Supreme Court of India

13,887 judgments

Year:
Showing 2020 — 1117 judgments found

Bikram Chatterji & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

10 Jun 2020 · Arun Mishra; Uday Umesh Lalit

The Supreme Court granted NBCC immunity while completing Amrapali projects, upheld interest on diverted funds, rejected release of FAR to authorities, dismissed challenges to forensic audit findings, and directed banks to release home loans with reasonable interest on dues to authorities.

civil other Significant NBCC immunity Amrapali Group Floor Area Ratio (FAR) Forensic Audit

SRI ANTHONY alias ANTHONY SWAMY v. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, K.S.R.T.C.

10 Jun 2020 · R.F. Nariman; Navin Sinha; B.R. Gavai
Cites 0 · Cited by 3

The Supreme Court enhanced compensation in a motor accident case by properly assessing permanent disability and its impact on future earnings, medical expenses, and loss of amenities.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident compensation permanent disability loss of future earnings functional disability

U.P. STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION v. RAJENDRI DEVI

08 Jun 2020 · R. F. Nariman; Navin Sinha; B. R. Gavai

The Supreme Court held that the insurance company is liable to pay compensation for a motor accident involving a bus operated under contract by a corporation, overruling earlier rulings that held the corporation solely liable.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Motor Vehicles Act owner definition vicarious liability insurance company liability

Chandrakanta Tiwari v. New India Assurance Company Ltd. & Anr.

08 Jun 2020 · R. F. Nariman; Navin Sinha; B. R. Gavai · 2020 INSC 419

The Supreme Court held that under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, liability for compensation is no-fault, the multiplier must be based on the victim's age, and restored the MACT award with modification, allowing the claimant's appeal.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 163A Motor Vehicles Act no-fault liability motor accident compensation multiplier for compensation

Chandrakanta Tiwari v. New India Assurance Company Ltd. & Anr.

08 Jun 2020 · R. F. Nariman; Navin Sinha; B. R. Gavai
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court held that under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, no-fault liability applies and the claimant is entitled to compensation without proving negligence, correcting the multiplier and restoring the MACT award.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 163A Motor Vehicles Act no-fault liability motor accident compensation multiplier for compensation

Addissery Raghavan v. Cheruvalath Krishnadasan

08 Jun 2020 · R. F. Nariman; Navin Sinha; B. R. Gavai · 2020 INSC 418

The Supreme Court held that the High Court in revisional jurisdiction under the Kerala Rent Control Act cannot reappreciate evidence and set aside eviction findings unless perverse, restoring the Appellate Authority’s order denying eviction on bonafide requirement and comparative hardship grounds.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Kerala Rent Control Act Section 11(8) Section 20 revisional jurisdiction

Addissery Raghavan v. Cheruvalath Krishnadasan

08 Jun 2020 · R. F. Nariman; Navin Sinha; B. R. Gavai

The Supreme Court held that the High Court in revisional jurisdiction cannot reappreciate evidence or substitute findings of fact of the Rent Control Appellate Authority unless perverse, and restored the appellate authority's order denying eviction on landlord's bonafide requirement under Section 11(8) of the Kerala Rent Control Act.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Kerala Rent Control Act Section 11(8) Section 20 revisional jurisdiction

Ramnath & Co. v. Commissioner of Income Tax

05 Jun 2020 · A. M. Khanwilkar; Dinesh Maheshwari
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that specialized services rendered from India to foreign enterprises, resulting in foreign exchange earnings, qualify for deduction under Section 80-O of the Income Tax Act, reversing the High Court's denial of such benefit.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Section 80-O Income Tax Act services rendered from India services rendered in India foreign exchange earnings

State of Orissa v. M/S B. Engineers & Builders Ltd.

05 Jun 2020 · A. M. Khanwilkar; Indira Banerjee; Dinesh Maheshwari · 2020 INSC 414

The Supreme Court upheld the contractor's right to reimbursement of sales tax paid on works contracts under contractual and statutory provisions, quashing the State's contrary Circular.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant works contract sales tax reimbursement Clause 45(2) GCC

State of Orissa v. M/S B. Engineers & Builders Ltd.

