Supreme Court of India

16,356 judgments

Year:

Ashish Seth v. Sumit Mittal

24 Apr 2020 · Ashok Bhushan; M. R. Shah · 2020 INSC 361

The Supreme Court held the Mittal Group and TFIPL liable for contempt for willful non-compliance of a settlement incorporated in its order, granting them two months to fulfill their obligations while dismissing the counter contempt petitions by the Seth Group.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Memorandum of Settlement Contempt of Court External Development Charges License Renewal

Maximal Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. Ashish Seth

24 Apr 2020 · Ashok Bhushan; M. R. Shah

The Supreme Court held the Mittal Group liable for contempt for willful non-compliance of a court-approved settlement, granting them time to fulfill obligations including payment of development charges and license renewals, while dismissing their contempt petitions against the Seth Group.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Memorandum of Settlement Contempt of Court External Development Charges License Renewal

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 416 OF 2020 [ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION [CRL] NO.2908 OF 2019] xxxx v. xxxx & ORS. .

24 Apr 2020 · Uday Umesh Lalit; Vineet Saran

The Supreme Court quashed the FIR under Sections 498A and 406 IPC as the 498A complaint was time-barred and the allegations under 406 IPC were unsustainable, holding the criminal complaint to be an abuse of process.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 498A IPC Section 406 IPC Stridhan Limitation

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 416 OF 2020 [ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION [CRL] NO.2908 OF 2019] xxxx v. xxxx & ORS. .

24 Apr 2020 · Uday Umesh Lalit; Vineet Saran

The Supreme Court quashed the FIR under Sections 498A and 406 IPC in a matrimonial dispute, holding the complaint time-barred and the criminal proceedings an abuse of process.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 498A IPC Section 406 IPC Stridhan Limitation

Shivakumar v. Sharanabasappa

24 Apr 2020 · A. M. Khanwilkar; Hemant Gupta; Dinesh Maheshwari

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's finding that the contested Will was not genuine due to suspicious circumstances and discrepancies, dismissing the plaintiffs' appeal.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Will Indian Succession Act Proof of Will Attesting Witness

Shivakumar v. Sharanabasappa

24 Apr 2020 · A. M. Khanwilkar; Hemant Gupta; Dinesh Maheshwari

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's finding that the contested Will was not genuine due to suspicious circumstances, dismissing the plaintiffs' appeal for declaration of ownership based on that Will.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Will Indian Succession Act Proof of Will Section 63 Indian Succession Act

National Agricultural Cooperative Marketing Federation of India v. Alimenta S.A.

22 Apr 2020 · Arun Mishra; M.R. Shah; B.R. Gavai
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Supreme Court held that a contract expressly providing for cancellation upon lawful government export prohibition becomes void under Section 32 of the Indian Contract Act, rendering a foreign arbitration award for damages unenforceable as against Indian public policy.

civil appeal_allowed Significant foreign award enforcement public policy contract frustration Indian Contract Act Section 32

National Agricultural Cooperative Marketing Federation of India v. Alimenta S.A.

22 Apr 2020 · Arun Mishra; M. R. Shah; B. R. Gavai

The Supreme Court held that a contract voided by lawful government export prohibition under an express contractual clause cannot give rise to damages, and enforcement of a foreign arbitration award ignoring this is against public policy and unenforceable.

civil appeal_allowed Significant foreign award enforcement public policy contract frustration contingent contract

West U.P. Sugar Mills Association & Ors. v. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.

22 Apr 2020 · Arun Mishra; Indira Banerjee; Vineet Saran; M. R. Shah; Anir...

The Supreme Court held that the State Government has the power to fix a sugarcane price above the Central minimum price without repugnancy, resolving conflicting precedents on legislative competence under the Concurrent List.

constitutional other Significant Sugarcane price fixation State Advised Price (SAP) Essential Commodities Act, 1955 Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966

Union of India v. M/s V.V.F Limited

22 Apr 2020 · Arun Mishra; M. R. Shah; B. R. Gavai
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld the Government's power to amend excise duty exemption notifications in public interest, ruling that promissory estoppel does not bar such statutory modifications in fiscal matters.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Central Excise Act Section 5A exemption notification promissory estoppel

Chebrolu Leela Prasad Rao v. State of A.P.

