Supreme Court of India

16,356 judgments

Year:

Canara Bank v. M/s. Leatheroid Plastics Pvt. Ltd.

20 May 2020 · Uday Umesh Lalit; Aniruddha Bose

The Supreme Court held that a bank exercising its liberty to insure hypothecated assets must ensure full coverage, and failure to do so amounts to deficiency in service attracting liability under the Consumer Protection Act.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant deficiency in service bank liability insurance coverage hypothecated assets

Canara Bank v. M/s. Leatheroid Plastics Pvt. Ltd.

20 May 2020 · Uday Umesh Lalit; Aniruddha Bose

The Supreme Court held that a bank exercising its liberty to insure hypothecated assets must cover all such assets, and failure to do so amounts to deficiency in service liable for compensation under the Consumer Protection Act.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant deficiency in service insurance coverage hypothecated assets bank liability

Area Planning Authority v. Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprise Limited

19 May 2020 · A.M. Khanwilkar; Dinesh Maheshwari

The Supreme Court held that the Project Proponents must obtain prior State approval under the Framework Agreement before seeking planning permission, and set aside the High Court's order directing issuance of commencement certificate for a group housing scheme in the infrastructure corridor.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Framework Agreement Integrated Infrastructure Corridor Planning Authority Group Housing Scheme

Arnab Ranjan Goswami v. Union of India & Ors.

19 May 2020 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; M R Shah
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court quashed multiple FIRs against journalist Arnab Goswami arising from the same cause of action, upheld his freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a), allowed investigation in one FIR to proceed, and declined to transfer the investigation to the CBI absent exceptional circumstances.

constitutional appeal_allowed Significant multiple FIRs abuse of process freedom of speech and expression Article 19(1)(a)

FCI Labour Federation v. Ravuthar Dawood Naseem

19 May 2020 · A.M. Khanwilkar; Dinesh Maheshwari · 2020 INSC 401

The Supreme Court dismissed contempt petitions against FCI, holding that regularisation of workers under the Direct Payment System complies with general directions to departmentalise, and no wilful disobedience was established.

labor petition_dismissed Significant regularisation departmentalisation Direct Payment System Departmental Labour System

FCI Labour Federation v. Ravuthar Dawood Naseem

19 May 2020 · A.M. Khanwilkar; Dinesh Maheshwari

The Supreme Court dismissed contempt petitions against FCI, holding that regularisation of contract workers under the Direct Payment System complied with general directions to departmentalise, absent specific orders mandating the Departmental Labour System, and no wilful disobedience was established.

labor petition_dismissed Significant regularisation departmental labour system direct payment system contract labour

RAMNATH AGRAWAL v. FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA

13 May 2020 · N.V. Ramana; Sanjiv Khanna; Krishna Murari
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that the 1976 agreement was an executory agreement to lease, not a lease, and rent was payable only from actual possession after completion and approval, dismissing the appellants' claim for arrears and enhanced rent.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant agreement to lease lease agreement possession completion certificate

Jagmail Singh v. Karamjit Singh

13 May 2020 · Navin Sinha; Krishna Murari

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal permitting secondary evidence of a Will where the original was in possession of revenue officials who failed to produce it after notice, emphasizing the need to establish foundational facts before admitting secondary evidence.

civil appeal_allowed Significant secondary evidence Indian Evidence Act Section 65 Section 66

Jagmail Singh v. Karamjit Singh

13 May 2020 · Navin Sinha; Krishna Murari

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal permitting the appellants to lead secondary evidence of a Will when the original was in possession of revenue officials who failed to produce it despite notice under Sections 65 and 66 of the Indian Evidence Act.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Secondary evidence Indian Evidence Act Section 65 Section 66

Foundation for Media Professionals v. Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir

11 May 2020 · N. V. Ramana; R. Subhash Reddy; B. R. Gavai · (2020) SCC Online SC 25

The Supreme Court upheld the necessity of internet restrictions in Jammu and Kashmir for national security but mandated a Special Committee to ensure proportionality and procedural safeguards balancing fundamental rights and security.

