Supreme Court of India
17,536 judgments
Samarpan Varishtha Jan Parisar v. Rajendra Prasad Agarwal
The Supreme Court held that inmates of an old age home are licensees with permissive possession only and cannot claim injunction against eviction for violation of license terms.
Land and Building Department v. Pawan Kumar
The Supreme Court held that acquisition proceedings do not lapse merely because compensation was deposited in court without prior tender to landowners, and a subsequent purchaser cannot claim lapse under the 2013 Act, setting aside the High Court's order.
Land and Building Department v. Pawan Kumar
The Supreme Court held that acquisition proceedings do not lapse if compensation has been tendered or deposited in court, and a subsequent purchaser cannot claim lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.
Delhi Development Authority v. Godfrey Phillips (I) Ltd.
The Supreme Court held that acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 do not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession has been taken and compensation paid or deposited, and purchasers acquiring land post-vesting cannot claim lapse of acquisition.
IFFCO-TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD v. M/s NEW INDIA DETERGENTS LTD.
The Supreme Court dismissed the insurance company's statutory appeal, holding that the exclusion clause did not exempt it from paying storage charges awarded by the consumer commission.
IFFCO-TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD v. M/s NEW INDIA DETERGENTS LTD.
The Supreme Court dismissed the insurance company's appeal, holding that the exclusion clause did not exempt it from paying storage charges awarded by the consumer forum.
Bhag Singh v. Union of India
The Supreme Court upheld compensation of Rs.4 lakhs per acre for land acquired in Village Sohana under the 1990 notification, rejecting higher compensation claims based on non-adjoining villages and subsequent acquisitions.
Swadesh Kumar Agarwal v. Dinesh Kumar Agarwal & Ors
The Supreme Court held that termination of an arbitrator's mandate on grounds of undue delay must be decided by the court under section 14(2) and that an application under section 11(6) is not maintainable absent a written arbitration agreement.
Union of India v. Navneet Kumar
The Supreme Court held that the ACC lawfully denied extension of a Judicial Member's term in accordance with the Selection Committee's binding recommendation to carry forward vacancies, setting aside the High Court's contrary order.
Reddy Veerana v. New Okhla Industrial Development Authority
The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's direction to pay compensation at the commercial circle rate without deduction for development charges, imposed penal interest for delay, and dismissed NOIDA's appeal, affirming the landowner's right to just compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
Reddy Veerana v. New Okhla Industrial Development Authority
The Supreme Court upheld the appellant's right to compensation at the circle rate without development charge deductions, imposed statutory and penal interest, and dismissed NOIDA's appeal, emphasizing just compensation and protection of property rights under Article 300A.
J. Sekar Reddy v. Directorate of Enforcement
The Supreme Court quashed PMLA proceedings against the appellant due to lack of evidence of scheduled offence and proceeds of crime, emphasizing that criminal prosecution cannot continue when adjudication exonerates on merits.
J. Sekar Reddy v. Directorate of Enforcement
The Supreme Court quashed PMLA proceedings against the appellant due to closure of scheduled offence FIR for lack of evidence and exoneration in adjudication proceedings, holding that prosecution under PMLA requires a valid scheduled offence and proof beyond reasonable doubt.
Ritu Maheshwari v. M/S. Promotional Club
The Supreme Court held that applicants have no right to allotment under a terminated public scheme and must seek allotment under prevailing schemes, setting aside the High Court's order favoring the applicant club.
Ritu Maheshwari v. M/S. Promotional Club
The Supreme Court held that applicants have no right to allotment under a closed scheme and must be considered under prevailing schemes, setting aside the High Court's order favoring the club and dismissing contempt proceedings against Noida.
State of Bihar v. Shyama Nandan Mishra
The Supreme Court held that +2 lecturers appointed under Advertisement No. 1/87 are members of the Bihar Subordinate Education Service and entitled to merger benefits with the Bihar Education Service, quashing the State’s exclusionary notifications as arbitrary and unlawful.
State of Bihar v. Shyama Nandan Mishra
The Supreme Court upheld that +2 lecturers appointed under Advertisement No. 1/87 are members of the Bihar Subordinate Education Service and entitled to merger benefits with Bihar Education Service, quashing government notifications excluding them.
Delhi Airport Metro Express Private Limited v. Delhi Metro Rail Corporation
The Supreme Court held that interest pendente lite can be included in the sum awarded under Section 31(7)(a) of the Arbitration Act only if there is no contrary agreement between the parties, and upheld the arbitral award applying the parties' agreed interest terms.
Abdul Matin Mallick v. Subrata Bhattacharjee (Banerjee)
The Supreme Court held that deposit of the entire sale consideration plus 10% at the time of filing a pre-emption application under the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 is mandatory, and failure to comply renders the application not maintainable, leading to dismissal of the pre-emption claim.
MS. P. v. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's grant of regular bail in a serious offence case due to non-application of mind and relevant material being overlooked, emphasizing the need for judicial reasoning and consideration of criminal antecedents and threat to the complainant.