Supreme Court of India

13,887 judgments

Year:
Showing 2020 — 1117 judgments found

West Bengal Small Industries Development Corporation Ltd. v. M/S. Sona Promoters Pvt. Ltd.

18 Mar 2020 · S. Abdul Nazeer; Deepak Gupta

The Supreme Court held that a government company is a government undertaking under the West Bengal Government Premises Act, but tenancy of bare land without structures does not constitute government premises under the Act, rendering eviction under the Act invalid.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Government undertaking Government premises West Bengal Government Premises (Tenancy Regulation) Act, 1976 bare land tenancy

EX-GUNNER VIRENDER PRASAD v. UNION OF INDIA

18 Mar 2020 · S.A. BOBDE; B.R. GAVAI; SURYA KANT

The Supreme Court upheld the appellant's conviction for murder by Court Martial but allowed his release after considering mitigating factors and the period of actual imprisonment served exceeding 14 years under Section 433-A Cr.P.C.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Court Martial Army Act Section 69 Murder Section 302 Ranbir Penal Code Life Imprisonment

Union of India v. Annie Nagaraja

17 Mar 2020 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Ajay Rastogi · 2020 INSC 300
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court invalidated the 2008 policy restricting Permanent Commissions to women SSC officers prospectively and to certain cadres, affirming their right to be considered for PCs under earlier policies and regulations.

constitutional appeal_dismissed Significant Permanent Commission Short Service Commission Women officers Indian Navy

Union of India v. Lt Cdr Annie Nagaraja

17 Mar 2020 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Ajay Rastogi
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that the 2008 policy restricting Permanent Commissions to women SSC officers prospectively and to certain branches is arbitrary and invalid, affirming the binding nature of the 1999 policy and statutory regulations entitling women SSC officers to consideration for Permanent Commissions.

constitutional appeal_dismissed Significant Permanent Commission Short Service Commission Women officers Indian Navy

Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited v. Anil Padegaonkar

17 Mar 2020 · Ashok Bhushan; Navin Sinha

The Supreme Court upheld the validity of a discharge order issued by a competent authority under service rules, setting aside the High Court's order invalidating the charge-sheet and disciplinary action.

labor appeal_allowed Significant disciplinary authority charge-sheet discharge vs dismissal delegation of authority

Subodh Kumar v. Commissioner of Police

17 Mar 2020 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Ajay Rastogi · 2020 INSC 301

The Supreme Court upheld the validity of amendments reducing the upper age limit for departmental candidates in Delhi Police recruitment rules, holding them not arbitrary or violative of Articles 14 and 16.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Delhi Police Recruitment Rules 1980 Rule 7 amendment Rule 27A amendment upper age limit

Subodh Kumar v. Commissioner of Police

17 Mar 2020 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Ajay Rastogi

The Supreme Court upheld the 2013 amendments to Delhi Police recruitment rules reducing upper age limits for departmental candidates, holding them constitutionally valid and not arbitrary.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Delhi Police Recruitment Rules 1980 Amendment Notification 2013 Upper Age Limit Departmental Candidates

Council of Architecture v. Mukesh Goyal & Ors

17 Mar 2020 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Ajay Rastogi · 2020 INSC 298

The Supreme Court held that Section 37 of the Architects Act prohibits only the use of the title "Architect" by unregistered individuals and does not restrict unregistered persons from practicing architectural activities.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Architects Act, 1972 Section 37 use of title practice of architecture

Council of Architecture v. Mr Mukesh Goyal & Ors

17 Mar 2020 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Ajay Rastogi

The Supreme Court held that Section 37 of the Architects Act prohibits only the use of the title "Architect" by unregistered individuals and does not bar unregistered persons from practicing architectural activities.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Architects Act, 1972 Section 37 use of title practice of architecture

Sajan v. State of Maharashtra

17 Mar 2020 · R. Banumathi; A. S. Bopanna · 2020 INSC 302

The Supreme Court modified the compensation awarded in a land acquisition case by reducing the development cost deduction to 20% and enhancing compensation for electrical installations, affirming principles on valuation and deductions in land acquisition for public projects.

property appeal_allowed Significant land acquisition compensation development cost deduction valuation of land

