Supreme Court of India

17,225 judgments

Year:

Bhupinder Singh v. Unitech Limited

23 Mar 2023 · Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud; M.R. Shah

The Supreme Court applied the principle of restitution to order the return of amounts paid without adjudication from disputed land sale proceeds, emphasizing that court orders must not confer unjust enrichment.

civil appeal_allowed Significant principle of restitution actus curiae neminem gravabit unjust enrichment interim orders

The Govt. of NCT of Delhi v. Kamlesh Rani Bhatla

23 Mar 2023 · Aniruddha Bose; Krishna Murari

The Supreme Court upheld the respondent's right to withdraw her resignation after acceptance under Rule 26(4) CCS Pension Rules, rejecting the employer's reliance on a prior chargesheet to deny reinstatement.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant withdrawal of resignation Rule 26(4) CCS Pension Rules chargesheet vigilance clearance

Supreme Court Bar Association v. Ministry of Urban Development

23 Mar 2023 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Sanjay Kishan Kaul; Pamidighantam... · 2023 INSC 278
Cites 0 · Cited by 5

The Supreme Court held that allocation and use of land allotted to it, including conversion for lawyers’ chambers, is an administrative matter not amenable to judicial direction under Article 32, and dismissed the writ petitions accordingly.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant Article 32 Constitution of India writ of mandamus land use change Supreme Court Archives

Supreme Court Bar Association v. Ministry of Urban Development

23 Mar 2023 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Sanjay Kishan Kaul; Pamidighantam...

The Supreme Court held that allocation and use of land allotted to it for lawyers’ chambers is an administrative matter not amenable to judicial intervention under Article 32 and dismissed the writ petitions accordingly.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant Article 32 Constitution of India writ of mandamus land use change Supreme Court chambers

Jagtar Singh v. State of Punjab

23 Mar 2023 · Abhay S. Oka; Rajesh Bindal · 2023 INSC 279

Conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act cannot be sustained without proof of both demand and acceptance of illegal gratification, and mere recovery of marked currency notes is insufficient.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 demand and acceptance illegal gratification marked currency notes

Jagtar Singh v. State of Punjab

23 Mar 2023 · Abhay S. Oka; Rajesh Bindal

The Supreme Court acquitted the appellant for lack of proof of demand of illegal gratification, holding that recovery alone is insufficient to sustain conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 illegal gratification demand and acceptance proof of demand

Munshi v. State of Uttar Pradesh

23 Mar 2023 · Abhay S. Oka; Rajesh Bindal · 2023 INSC 281

The Supreme Court set aside the conviction of appellant Munshi Singh in a dowry death case due to lack of specific evidence of cruelty or harassment soon before the death, holding that general allegations are insufficient to invoke statutory presumption under Section 113B of the Evidence Act.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant dowry death Section 304B IPC Section 113B Evidence Act presumption of dowry death

Munshi v. State of Uttar Pradesh

23 Mar 2023 · Abhay S. Oka; Rajesh Bindal

The Supreme Court set aside the conviction of appellant Munshi Singh in a dowry death case due to lack of specific evidence of cruelty or harassment required to invoke presumption under Section 113B of the Evidence Act.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant dowry death Section 304B IPC Section 113B Evidence Act presumption of cruelty

M/S BILAG INDUSTRIES P. LTD. & ANR. v. COMMR. OF CEN. EXC. DAMAN & ANR.

22 Mar 2023 · S. RAVINDRA BHAT; DIPANKAR DATTA

The Supreme Court held that mutual interest in each other's business is essential to classify parties as related persons under Section 4(4)(c) of the Central Excise Act, and set aside the differential duty demand on BIL for sales to its subsidiary Aventis CropScience (India) Ltd.

tax appeal_allowed Significant related person Section 4(4)(c) Central Excise Act, 1944 mutual interest test

M/S BILAG INDUSTRIES P. LTD. & ANR. v. COMMR. OF CEN. EXC. DAMAN & ANR.

22 Mar 2023 · S. RAVINDRA BHAT; DIPANKAR DATTA
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that mutual interest in each other's business is essential to treat parties as 'related persons' under Section 4(4)(c) of the Central Excise Act, and set aside the revenue's valuation based on related party transaction in favor of BIL.

tax appeal_allowed Significant related person Section 4(4)(c) Central Excise Act, 1944 transaction value

Shramjeevi Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. v. Dinesh Joshi & Ors.

