Supreme Court of India
18,256 judgments
Union of India v. M/s. Union Carbide Corporation
The Supreme Court dismissed the Union of India's curative petitions seeking to reopen the 1989 Bhopal gas disaster settlement with Union Carbide, affirming the finality and binding nature of the settlement and rejecting unilateral enhancement of compensation.
The State of Goa v. Summit Online Trade Solutions (P) Ltd & Ors.
The Supreme Court held that the High Court of Sikkim lacked territorial jurisdiction to entertain writ petitions challenging a Goa GST notification, emphasizing that at least part of the cause of action must arise within the High Court's jurisdiction under Article 226(2).
The State of Goa v. Summit Online Trade Solutions (P) Ltd & Ors.
The Supreme Court held that the High Court of Sikkim lacked territorial jurisdiction to entertain writ petitions challenging a Goa GST notification, setting aside the High Court's order and deleting the State of Goa from the array of respondents.
Ganesh Prasad v. Rajeshwar Prasad & Ors.
The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's order permitting amendment of the plaint, holding that amendments introducing alternative pleas without changing the nature of the suit are permissible and that the suit was not barred by dismissal of an earlier suit for non-prosecution.
Pawan Kumar Chourasia v. State of Bihar
The Supreme Court acquitted the appellant, holding that the extra-judicial confession was unreliable and insufficient to sustain conviction for murder under Section 302 IPC.
Ashutosh Samanta v. Sm. Ranjan Bala Dasi
The Supreme Court upheld the grant of letters of administration based on a duly proved will despite the absence of attesting witnesses and delay, clarifying the proper mode of proof under the Indian Succession and Evidence Acts.
Nand Lal v. State of Chhattisgarh
The Supreme Court acquitted accused due to unexplained grievous injuries on one accused, unexplained delay and suppression of FIRs, and unreliable evidence from interested witnesses in a murder case under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC.
Victory Iron Works Ltd. v. Jitendra Lohia & Anr.
The Supreme Court held that exclusive development rights over immovable property constitute assets under the IBC, mandating their inclusion in the CIRP Information Memorandum, while insolvency authorities cannot evict third-party licensees beyond their licensed area.
Victory Iron Works Ltd. v. Jitendra Lohia & Anr.
The Supreme Court upheld that exclusive development rights over immovable property held by a Corporate Debtor constitute assets under the IBC, entitling the Resolution Professional to take custody and control during CIRP, while protecting third-party licensee rights within licensed limits.
AND ANOTHER v. NARAIN SINGH AND OTHERS
The Supreme Court held that urbanization notification under Section 507(a) of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 extinguishes the applicability of the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954, and upheld possession rights of registered purchasers accordingly.
M/s Indian Oil Corporation Limited v. V.B.R. Menon
The Supreme Court upheld NGT's directions mandating Vapour Recovery Systems at petroleum outlets but set aside its order requiring mandatory Consent to Establish and Consent to Operate, directing adherence to CPCB guidelines instead.
M/s Indian Oil Corporation Limited v. V.B.R. Menon
The Supreme Court upheld NGT's directions mandating Vapour Recovery Systems at petroleum outlets but set aside the requirement for mandatory Consent to Establish and Consent to Operate, directing strict adherence to CPCB guidelines instead.
Shinhan Bank v. Carol Info Services Limited
The Supreme Court held that an arbitration clause in an Amenities agreement is incorporated into a contemporaneous Leave and License agreement, entitling the petitioner to invoke arbitration directly.
Union of India Through Land Acquisition Collector v. Rajesh Kumar
The Supreme Court held that land acquisition proceedings do not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession was taken before the Act's commencement, even if compensation was unpaid.
Union of India Through Land Acquisition Collector v. Rajesh Kumar
The Supreme Court held that land acquisition proceedings do not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession has been taken, even if compensation has not been paid.
Land Acquisition Collector v. Ashok Kumar
The Supreme Court held that land acquisition does not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession could not be taken due to an operative court stay order continuing until the Act's commencement.
Land Acquisition Collector v. Ashok Kumar
The Supreme Court held that land acquisition does not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession was not taken due to an operative court stay continuing until the Act's commencement, overruling contrary precedents.
Govt. of NCT of Delhi v. Manjeet Kaur
The Supreme Court held that a subsequent purchaser has no locus to challenge deemed lapse of land acquisition under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act and clarified the correct interpretation of possession and compensation requirements to prevent lapse.
Govt. of NCT of Delhi v. Manjeet Kaur
The Supreme Court held that acquisition proceedings do not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession is taken or compensation tendered, and a subsequent purchaser has no locus to claim lapse, setting aside the High Court's order declaring lapse.
Government of NCT of Delhi v. Dayanand
The Supreme Court held that land acquisition proceedings do not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession is taken or compensation is tendered, overruling Pune Municipal Corporation and allowing the Government's appeal.