Supreme Court of India

13,887 judgments

Year:
Showing 2020 — 1117 judgments found

Director, Department of Archaeology and Museums, Jaipur v. Ashish Gautam

11 May 2020 · Arun Mishra; S. Ravindra Bhat · 2020 INSC 394

The Supreme Court allowed limited daytime use of Sisodia Rani ka Bagh for social functions with strict environmental safeguards, modifying the NGT's blanket ban to balance heritage, tourism, and wildlife protection.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant protected monument forest area National Green Tribunal environmental restrictions

Director, Department of Archaeology and Museums, Jaipur v. Ashish Gautam

11 May 2020 · Arun Mishra; S. Ravindra Bhat

The Supreme Court partially allowed the appeal against the NGT's blanket ban on social functions at Sisodia Rani ka Bagh, permitting regulated use with strict environmental safeguards to balance heritage conservation and wildlife protection.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Sisodia Rani ka Bagh National Green Tribunal protected monument forest area

South East Asia Marine Engineering and Constructions Ltd. v. Oil India Limited

11 May 2020 · N. V. Ramana; Mohan M. Shantanagoudar; Ajay Rastogi

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's setting aside of an arbitral award interpreting a contract clause on change in law, holding the tribunal's interpretation was not a plausible construction and thus the award was perverse and against public policy.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitral award Clause 23 Change in law Force majeure

South East Asia Marine Engineering and Constructions Ltd. v. Oil India Limited

11 May 2020 · N. V. Ramana; Mohan M. Shantanagoudar; Ajay Rastogi

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's setting aside of an arbitral award interpreting a 'change in law' clause to include government circulars increasing diesel prices, holding such interpretation was not a plausible reading of the contract and exceeded the Tribunal's jurisdiction.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 change in law clause contract interpretation

S. Kasi v. State

11 May 2020 · Ashok Bhushan; M. R. Shah; V. Ramasubramanian
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that the COVID-19 related extension of limitation periods does not affect the statutory period for filing charge sheets under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C., affirming the accused's right to default bail despite lockdown restrictions.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant default bail Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. charge sheet filing COVID-19 pandemic

S. Kasi v. State

11 May 2020 · Ashok Bhushan; M. R. Shah; V. Ramasubramanian
Cites 1 · Cited by 4

The Supreme Court held that the COVID-19 related extension of limitation periods does not affect the statutory period for filing charge sheets under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C., affirming the accused's right to default bail despite the pandemic.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant default bail Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. charge sheet filing personal liberty

State of Madhya Pradesh v. Babbu Rathore & Anr.

09 May 2020 · Indu Malhotra; Ajay Rastogi · 2020 INSC 53

The Supreme Court held that investigation defects under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act do not vitiate proceedings for IPC offences if investigated by a competent officer, restoring trial for IPC charges while quashing only the Act-related charges.

criminal appeal_partly_allowed Significant Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 investigation Deputy Superintendent of Police Section 9 of Act 1989

TRILOKI NATH SINGH v. ANIRUDH SINGH

06 May 2020 · A. M. Khanwilkar; Ajay Rastogi · 2020 INSC 385

A stranger to a compromise decree cannot challenge its validity in a separate suit as barred by Order 23 Rule 3A CPC; only the court which passed the decree can examine its lawfulness.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant compromise decree Order 23 Rule 3 CPC Order 23 Rule 3A CPC bar to suit

TRILOKI NATH SINGH v. ANIRUDH SINGH

06 May 2020 · A. M. Khanwilkar; Ajay Rastogi
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

A stranger to a compromise decree cannot challenge its validity in a separate suit as barred under Order 23 Rule 3A CPC; only the court which passed the decree can examine its lawfulness.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant compromise decree Order 23 Rule 3A CPC stranger to proceedings bar to suit

Bihar Staff Selection Commission v. Arun Kumar

06 May 2020 · Rohinton Fali Nariman; S. Ravindra Bhat · 2020 INSC 391
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court held that judicial re-evaluation of public service examination answers is limited and accepted expert committee recommendations to finalize results without disturbing appointments already made.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant judicial review examination evaluation re-evaluation public service commission