05 Jun 2020 · A. M. Khanwilkar; Indira Banerjee; Dinesh Maheshwari

The Supreme Court upheld the contractor's right to reimbursement of sales tax paid on works contracts under contractual and statutory provisions, quashing the State Government's contrary circular.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant works contract sales tax reimbursement Clause 45 of GCC

Shakti Bhog Food Industries Ltd v. The Central Bank of India

05 Jun 2020 · A.M. Khanwilkar; Indira Banerjee; Dinesh Maheshwari
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Supreme Court held that under Article 113 of the Limitation Act, 1963, the right to sue accrues upon clear denial by the defendant, and plaints filed within three years thereafter cannot be rejected as barred by limitation under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order VII Rule 11 CPC Limitation Act 1963 Article 113 Limitation Act right to sue accrues

Shakti Bhog Food Industries Ltd v. The Central Bank of India

05 Jun 2020 · A.M. Khanwilkar; Indira Banerjee; Dinesh Maheshwari

The Supreme Court held that under Article 113 of the Limitation Act, 1963, the limitation period runs from the last accrual of cause of action, and a plaint disclosing a continuing cause of action filed within three years thereof cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC as barred by limitation.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order VII Rule 11 CPC Limitation Act 1963 Article 113 Limitation Act cause of action

Somasundaram @ Somu v. State Represented by Deputy Commissioner of Police

03 Jun 2020 · Rohinton Fali Nariman; K. M. Joseph; V. Ramasubramanian
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld convictions for the conspiracy, abduction, and murder of an ex-MLA based on cumulative circumstantial evidence, confessions, and vicarious liability principles despite absence of the body and acquittal of some accused.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant criminal conspiracy abduction murder circumstantial evidence

M/S. CENTROTRADE MINERALS AND METALS INC. v. HINDUSTAN COPPER LTD.

02 Jun 2020 · R.F. Nariman; S. Ravindra Bhat; V. Ramasubramanian

The Supreme Court held that enforcement of a foreign arbitral award can be refused under Section 48(1)(b) if a party was effectively denied a fair opportunity to present its case due to arbitrator's procedural refusal, and remitted the matter for fresh arbitration proceedings.

civil appeal_allowed Significant two-tier arbitration foreign arbitral award Section 48 Arbitration Act natural justice

Centrotrade Minerals and Metals Inc. v. Hindustan Copper Ltd.

02 Jun 2020 · R.F. Nariman; S. Ravindra Bhat; V. Ramasubramanian

The Supreme Court set aside enforcement of a foreign arbitral award due to denial of fair opportunity to present the case, remitting it for fresh arbitration under Section 48(1)(b) of the Arbitration Act, 1996.

civil appeal_allowed Significant two-tier arbitration foreign arbitral award Section 48(1)(b) Arbitration Act natural justice

Maharashtra Seamless Limited v. Padmanabhan Venkatesh & Ors.

01 Jun 2020 · Rohinton Fali Nariman; Aniruddha Bose; V. Ramasubramanian · 2020 INSC 76

The Supreme Court upheld the resolution plan approved by the Committee of Creditors and Adjudicating Authority, ruling that the plan need not match liquidation value and limiting judicial interference in commercial decisions under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

corporate appeal_allowed Significant Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process Resolution Plan Liquidation Value Committee of Creditors

Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Company Limited v. M/S. Srigdhaa Beverages

01 Jun 2020 · Sanjay Kishan Kaul; K. M. Joseph · 2020 INSC 410

The Supreme Court held that an auction purchaser is liable to pay outstanding electricity dues of the previous owner when the sale notice explicitly states such liability under an "as is where is" sale basis.

civil appeal_allowed Significant electricity dues SARFAESI Act auction purchaser liability statutory dues

Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Company Limited v. M/S. Srigdhaa Beverages

01 Jun 2020 · Sanjay Kishan Kaul; K.M. Joseph

The Supreme Court held that an auction purchaser is liable to pay outstanding electricity dues of the previous owner when the sale is on an "as is where is" basis with explicit mention of such dues, and the electricity company can refuse new connections until dues are cleared.

civil appeal_allowed Significant SARFAESI Act electricity dues auction purchaser liability as is where is sale

Sonu @ Sunil v. State of Madhya Pradesh

29 May 2020 · Sanjay Kishan Kaul; K. M. Joseph
Cites 4 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court acquitted the appellant due to insufficient and inconsistent circumstantial evidence, emphasizing the necessity of proving common intention and reliable recovery to uphold a murder conviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant circumstantial evidence common intention Section 34 IPC recovery of stolen property

Sonu @ Sunil v. State of Madhya Pradesh

29 May 2020 · Sanjay Kishan Kaul; K. M. Joseph
Cites 4 · Cited by 3

The Supreme Court acquitted the appellant due to insufficient and doubtful circumstantial evidence, emphasizing the necessity of a complete chain of proof and clear common intention for conviction under Section 34 IPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant circumstantial evidence common intention Section 34 IPC recovery of stolen property