Supreme Court of India
14,826 judgments
State of Uttar Pradesh v. Ram Swaroop @ Barkat
The Supreme Court upheld the acquittal of the accused for Section 364 IPC offences due to absence of charge and held that Section 364 IPC is not a cognate minor offence of Section 302 IPC for conviction under Section 222 CrPC.
Wg. Cdr. Sucheta EDN v. Union of India
The Supreme Court held that retrospective use of ACRs prepared under limited tenure policies and abrupt imposition of new eligibility criteria for Permanent Commission on Short Service Commission Women Officers was arbitrary, directing pension benefits and mandating transparent future selection processes.
Union of India v. Larsen & Tubro Limited
The Supreme Court upheld an arbitral award granting interest despite contractual clauses barring interest, clarifying that such clauses broadly preclude pre-award interest but do not bar post-award interest under the Arbitration Act, 1996.
Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation v. M/S Anoj Kumar Garwala
The Supreme Court held that a tender bid with a materially deficient bank guarantee period is non-responsive and must be rejected, dismissing the appeal and directing the work to be awarded to the next lowest bidder.
Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation v. M/S Anoj Kumar Garwala
The Supreme Court held that a tender bid with a bank guarantee valid for only six months instead of the required 40 months constituted a material deviation that could not be condoned, leading to dismissal of the appeal and directing acceptance of the next lowest bid.
74ecc32d0a2dc387c1a5548a7dbacd3fd7d4d06d7e13042a26f226426c4a4f4d
The Karnataka High Court upheld the conviction of the accused under Section 302 IPC and related provisions, affirming liability of unlawful assembly members for murder committed in furtherance of common object.
Radhamma & Ors. v. H.N. Muddukrishna & Ors.
The Supreme Court upheld the validity of a registered Will disposing of a coparcener's undivided share in Mitakshara joint family property under Section 30 of the Hindu Succession Act, dismissing the appellants' claim to an independent share.
Radhamma v. H.N. Muddukrishna
The Supreme Court held that a male Hindu coparcener can validly dispose of his undivided share in joint family property by Will under Section 30 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, and dismissed the appellants' claim to an independent share.
Forech India Ltd v. Edelweiss Assets Reconstruction Co. Ltd
The Supreme Court held that insolvency proceedings under the IBC prevail over pending winding up petitions before High Courts and allowed continuation of NCLT proceedings while permitting transfer of winding up petitions to the NCLT under amended statutory provisions.
djus ds fy;s Ik;kZIr Fkha A lHkh e`rdksa dh e`R;q ds ckjs esa ;g er fn;k x;k Fkk fd e`R;q v. chp vFkkZr 04 tuojh ds nksigj 12%00 cts ls 05 tuojh ds nksigj 12%00 cts ds chp Fkk
The Supreme Court upheld the validity of the police investigation and charge sheet, emphasizing adherence to procedural safeguards and limiting judicial interference to cases of manifest illegality.
Nawaz v. State
The Supreme Court reduced the murder conviction to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under provocation and upheld conviction for concealment of offence, partially allowing the appeal.
Ku. Bhawana v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
The Supreme Court upheld that a teacher appointed as trained before another acquires training qualification ranks senior under the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools Rules, 1981, dismissing the appellant's claim to seniority.
KU. BHAWANA v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
The Supreme Court held that a teacher appointed as a trained teacher before another acquires the requisite qualification is senior under the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools Rules, 1981, dismissing the appellant's claim to seniority.
Western Coalfields Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise
The Supreme Court held that the six-month limitation period under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act applies independently to buyers claiming refund of excise duty paid under protest by manufacturers, and refund claims filed beyond this period are barred.
WESTERN COALFIELDS LTD. v. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE
The Supreme Court held that the six-month limitation period under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act applies to refund claims by buyers even if the manufacturer paid excise duty under protest, dismissing the buyer's time-barred refund claim.
Western Coalfields Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise
The Supreme Court held that the six-month limitation under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act applies strictly to buyers claiming refund of excise duty paid under protest by manufacturers, dismissing refund claims filed beyond this period.
Western Coalfields Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise
The Supreme Court held that the six-month limitation period under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act applies separately to buyers and manufacturers, and a buyer cannot claim refund of duty paid under protest by the manufacturer beyond this period.
32 Q (1) v. P
The court upheld the validity of land rights mutation and registration under Sections 29, 31, and 32 of the Act, dismissing the petitioner's challenge for lack of illegality or procedural lapse.
Punjab Wakf Board v. Sham Singh Harike; Punjab Wakf Board v. Teja Singh
The Supreme Court held that suits for possession and injunction relating to Wakf properties are maintainable before Wakf Tribunals under the Wakf Act, 1995, clarifying the limits of civil court jurisdiction and distinguishing the Ramesh Gobindram precedent.
Punjab Wakf Board v. Sham Singh Harike; Punjab Wakf Board v. Teja Singh
The Supreme Court held that prior to the 2013 amendment, suits for eviction or possession relating to Wakf properties are maintainable only before civil courts and not Wakf Tribunals, dismissing the Punjab Wakf Board's appeals.