Bihar Staff Selection Commission v. Arun Kumar

06 May 2020 · Rohinton Fali Nariman; S. Ravindra Bhat

The Supreme Court held that judicial re-evaluation of public recruitment examination results is permissible only in exceptional cases, accepted expert committee recommendations for correcting disputed answers, and directed fresh results without disturbing appointments already made.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant judicial review examination results re-evaluation public service recruitment

State of Rajasthan v. Mehram

06 May 2020 · A.M. Khanwilkar; Dinesh Maheshwari

The Supreme Court restored the murder conviction of accused Mehram under Section 304 Part I IPC, rejecting the High Court’s reduction to Section 326 IPC, and sentenced him to ten years’ imprisonment with compensation to the victim’s family.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 302 IPC Section 304 Part I IPC right of private defence murder conviction

State of Rajasthan v. Mehram

06 May 2020 · A.M. Khanwilkar; Dinesh Maheshwari

The Supreme Court restored the murder conviction of accused Mehram under Section 304 Part I IPC, rejecting the High Court's reduction to Section 326 IPC, and sentenced him to ten years' imprisonment for causing homicidal death with intention.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 302 IPC Section 304 Part I IPC right of private defence murder

Ratnagiri Nagar Parishad v. Gangaram Narayan Ambekar

06 May 2020 · A.M. Khanwilkar; Dinesh Maheshwari

The Supreme Court held that civil courts lack jurisdiction over environmental disputes post-establishment of the NGT and dismissed a premature suit for injunction against a solid waste project, emphasizing the need to approach the NGT for environmental relief.

civil appeal_allowed Significant National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 Section 29 NGT Act environmental jurisdiction permanent injunction

Ratnagiri Nagar Parishad v. Gangaram Narayan Ambekar

06 May 2020 · A.M. Khanwilkar; Dinesh Maheshwari

The Supreme Court held that civil courts lack jurisdiction over environmental matters post-establishment of the NGT and dismissed a premature injunction suit based on unsubstantiated apprehensions, setting aside lower courts' decrees.

civil appeal_allowed Significant National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 Section 29 NGT Act permanent injunction quia timet action

Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTU, Kakinada v. M/s. Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Limited

06 May 2020 · A.M. Khanwilkar; Dinesh Maheshwari
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court held that the High Court cannot entertain a writ petition challenging a tax assessment order after the statutory appeal limitation period expires, emphasizing strict adherence to statutory remedies and limitation provisions.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Article 226 statutory appeal limitation period condonation of delay

Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTU, Kakinada v. M/s. Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Limited

06 May 2020 · A.M. Khanwilkar; Dinesh Maheshwari

The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred in entertaining a writ petition challenging a tax assessment order after the statutory appeal period and maximum condonable delay had expired, emphasizing the mandatory nature of limitation under the Andhra Pradesh VAT Act.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Article 226 Constitution of India statutory appeal limitation period condonation of delay

Kapilaben Ambalal Patel v. State of Gujarat

06 May 2020 · A.M. Khanwilkar; Dinesh Maheshwari

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal holding that the writ petition challenging State's possession of surplus land under the Urban Land Ceiling Act was barred by delay and laches, affirming lawful possession taken in 1986.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 Possession Panchnama Section 10(5) notice Section 21 exemption

Punjab National Bank v. Atmanand Singh

06 May 2020 · A.M. Khanwilkar; Dinesh Maheshwari

The Supreme Court held that writ petitions involving complex disputed facts and monetary claims should not be entertained under Article 226 when alternative remedies exist, and set aside the High Court's order directing the Bank to pay disputed amounts.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Article 226 writ petition disputed facts alternative remedy

CLP INDIA PVT. LTD. v. GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LTD.

06 May 2020 · ARUN MISHRA; VINEET SARAN; S. RAVINDRA BHAT
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld statutory tariff notifications overriding PPA terms, limited recovery of excess incentive payments to three years, and denied interest claims on deemed loans prior to agreed periods, dismissing both appeals.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Power Purchase Agreement Electricity Act 2003 Electricity Supply Act 1948 Section 43A