Sajan v. State of Maharashtra

17 Mar 2020 · R. Banumathi; A. S. Bopanna

The Supreme Court modified the compensation awarded for land acquired for a dam project by reducing development cost deduction to 20%, affirming valuations of structures and loss of business, and ordered payment of the balance amount to the appellants.

property appeal_partly_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act compensation development cost deduction market value

Palniammal v. Kamalakannan

17 Mar 2020 · Ashok Bhushan; Navin Sinha

The Supreme Court upheld the validity of a court auction sale and lawful ownership of the purchaser, dismissing the delayed suit by the original owner's heirs challenging the sale.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant court auction sale lawful ownership fiduciary relationship trustee

Aarifaben Yunusbhai Patel v. Mukul Thakorebhai Amin

17 Mar 2020 · L. Nageswara Rao; Deepak Gupta

The Supreme Court held that an application to set aside a sale in execution proceedings under Order XXI Rule 90 CPC is strictly time-barred after 60 days and delay cannot be condoned, thereby restoring the sale confirmed by the executing court.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order XXI Rule 90 CPC Limitation Act 1963 Application to set aside sale Execution of decree

Bengaluru Development Authority v. Mr Sudhakar Hegde & Ors.

17 Mar 2020 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Hemant Gupta · 2020 INSC 303

The Supreme Court upheld the quashing of Environmental Clearance for the Peripheral Ring Road project due to non-compliance with the EIA Notification, 2006, emphasizing the requirement of contemporaneous data and retrospective inclusion of expressways within highways.

environmental appeal_dismissed Significant Environmental Clearance EIA Notification 2006 Peripheral Ring Road Bangalore Development Authority Act

Bengaluru Development Authority v. Mr Sudhakar Hegde & Ors.

17 Mar 2020 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Hemant Gupta

The Supreme Court upheld the quashing of Environmental Clearance for the Peripheral Ring Road project due to non-compliance with EIA Notification 2006 requirements, holding that the project qualifies as an expressway requiring prior clearance and that delays in EIA process invalidate the clearance.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Environmental Clearance EIA Notification 2006 Peripheral Ring Road Bangalore Development Authority Act

BANK OF BARODA v. KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD.

17 Mar 2020 · Deepak Gupta; Aniruddha Bose
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court held that the limitation period for executing a foreign decree from a reciprocating country in India is governed by the limitation law of the country where the decree was passed, and Section 44A CPC does not create a fresh limitation period.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Section 44A CPC execution of foreign decree limitation period cause country

BANK OF BARODA v. KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD.

17 Mar 2020 · Deepak Gupta; Aniruddha Bose

The Supreme Court held that the limitation period for executing a foreign decree in India is governed by the law of the foreign country where the decree was passed, and Section 44A CPC does not prescribe a separate limitation period.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Section 44A CPC execution of foreign decree limitation period cause country

Joint Labour Commissioner and Registering Officer and Anr v. Kesar Lal

17 Mar 2020 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Ajay Rastogi

The Supreme Court held that construction workers registered under the Building and Other Construction Workers Act, 1996 are consumers under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and can seek redress for deficiency of service from welfare boards.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Consumer Protection Act 1986 Building and Other Construction Workers Act 1996 consumer definition welfare schemes

Joint Labour Commissioner and Registering Officer and Anr v. Kesar Lal

17 Mar 2020 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Ajay Rastogi

The Supreme Court held that construction workers registered under the Building and Other Construction Workers Act, 1996 who contribute to welfare schemes are 'consumers' under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and can seek redress for deficiency of service before consumer forums.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Consumer Protection Act 1986 Building and Other Construction Workers Act 1996 consumer definition welfare schemes

Rohtas & Anr. v. State of Haryana; Bijender v. State of Haryana

15 Mar 2020 · N. V. Ramana; Surya Kant; Aniruddha Bose · 2020 INSC 694
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld convictions for attempt to murder under Section 307 IPC, clarified the interplay between Sections 149 and 34 IPC regarding unlawful assembly and common intention, and rejected appellants' plea for sentence reduction.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 307 IPC Section 148 IPC Section 149 IPC Section 34 IPC