Supreme Court of India
8,449 judgments
Shaifuddin v. Kanhaiya Lal
The Supreme Court held that the limitation period for executing a compromise decree begins when the decree becomes enforceable upon dispossession, not from the date of the decree itself, and dismissed the appeal as time-barred execution was not established.
Shaifuddin v. Kanhaiya Lal
The Supreme Court held that the limitation period for executing a compromise decree begins when the decree becomes enforceable upon dispossession, not from the date of the compromise, and dismissed the appeal as time-barred execution was not established.
Gujarat State v. S.O. Pipes Limited
The Supreme Court held that penalty and interest under Sections 45(6) and 47(4A) of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 are mandatory civil liabilities not requiring proof of mens rea, and quashing them on bona fide belief grounds was erroneous.
State of Gujarat v. M/s Saw Pipes Ltd.
The Supreme Court held that penalty and interest under Sections 45(6) and 47(4A) of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 are statutory and mandatory, requiring no mens rea or discretion, and restored their levy against the assessee.
State of Gujarat v. M/s Saw Pipes Ltd.
The Supreme Court held that penalty and interest under Sections 45(6) and 47(4A) of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 are statutory and mandatory, requiring no mens rea, and restored their levy despite the assessee's bonafide belief and payment of tax.
South Indian Bank Ltd. v. Naveen Mathew Philip
The Supreme Court held that writ petitions challenging SARFAESI Act actions are generally not maintainable when an effective statutory remedy before the Debt Recovery Tribunal exists, emphasizing restraint in High Court interference in commercial recovery matters.
South Indian Bank Ltd. v. Naveen Mathew Philip
The Supreme Court held that writ petitions under Article 226 challenging actions under the SARFAESI Act by private financial institutions are generally not maintainable when an effective statutory remedy exists, emphasizing the need to exhaust such remedies before seeking extraordinary judicial intervention.
Mumbai Metro Rail Corporation Limited v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai
The Supreme Court clarified that MMRCL must seek prior permission before felling trees beyond 84 as permitted, but allowed implementation of the Tree Authority's order for 177 trees subject to strict afforestation and monitoring conditions.
Mumbai Metro Rail Corporation Limited v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai
The Supreme Court clarified that MMRCL must obtain prior Court approval before felling trees beyond the permitted number, but allowed implementation of the Tree Authority's order subject to conditions to balance environmental and developmental interests.
SRI MAHAVIR AGENCY & ANR. v. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR.
The Supreme Court held that a vendor selling sealed packaged food with a valid written warranty from the manufacturer is entitled to protection under Section 19(2) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 and set aside his conviction for selling adulterated food.
SRI MAHAVIR AGENCY & ANR. v. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR.
The Supreme Court held that a vendor who sells adulterated food purchased with a valid written warranty from the manufacturer is entitled to statutory defense under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, and set aside the conviction.
Virendrasing v. The Additional Commissioner & Ors.
The Supreme Court upheld the disqualification of a Zilla Parishad member for having an indirect financial interest in a contract ordered by the Zilla Parishad, emphasizing broad interpretation of disqualification provisions and adherence to procedural fairness.
Veerendra Singh v. Additional Commissioner & Ors.
The Supreme Court upheld the disqualification of a district council member for having a pecuniary interest in a contract awarded to his son, affirming the broad scope of Sections 16(1)(a) and 40 of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishad and Panchayat Samiti Act, 1961.
Virendrasing v. The Additional Commissioner & Ors.
The Supreme Court upheld the disqualification of a Zilla Parishad member for having an indirect financial interest in a contract ordered by the Zilla Parishad awarded to his son, emphasizing broad interpretation of disqualification provisions to ensure probity in local governance.
Siju Kurian v. State of Karnataka
The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's reversal of acquittal and conviction of the appellant for murder based on admissible confession, last seen theory, and recovery of stolen articles forming a complete chain of circumstantial evidence.
Siju Kurian v. Karnataka State
The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's reversal of the trial court's acquittal, affirming the appellant's conviction for murder based on admissible confession and corroborated circumstantial evidence.
Siju Kurian v. State of Karnataka
The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's reversal of acquittal and conviction of the accused for murder and related offences based on proper reappreciation of circumstantial evidence and admissible confession leading to discovery.
Vesoundararajan v. State
The Supreme Court acquitted the appellant in a corruption case due to lack of evidence proving demand and acceptance of bribe under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
Soundarajan v. State
The Supreme Court acquitted the appellant due to failure of prosecution to prove demand of gratification and held that defective charge framing without prejudice is not fatal under Section 464 CrPC.
Yedala Subba Rao & Anr. v. Union of India
The Supreme Court granted bail to accused under UAPA, holding that the prosecution failed to establish prima facie truth of accusations and that confessional statements were inadmissible, emphasizing protection of fundamental rights during prolonged pre-trial custody.