Supreme Court of India
16,357 judgments
AUTHORITY OF INDIA v. M. HAKEEM & ANR
The Supreme Court held that courts under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 have no power to modify arbitral awards and can only set aside or remit them on limited grounds, overruling contrary High Court decisions in land acquisition compensation cases under the National Highways Act.
National Highways Authority of India v. M. Hakeem & Anr.
The Supreme Court held that courts under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 cannot modify arbitral awards, limiting judicial power to setting aside or remitting awards, and overruled the Madras High Court's contrary view in land acquisition compensation cases under the National Highways Act.
A P Mahesh Cooperative Urban Bank Shareholders Welfare Association v. Ramesh Kumar Bung
The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's interim stay of criminal proceedings in election-related fraud complaints, emphasizing caution against abuse of criminal law in election disputes.
Shubhas Jain v. Rajeshwari Shivam & Ors.
The Supreme Court set aside the Bombay High Court's order permitting structural alteration of a dangerous building, holding that courts should not decide disputed technical facts and emphasizing the primacy of safety in eviction and redevelopment cases.
Shubhas Jain v. Rajeshwari Shivam & Ors.
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order permitting structural alteration in a dangerous building, emphasizing deference to Municipal Corporation's safety classification and upholding the landlord's redevelopment proposal.
ATLANTA INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. v. DELTA MARINE COMPANY
The Supreme Court held that interference in bank guarantee encashment is limited to cases of fraud directly related to the guarantee and dismissed the appeal seeking to admit unrelated expert evidence to delay encashment.
ATLANTA INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. v. DELTA MARINE COMPANY
The Supreme Court held that judicial interference in encashment of an independent bank guarantee is limited to cases of egregious fraud directly related to the guarantee and dismissed attempts to delay encashment based on unrelated signature discrepancies.
K.P. NATARAJAN v. MUTHALAMMAL
The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s setting aside of an ex-parte decree passed against a minor without proper guardian appointment, emphasizing mandatory procedural safeguards and the High Court’s wide powers under Article 227.
K.P. NATARAJAN & ANR. v. MUTHALAMMAL & ORS.
The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s setting aside of an ex-parte decree passed against a minor without proper guardian appointment under Order XXXII, Rule 3 CPC (Madras amendment), affirming the mandatory nature of procedural safeguards and the High Court’s wide superintendence jurisdiction under Article 227.
Sachin Kashyap & Ors v. Sushil Chandra Srivastava & Ors
The Supreme Court held that a Writ Petition cannot be expanded to restrict DJ music without pleadings or impleading affected parties, and such restrictions must comply with law and licensing requirements.
Sachin Kashyap & Ors v. Sushil Chandra Srivastava & Ors
The Supreme Court held that the High Court exceeded its jurisdiction by issuing noise pollution restrictions on DJ music without pleadings or impleadment, quashing such directions while affirming lawful regulation under noise pollution rules.
New Okhla Industrial Development Authority v. B D Singhal
The Supreme Court held that enhancement of retirement age by government order with prospective effect cannot be given retrospective operation by courts, affirming the executive's policy domain and denying retrospective benefits to employees retired before the effective date.
New Okhla Industrial Development Authority v. B D Singhal
The Supreme Court held that enhancement of retirement age by the State government is a policy decision validly made with prospective effect, and courts cannot direct retrospective effect absent express provision or arbitrariness.
Dr. Rohit Kumar v. Secretary Office of Lt. Governor of Delhi & Ors.
The Supreme Court allowed a doctor denied Study Leave during COVID-19 to pursue postgraduate studies, directing his admission in the next session and reconsideration of leave in light of improved circumstances.
Dr. Rohit Kumar v. Secretary Office of Lt. Governor of Delhi & Ors.
The Supreme Court allowed a doctor denied Study Leave during COVID-19 to pursue postgraduate studies, directing admission in the next session and reconsideration of leave in light of improved pandemic conditions.
Franklin Templeton Trustee Services Private Limited v. Amruta Garg
The Supreme Court held that trustees must obtain the consent of the majority of voting unitholders before winding up a mutual fund scheme under SEBI Mutual Fund Regulations, harmonizing the regulatory provisions to protect unitholder interests.
FRANKLIN TEMPLETON TRUSTEE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED v. AMRUTA GARG
The Supreme Court held that trustees must obtain majority unitholders' consent before winding up a mutual fund scheme under SEBI Regulations, interpreting Regulation 18(15)(c) harmoniously with Regulations 39 to 42.
Madras Bar Association v. Union of India
The Supreme Court held that the Tribunal Reforms Ordinance, 2021 and related amendments violating separation of powers and judicial independence are unconstitutional, safeguarding tribunal appointments made under judicial directions.
Madras Bar Association v. Union of India
The Supreme Court held that legislative provisions undermining tribunal independence and breaching separation of powers are unconstitutional, protecting tribunal members' tenure and appointment rights.
Ismailbhai I. Kansara v. State of Gujarat
The Supreme Court upheld the eviction of an encroacher from evacuee land, holding that only displaced persons with verified claims have rights to such land under the Displaced Persons Act and government policy.