentence of a juvenile convict, remitting the case to the Juvenile Justice Board for appropriate orders.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant juvenile justice juvenility determination date of offence juvenile justice act 2000

Satya Deo @ Bhoorey v. State of Uttar Pradesh

07 Oct 2020 · S. Abdul Nazeer; Sanjiv Khanna

The Supreme Court held that Satya Deo was a juvenile under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 at the time of the offence, upheld his conviction but set aside the life sentence, remitting the case to the Juvenile Justice Board for appropriate orders.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant juvenile justice juvenility determination pending cases Section 20 Juvenile Justice Act 2000

Amit Sahni v. Commissioner of Police & Ors.

07 Oct 2020 · Sanjay Kishan Kaul; Aniruddha Bose; Krishna Murari · 2020 INSC 579

The Supreme Court held that indefinite occupation of public roads for protests is impermissible under the Constitution, emphasizing reasonable restrictions on peaceful assembly to balance public order and citizens' rights.

constitutional appeal_dismissed Significant right to protest Article 19(1)(a) Article 19(1)(b) reasonable restrictions

Amit Sahni v. Commissioner of Police & Ors.

07 Oct 2020 · Sanjay Kishan Kaul; Aniruddha Bose; Krishna Murari

The Supreme Court held that indefinite occupation of public roads by protestors is not permissible under the constitutional right to protest, which is subject to reasonable restrictions in the interest of public order and convenience.

constitutional appeal_dismissed Significant right to protest Article 19(1)(a) Article 19(1)(b) reasonable restrictions

Commissioner of Police v. Umesh Kumar

07 Oct 2020 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Indira Banerjee · 2020 INSC 578

The Supreme Court held that candidates do not acquire a vested right to appointment merely by inclusion in a provisional selection list and upheld the lawful revision of recruitment results, setting aside the High Court's direction to appoint respondents who failed to meet revised cut-offs.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant public recruitment vested right to appointment revision of result writ of mandamus

Commissioner of Police v. Umesh Kumar

07 Oct 2020 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Indira Banerjee

The Supreme Court held that inclusion in a provisional selection list does not confer a vested right to appointment, and lawful revision of recruitment results due to errors cannot be challenged by unsuccessful candidates seeking mandamus for appointment.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant public recruitment vested right to appointment revision of results writ of mandamus

T.K. David v. Kuruppampady Service Co-operative Bank Ltd.

05 Oct 2020 · Ashok Bhushan; R. Subhash Reddy; M.R. Shah · 2020 INSC 576

The Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition challenging the dismissal of a review petition, reaffirming that such petitions are not maintainable when the main judgment has already been finally adjudicated.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Special Leave Petition Review Petition Maintainability Cooperative Tribunal

T.K. David v. Kuruppampady Service Co-operative Bank Ltd.

05 Oct 2020 · Ashok Bhushan; R. Subhash Reddy; M.R. Shah

The Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition challenging the dismissal of a review petition, reaffirming that such petitions are not maintainable when the main judgment is final and unchallenged.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Special Leave Petition Review Petition Maintainability Res Judicata

M/S Magma Fincorp Ltd. v. Rajesh Kumar Tiwari

01 Oct 2020 · D. Y. Chandrachud; Indira Banerjee · 2020 INSC 574

The Supreme Court upheld that improper service of notice before repossession of a vehicle under a hire purchase agreement constitutes deficiency in service under the Consumer Protection Act, entitling the consumer to refund and damages.

consumer_protection appeal_dismissed Significant hire purchase agreement repossession consumer protection deficiency in service

M/S Magma Fincorp Ltd. v. Rajesh Kumar Tiwari

01 Oct 2020 · D. Y. Chandrachud; Indira Banerjee

The Supreme Court upheld consumer forum orders directing a financier to refund amounts and pay damages for repossessing and selling a vehicle without proper notice under a hire purchase agreement, affirming notice as essential to avoid deficiency in service.

consumer_protection appeal_dismissed Significant hire purchase agreement repossession consumer protection deficiency in service

Parvez Noordin Lokhandwalla v. State of Maharashtra & Anr

01 Oct 2020 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Indira Banerjee

The Supreme Court allowed the appellant's appeal permitting him to travel abroad despite an FIR, holding that bail conditions restricting travel must be reasonable, proportionate, and balance the accused's rights with the interests of justice.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail conditions right to travel abroad anticipatory bail Section 437 CrPC

M/S ARUN KUMAR KAMAL KUMAR & ORS. v. M/S SELECTED MARBLE HOME & ORS.

01 Oct 2020 · N.V. Ramana; S. Abdul Nazeer; Surya Kant · 2020 INSC 571

The Supreme Court upheld an arbitration award holding appellants liable for damages for use and occupation during business closure under licence agreements, rejecting challenges to the calculation of commission and reducing post-award interest rate.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant licence agreement damages for use and occupation arbitration award statement of accounts

M/S ARUN KUMAR KAMAL KUMAR & ORS. v. M/S SELECTED MARBLE HOME & ORS.

01 Oct 2020 · N. V. Ramana; S. Abdul Nazeer; Surya Kant

The Supreme Court upheld an arbitration award holding appellants liable for damages during business closure under licence agreements and reduced post-award interest rate, dismissing the appeal.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant licence agreement damages for use and occupation arbitration award statement of accounts