Supreme Court of India
18,257 judgments
Jitul Jentilal Kotecha v. State of Gujarat & Ors.
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's quashing of the FIR against several accused, holding that inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC cannot be exercised prematurely relying on draft charge-sheets and investigation reports not submitted to the Magistrate.
B.K. Enterprises v. State of Manipur
The Supreme Court directed the State of Manipur to conduct a fresh, transparent tender process for transportation contracts under the Supplementary Nutrition Programme, condemning the unlawful extension of interim contracts causing loss to the public exchequer.
B.K. Enterprises v. State of Manipur
The Supreme Court directed the State of Manipur to conduct a fresh, transparent tender process for transportation contracts under the nutrition programme, condemning prolonged interim arrangements causing public loss.
National Company v. The Territory Manager
The Supreme Court held that a tenant not in actual physical possession due to subletting is not entitled to protection under the Madras City Tenants Protection Act, allowing the landlord's writ petition for eviction and rent arrears recovery.
Union of India v. Ram Karan
The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred in substituting the disciplinary punishment of removal from service with confinement, emphasizing that punishment under the CRPF Act lies within the exclusive domain of the disciplinary authority and judicial review cannot alter it.
Bajri Lease LoI Holders Welfare Society v. The State of Rajasthan & Ors.
The Supreme Court upheld termination of illegal sand mining leases near river banks in Rajasthan, approved environmental safeguards and monitoring, and mandated penalties under the Polluter Pays principle to prevent ecological damage.
Bajri Lease LoI Holders Welfare Society v. The State of Rajasthan & Ors.
The Supreme Court upheld termination of environmentally harmful sand mining leases near river banks, approved issuance of Environmental Clearances without precondition of replenishment studies, and mandated penalties for illegal mining under the Polluter Pays principle.
NEWTECH PROMOTERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. v. STATE OF UP
The Supreme Court upheld the retroactive applicability of RERA 2016 to ongoing projects without completion certificates, affirmed the Authority's jurisdiction to order refunds with interest, distinguished refund from compensation adjudicated by the adjudicating officer, and validated procedural safeguards including pre-deposit and delegation of powers.
National Company v. The Territory Manager
The Supreme Court held that tenant protections under the Madras City Tenants Protection Act apply only to tenants in actual physical possession, allowing the landlord's writ petition for eviction and rent arrears against BPCL after lease expiry.
NEWTECH PROMOTERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. v. STATE OF UP
The Supreme Court upheld the jurisdiction of the Real Estate Regulatory Authority to direct refund of amounts with interest under RERA 2016 for ongoing projects, distinguishing refund from compensation claims adjudicated by the adjudicating officer, and validated the Act's retroactive application.
Bhupesh Rathod v. Dayashankar Prasad Chaurasia & Anr.
The Supreme Court held that a complaint under Section 138 of the NI Act filed by a Managing Director on behalf of a company with proper authorization is valid despite technical defects in format, and set aside acquittals to convict the respondent for cheque dishonour.
Bhupesh Rathod v. Dayashankar Prasad Chaurasia & Anr.
The Supreme Court held that a complaint under Section 138 of the NI Act filed by a Managing Director on behalf of a Company with proper Board authorization is valid despite technical defects, and set aside acquittal to convict the respondent for cheque dishonour.
The State of Bihar v. Pawan Kumar
The Supreme Court modified the NGT's directions on sand mining DSR preparation, mandating government sub-divisional committees to prepare DSRs with SEAC and SEIAA approval, while permitting interim legal mining under environmental safeguards.
The State of Bihar v. Pawan Kumar
The Supreme Court directed fresh preparation and approval of District Survey Reports for sand mining by government sub-divisional committees, allowing interim legal mining under state supervision to balance environmental safeguards and developmental needs.
Ratnam Sudesh Iyer v. Jackie Kakubhai Shroff
The Supreme Court upheld the setting aside of an arbitral award under the pre-2015 legal regime, holding that the 2015 Amendment does not apply retrospectively and that the award conflicted with the fundamental policy of Indian law.
Ratnam Sudesh Iyer v. Jackie Kakubhai Shroff
The Supreme Court upheld the setting aside of an arbitral award under the pre-2015 Arbitration Act law, holding that the 2015 Amendment applies prospectively and that the award was contrary to the fundamental policy of Indian law.
The Executive Engineer, Gosikhurd Project Ambadi, Maharashtra Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation v. Mahesh and Others
The Supreme Court held that the twelve-month limitation period under Section 25 of the 2013 Act applies to awards under Section 24(1)(a), overruling the two-year period under the repealed 1894 Act, and upheld the validity of the award dated 30th October 2014 made within the permissible period after excluding the stay period.
The Executive Engineer, Gosikhurd Project Ambadi, Maharashtra Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation v. Mahesh
The Supreme Court held that the twelve-month limitation under Section 25 of the 2013 Act applies to awards under Section 24(1)(a), excluding stay periods, and acquisition proceedings did not lapse despite alleged backdating of the award.
M/s. Kalamani Tex & Anr v. P. Balasubramanian
The Supreme Court upheld the conviction under Section 138 NIA based on admitted signatures and statutory presumptions, dismissing the appeal but modifying the sentence due to voluntary deposit of cheque amount.
Pusapati Ashok Gajapathi Raju & Anr v. Pusapati Madhuri Gajapathi Raju & Ors
The Supreme Court held that the arbitrator exceeded his jurisdiction by deciding beyond the terms of reference regarding stridhana property and upheld the High Court's setting aside of the interim award on that issue.