Supreme Court of India
8,182 judgments
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 U.P. & Ors.
The Supreme Court upheld the prospective but retrospective application of the Real Estate Act, affirming the Regulatory Authority's jurisdiction to order refunds and compensation, and dismissed appeals challenging its constitutional validity.
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.
Pusapati Ashok Gajapathi Raju & Anr v. Pusapati Madhuri Gajapathi Raju & Ors
The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's setting aside of an arbitrator's interim award that improperly denied Respondent No.1's stridhana rights over certain jewellery, emphasizing strict adherence to arbitration terms of reference.
Irappa Siddappa Murgannavar v. State of Karnataka
The Supreme Court upheld the appellant's conviction for rape and murder of a child but commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment with a 30-year minimum term, emphasizing the importance of mitigating factors in capital punishment cases.
Irappa Siddappa Murgannavar v. State of Karnataka
The Supreme Court upheld the appellant's conviction for rape and murder of a child but commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment with a 30-year minimum term, emphasizing the need to consider mitigating factors and procedural safeguards in capital cases.
State of Chhattisgarh v. M/S Sal Udyog Private Limited
The Supreme Court set aside the arbitral award's deduction of supervision charges for ignoring express contractual terms and government circulars, holding such failure as patent illegality warranting interference.
M s (Indsil Hydro Power and Manganese Limited) v. Carborundum Universal Limited
The Supreme Court upheld government authority to regulate hydroelectric power licenses, including water discharge and royalty charges, dismissing appeals challenging these regulatory conditions.
C. Haridasan v. Anappath Parakkattu Vasudeva Kurup
The Supreme Court restored the trial court's decree for specific performance of an agreement to sell, affirming the plaintiff's readiness and willingness and upholding enhancement of sale consideration, while setting aside the High Court's discretionary denial under Section 20 of the Specific Relief Act.
C. Haridasan v. Anappath Parakkattu Vasudeva Kurup
The Supreme Court restored the trial court's decree for specific performance of a sale agreement, affirming that readiness and willingness to perform are essential and that courts may enhance consideration to balance equities, overruling the High Court's denial based on Section 20 discretion.