Supreme Court of India
8,449 judgments
DARCL Logistics Limited v. Essemm Logistics
The Supreme Court held that counter-claims for loss or damage to goods under the Carriage by Road Act, 2007 are not maintainable without prior written notice as mandated by Section 16, overruling the trial court’s decision.
ESSEMM LOGISTICS v. DARCL LOGISTICS LIMITED
The Supreme Court held that the mandatory notice under Section 16 of the Carriage by Road Act, 2007 applies only to claims for loss or damage to consignments and not to other types of claims, allowing the appellant's counter-claim to proceed.
DARCL Logistics Limited v. ESSEMM Logistics
The court held that counter-claims for loss or damage to goods under the Carriage by Road Act, 2007 are barred without prior written notice as mandated by Section 16, and such non-compliance warrants rejection under Order VII Rule 11 CPC.
Jasbir Singh v. National Investigation Agency
The Supreme Court held that filing a charge-sheet within the statutory period under Section 167(2) CrPC, even without prior sanction under UAPA or Explosives Act, does not entitle accused to default bail.
Jasbir Singh v. National Investigation Agency
The Supreme Court held that filing a charge sheet within the statutory period suffices for default bail entitlement under Section 167(2) CrPC, and delay in sanction or approval under special laws like UAPA does not entitle accused to default bail.
Samra @ Jasbir Singh v. National Investigation Agency
The Supreme Court held that filing a chargesheet within the statutory period completes investigation for default bail purposes, and delayed sanction for prosecution under special laws does not entitle accused to default bail.
GUJARAT COMPOSITE LIMITED v. A INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED
The Supreme Court held that disputes involving multiple parties and agreements, some without arbitration clauses, cannot be partially referred to arbitration under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, affirming that only parties bound by a valid arbitration agreement can be compelled to arbitrate.
Indore Vikas Pradhikaran v. Anita Singh & Ors.
The Supreme Court held that land acquisition lapses under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if neither possession is taken nor compensation paid within five years before the Act, and compensation deposited in court due to disputes does not prevent lapse.
Delhi Development Authority v. Anita Singh
The Supreme Court held that land acquisition does not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if either possession is taken or compensation is paid (including deposit in court due to ownership dispute), overruling the High Court's order that acquisition had lapsed.
dedbd088fec1dcf52dc6a0e12b6e44e24465d5893946e62361940df0741a71b0
The Supreme Court upheld the conviction and sentence of the accused for kidnapping, rape, and murder under Sections 366, 376, and 302 IPC, affirming the correct appreciation of evidence by the lower courts.
Ramisetty Venkatanna v. Nasyam Jamal Saheb
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and held that the plaint was liable to be rejected under Order VII Rule XI CPC as it was barred by limitation and disclosed no cause of action due to clever drafting to circumvent limitation law.
Ramisetty Venkatanna v. Nasyam Jamal Saheb
The Supreme Court held that a plaint cleverly drafted to circumvent limitation and lacking a clear cause of action is liable to be rejected under Order VII Rule XI CPC, allowing the appeal and setting aside lower court orders.
Veena Vadini Teachers Training Institute v. State of Madhya Pradesh
The Supreme Court upheld residence-based reservation in professional education but struck down 75% reservation as excessive, directing the State to limit it to 70% based on actual data.
Veena Vadini Teachers Training Institute v. State of Madhya Pradesh
The Supreme Court upheld residence-based reservation in professional education but struck down 75% reservation as excessive, directing the State to limit it to 70% considering ground realities.
P. V. Nidheesh v. Kerala State Wakf Board
The Supreme Court held that the 2013 penal amendments to the Wakf Act cannot be applied retrospectively to criminalize possession predating the amendment, quashing prosecution against long-standing occupants under Section 52A.
P. V. NIDHISH & ORS v. KERALA STATE WAKF BOARD & ANR
The Supreme Court held that the penal provision criminalizing unauthorized possession of wakf property cannot be applied retrospectively to possession predating the amendment, quashing the prosecution against long-term tenants.
Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited & Ors v. Sri. B. G. Manamohana
The Supreme Court held that additional pay revision linked to performance targets cannot be granted automatically or retrospectively without fulfilling stipulated conditions, partially allowing the appeal of Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation.
Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited & Ors v. Sri. B. G. Manamohana
The Supreme Court held that additional pay revision increments are conditional on performance targets and cannot be granted automatically from appointment date to employees appointed after the pay revision effective date.
Rajasthan v. Dr. Hami Singh Chauhan & Ors.
The Supreme Court held that absorption into Dairy Federations terminated the appellants' Rajasthan State service and pension rights under Rule 18(2) of the Rajasthan Service Rules, dismissing their claim for State pension benefits.
State of Rajasthan v. Dr. Hamir Singh Chouhan
The Supreme Court held that permanent absorption in the Dairy Federations terminates lien with the State Government, denying respondents pensionary benefits from the State after receiving retirement benefits from the Dairy Federations.