constitutional other Significant internet restrictions national security fundamental rights Anuradha Bhasin

Director, Department of Archaeology and Museums, Jaipur v. Ashish Gautam

11 May 2020 · Arun Mishra; S. Ravindra Bhat · 2020 INSC 394

The Supreme Court allowed limited daytime use of Sisodia Rani ka Bagh for social functions with strict environmental safeguards, modifying the NGT's blanket ban to balance heritage, tourism, and wildlife protection.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant protected monument forest area National Green Tribunal environmental restrictions

Director, Department of Archaeology and Museums, Jaipur v. Ashish Gautam

11 May 2020 · Arun Mishra; S. Ravindra Bhat

The Supreme Court partially allowed the appeal against the NGT's blanket ban on social functions at Sisodia Rani ka Bagh, permitting regulated use with strict environmental safeguards to balance heritage conservation and wildlife protection.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Sisodia Rani ka Bagh National Green Tribunal protected monument forest area

South East Asia Marine Engineering and Constructions Ltd. v. Oil India Limited

11 May 2020 · N. V. Ramana; Mohan M. Shantanagoudar; Ajay Rastogi

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's setting aside of an arbitral award interpreting a contract clause on change in law, holding the tribunal's interpretation was not a plausible construction and thus the award was perverse and against public policy.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitral award Clause 23 Change in law Force majeure

South East Asia Marine Engineering and Constructions Ltd. v. Oil India Limited

11 May 2020 · N. V. Ramana; Mohan M. Shantanagoudar; Ajay Rastogi

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's setting aside of an arbitral award interpreting a 'change in law' clause to include government circulars increasing diesel prices, holding such interpretation was not a plausible reading of the contract and exceeded the Tribunal's jurisdiction.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 change in law clause contract interpretation

S. Kasi v. State

11 May 2020 · Ashok Bhushan; M. R. Shah; V. Ramasubramanian
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that the COVID-19 related extension of limitation periods does not affect the statutory period for filing charge sheets under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C., affirming the accused's right to default bail despite lockdown restrictions.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant default bail Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. charge sheet filing COVID-19 pandemic

S. Kasi v. State

11 May 2020 · Ashok Bhushan; M. R. Shah; V. Ramasubramanian
Cites 1 · Cited by 4

The Supreme Court held that the COVID-19 related extension of limitation periods does not affect the statutory period for filing charge sheets under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C., affirming the accused's right to default bail despite the pandemic.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant default bail Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. charge sheet filing personal liberty

State of Madhya Pradesh v. Babbu Rathore & Anr.

09 May 2020 · Indu Malhotra; Ajay Rastogi · 2020 INSC 53

The Supreme Court held that investigation defects under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act do not vitiate proceedings for IPC offences if investigated by a competent officer, restoring trial for IPC charges while quashing only the Act-related charges.

criminal appeal_partly_allowed Significant Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 investigation Deputy Superintendent of Police Section 9 of Act 1989

TRILOKI NATH SINGH v. ANIRUDH SINGH

06 May 2020 · A. M. Khanwilkar; Ajay Rastogi · 2020 INSC 385

A stranger to a compromise decree cannot challenge its validity in a separate suit as barred by Order 23 Rule 3A CPC; only the court which passed the decree can examine its lawfulness.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant compromise decree Order 23 Rule 3 CPC Order 23 Rule 3A CPC bar to suit

TRILOKI NATH SINGH v. ANIRUDH SINGH

06 May 2020 · A. M. Khanwilkar; Ajay Rastogi
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

A stranger to a compromise decree cannot challenge its validity in a separate suit as barred under Order 23 Rule 3A CPC; only the court which passed the decree can examine its lawfulness.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant compromise decree Order 23 Rule 3A CPC stranger to proceedings bar to suit

Bihar Staff Selection Commission v. Arun Kumar

06 May 2020 · Rohinton Fali Nariman; S. Ravindra Bhat · 2020 INSC 391
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court held that judicial re-evaluation of public service examination answers is limited and accepted expert committee recommendations to finalize results without disturbing appointments already made.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant judicial review examination evaluation re-evaluation public service commission