22 Apr 2020 · Arun Mishra; Indira Banerjee; Vineet Saran; M.R. Shah; Aniru...

The Supreme Court upheld the Governor's power under Schedule V to provide 100% reservation for Scheduled Tribe teachers in scheduled areas, ruling that such orders override fundamental rights and do not conflict with Article 371D.

constitutional appeal_dismissed Significant Schedule V Paragraph 5(1) Governor's power Scheduled Areas

Hira Singh and Another v. Union of India and Another

22 Apr 2020 · Arun Mishra; Indira Banerjee; M. R. Shah

The Supreme Court held that for punishment under the NDPS Act, the entire weight of the narcotic drug mixture including neutral substances must be considered, overruling the earlier decision that considered only pure drug content.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant NDPS Act narcotic drugs psychotropic substances neutral substances

Hira Singh and Another v. Union of India and Another

22 Apr 2020 · Arun Mishra; Indira Banerjee; M. R. Shah

The Supreme Court held that for punishment under the NDPS Act, the entire mixture including neutral substances must be considered in determining quantity thresholds, overruling the earlier decision that considered only pure drug content.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant NDPS Act narcotic drugs psychotropic substances neutral substances

Anjuman E Shiate Ali & Anr. v. Gulmohar Area Societies Welfare Group & Ors.

17 Apr 2020 · Mohan M. Shantanagoudar; R. Subhash Reddy · 2020 INSC 343

The Supreme Court upheld that plots reserved as open spaces in an approved 1967 layout cannot be used for construction despite a subsequent development plan indicating residential use.

property appeal_dismissed Significant approved layout open space reservation Development Control Regulations Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act

Anjuman E Shiate Ali & Anr. v. Gulmohar Area Societies Welfare Group & Ors.

17 Apr 2020 · Mohan M. Shantanagoudar; R. Subhash Reddy

The Supreme Court upheld that plots reserved as open spaces in an approved 1967 layout cannot be used for construction despite a subsequent development plan showing them as residential.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Development Control Regulations approved layout open space reservation Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act

Mayor Municipal Corporation v. Govind Bajirao Navpute

17 Apr 2020 · Mohan M. Shantanagoudar; R. Subhash Reddy · 2020 INSC 341

The Supreme Court upheld the mandatory nature of statutory timelines under the MRTP Act, dismissed the appeal, and affirmed the High Court's quashing of the draft development plan notification and illegal extension of time.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 Section 26 MRTP Act draft development plan time limit mandatory

Mayor Municipal Corporation v. Govind Bajirao Navpute

17 Apr 2020 · Mohan M. Shantanagoudar; R. Subhash Reddy

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's quashing of a delayed draft development plan notification under the MRTP Act, affirming the mandatory nature of statutory time limits and the limited jurisdiction of delegated authorities to grant extensions.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 Section 26 MRTP Act Section 21(4A) MRTP Act draft development plan

Shankar Sakharam Kenjale v. Narayan Krishna Gade

17 Apr 2020 · Mohan M. Shantanagoudar; R. Subhash Reddy

The Supreme Court held that the mortgagor’s right of redemption survives the resumption and regrant of watan land under the Abolition Act, and any advantage gained by the mortgagee through regrant must be held for the mortgagor’s benefit under Section 90 of the Indian Trusts Act.

property appeal_dismissed Significant mortgage right of redemption Mirashi tenant watan land

Shankar Sakharam Kenjale v. Narayan Krishna Gade

17 Apr 2020 · Mohan M. Shantanagoudar; R. Subhash Reddy

The Supreme Court held that a permanent Mirashi tenant’s right of redemption survives the Abolition Act and re-grant to the mortgagee, who must hold the benefit of re-grant for the mortgagor under Section 90 of the Indian Trusts Act.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant mortgage right of redemption Bombay Paragana and Kulkarni Watans (Abolition) Act, 1950 Mirashi tenant

Dr. Thingujam Achouba Singh v. Dr. H. Nabachandra Singh

17 Apr 2020 · R. Banumathi; R. Subhash Reddy

The Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s quashing of the RIMS Director recruitment advertisement, holding that non-notification of amended rules does not invalidate recruitment and eligibility criteria are within employer’s discretion.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Regional Institute of Medical Sciences Director appointment Recruitment rules Medical Council of India Regulations