22 Mar 2023 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Dipankar Datta

The Supreme Court held that the NGT erred in prohibiting construction based on draft maps ignoring prior final decrees and sanctioned development plans, directing fresh demarcation and adherence to natural justice.

environmental appeal_allowed Significant National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 principles of natural justice doctrine of finality res judicata

M/S. PLATINUM THEATRE AND OTHERS v. COMPETENT AUTHORITY SMUGGLERS & FOREIGN EXCHANGE MANIPULATORS

22 Mar 2023 · Ajay Rastogi; Bela M. Trivedi

The Supreme Court upheld the forfeiture of property under the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators Act, 1976, holding that failure to prove legitimate source of acquisition justifies forfeiture without option to pay fine.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant forfeiture Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators Act, 1976 Section 7 forfeiture Section 8 burden of proof

Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Kanpur v. M/S. A.R. Polymers Pvt. Ltd.

21 Mar 2023 · Krishna Murari; Sudhanshu Dhulia

The Supreme Court held that bulk sales of footwear to defense and paramilitary forces do not qualify for MRP-based excise duty benefits under Section 4(A) of the Central Excise Act as such sales are not retail sales to final consumers.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Section 4(A) Central Excise Act MRP valuation retail sale institutional consumers

Nagaraj Reddy v. State of Tamil Nadu

21 Mar 2023 · B. R. Gavai; Vikram Nath

The Supreme Court acquitted the appellant of murder charges, holding that conviction cannot rest solely on the uncorroborated testimony of an interested witness.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant interested witness corroboration previous enmity Sections 302 and 341 IPC

Yuvraj @ Munna Pralhad Jagdale & Ors v. Janardan Subajirao Wide

21 Mar 2023 · Sudhanshu Dhulia; Sanjay Kumar

The Supreme Court held that a tenant's execution of an assignment agreement transferring leasehold business interest in breach of lease conditions and statutory provisions amounts to unlawful assignment warranting eviction.

property appeal_allowed Significant leasehold interest assignment subletting Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates (Control) Act, 1947

Yuvraj @ Munna Pralhad Jagdale v. Janardan Subajirao Wide

21 Mar 2023 · Sudhanshu Dhulia; Sanjay Kumar

The Supreme Court held that a tenant's execution of an assignment agreement transferring his leasehold business interest without landlord consent or statutory permission constitutes unlawful assignment warranting eviction under the Bombay Rents Act.

civil appeal_allowed Significant leasehold assignment sub-letting Bombay Rents Act 1947 Section 13(1)(e)

K.H. Balakrishna v. The State of Karnataka

21 Mar 2023 · V. Ramasubramanian; Pankaj Mithal

The Supreme Court acquitted the appellant of kidnapping, wrongful confinement, and criminal intimidation charges due to insufficient evidence and indications of consensual relationship and elopement.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant kidnapping wrongful confinement criminal intimidation Section 366 IPC

Seemant Kumar Singh v. Mahesh PS & Ors.

21 Mar 2023 · Krishna Murari; Ahsanuddin Amanullah · 2023 INSC 272

The Supreme Court quashed adverse remarks and directions issued by the Karnataka High Court against non-parties during bail proceedings, emphasizing judicial restraint and fair hearing.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant adverse remarks bail proceedings judicial restraint presumption of innocence

Seemant Kumar Singh v. Mahesh PS

21 Mar 2023 · Krishna Murari; Ahsanuddin Amanullah

The Supreme Court expunged adverse remarks made by the High Court against appellants unconnected to bail proceedings and quashed directions issued beyond the scope of bail jurisdiction, emphasizing judicial restraint and fairness.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant adverse remarks bail proceedings judicial restraint Section 439 CrPC

Union of India v. Parashotam Dass

21 Mar 2023 · Sanjay Kishan Kaul; Abhay S. Oka; B.V. Nagarathna
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court affirmed that High Courts retain writ jurisdiction under Article 226 to judicially review Armed Forces Tribunal orders, overruling prior conflicting precedent and ensuring access to justice for service personnel.

constitutional appeal_allowed Significant Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 Article 226 Constitution Judicial review High Court jurisdiction