Supreme Court of India
8,182 judgments
Expeditious Trial of Cases under Section 138 of N.I. Act 1881
The Supreme Court issued directions and clarified procedural aspects to expedite trials under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, emphasizing mandatory inquiry under Section 202 CrPC, proper exercise of discretion in trial conversion, and rejecting inherent power of Magistrates to recall summons.
In Re: Expeditious Trial of Cases under Section 138 of N.I. Act 1881
The Supreme Court clarified procedural aspects and directed reforms to ensure expeditious trial of cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, emphasizing proper exercise of summary trial provisions and mandatory inquiry under Section 202 CrPC.
VIIT PHARMACY COLLEGE AND ANOTHER v. DR. A.P.J. ABDUL KALAM TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY AND ANOTHER
The Supreme Court directed the University to grant affiliation and permit examinations for petitioner pharmacy colleges, holding that PCI approval and State conditional affiliation prevail over restrictive State policies.
VIIT PHARMACY COLLEGE AND ANOTHER v. DR. A.P.J. ABDUL KALAM TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY AND ANOTHER
The Supreme Court held that PCI approval prevails over State policies and directed the University to grant affiliation and permit examinations for petitioner pharmacy colleges.
Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Limited v. Bishal Jaiswal & Anr.
The Supreme Court held that signed entries in balance sheets constitute acknowledgements under Section 18 of the Limitation Act, extending limitation for insolvency proceedings under Section 7 of the IBC.
Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Limited v. Bishal Jaiswal & Anr.
The Supreme Court held that entries in balance sheets can amount to acknowledgements under Section 18 of the Limitation Act, applicable to IBC proceedings under Section 238A, thereby extending limitation for filing insolvency applications.
Ghanashyam Mishra and Sons Private Limited v. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Limited
The Supreme Court held that an approved resolution plan under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code binds all creditors including government authorities, extinguishing claims not included in the plan and barring separate recovery proceedings.
Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra
The Supreme Court held that High Courts must exercise their inherent powers sparingly and cannot grant blanket interim protection restraining investigation without reasons, emphasizing the police's statutory right to investigate cognizable offences.
Rajasthan State v. Ashok Kumar Kashyap
The Supreme Court held that at the stage of framing charges under the Prevention of Corruption Act, the court must only determine if a prima facie case exists and set aside the High Court's discharge order for impermissible reappraisal of evidence.
Rajasthan State v. Ashok Kumar Kashyap
The Supreme Court held that at the charge framing stage under the Prevention of Corruption Act, the court must only assess the existence of a prima facie case without delving into the merits, setting aside the High Court's acquittal and restoring the charges against the accused.
State of Rajasthan v. Ashok Kumar Kashyap
The Supreme Court held that at the charge framing stage under Section 7 of the PC Act, the court must consider only whether a prima facie case exists without delving into merits, and set aside the High Court's order discharging the accused for impermissibly conducting a mini trial.
M/S Envitech Marine Consultants Private Limited and Others v. Union of India & Anr.
The Supreme Court dismissed the petitioners' plea to preserve INS Viraat as a museum, upholding the Government's lawful decision to scrap the ship and rejecting interference without a No Objection Certificate.
M/S Envitech Marine Consultants Private Limited and Others v. Union of India & Anr.
The Supreme Court dismissed the petitioners' plea to restrain scrapping of INS Viraat, holding that without Ministry of Defence approval, no right to preserve the ship arises and government disposal decisions cannot be judicially interfered with.
Justice V. Eswaraiah (Retd.) v. Union of India & Ors.
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order directing an inquiry into a private conversation after the petitioner admitted its authenticity, emphasizing adherence to natural justice and procedural propriety in PIL proceedings.
Justice V. Eswaraiah (Retd.) v. Union of India & Ors.
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order directing an inquiry into a private conversation transcript after the petitioner admitted its authenticity, emphasizing adherence to natural justice and procedural propriety.
IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. v. PEARL BEVERAGES LTD.
The Supreme Court held that an insurer cannot deny liability under an exclusion clause without evidence that the driver was intoxicated, requiring proof of impairment beyond mere consumption or smell of alcohol.
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India
The Supreme Court allowed registration of BS-IV compliant vehicles used for public utility services despite BS-VI norms, directing private applicants outside Delhi to approach respective High Courts.
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India
The Supreme Court allowed registration of BS-IV vehicles for public utility services purchased before 31.03.2020, balancing environmental norms with public service needs.
3c6bea171d736ace9219920d282ef8840877eeac29f97a2cb72aa01afab2fa77
The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of the petitioner, ruling that the evidence sufficiently proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt despite procedural delays, and dismissed the appeal.
A.R. Madana Gopal v. M/s Ramnath Publications Pvt. Ltd. and Anr.
The Supreme Court restored the decree for specific performance, holding that the appellants were ready and willing to perform despite delay caused by pending writ appeals and that the MOUs and agreements must be read together.