Supreme Court of India

8,449 judgments

Year:

P. Daivasigamani v. S. Sambandan

15 Jun 2010 · Bela M. Trivedi; Sanjiv Khanna
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decree for specific performance of a sale agreement, holding that the plaintiff had proved readiness and willingness within limitation and that time was not the essence of the contract for immovable property.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant specific performance readiness and willingness limitation Section 16(c) Specific Relief Act

Abhishek Sharma v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)

31 May 2010 · Abhay S. Oka; Sanjay Karol · 2023 INSC 924
Cites 8 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court set aside the appellant's conviction under Section 302 IPC due to unreliable dying declarations and insufficient corroborative evidence, emphasizing strict scrutiny of multiple dying declarations and procedural compliance.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant dying declaration Section 302 IPC multiple dying declarations reliability of evidence

Achhar Singh v. State of Himachal Pradesh

27 May 2010 · Surya Kant; Aniruddha Bose · 2021 INSC 289
Cites 10 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's conviction of appellants for murder and grievous hurt, holding that appellate interference with trial acquittal is justified when the trial Court's judgment is perverse and overlooks consistent, corroborated evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 378 CrPC Acquittal Perverse judgment Eyewitness testimony

Achhar Singh v. State of Himachal Pradesh

27 May 2010 · Surya Kant; Aniruddha Bose
Cites 10 · Cited by 3

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's conviction of appellants for murder and grievous hurt, affirming that appellate courts may interfere with trial acquittals when based on perverse findings and that exaggerations in witness testimony do not vitiate core truthful evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant acquittal conviction Section 378 CrPC presumption of innocence

Surinder Singh v. State (Union Territory of Chandigarh)

19 May 2010 · N.V. Ramana; Surya Kant; A.S. Bopanna
Cites 0 · Cited by 3

Trust & Anr. v. Sh. Diwan Chand

05 Apr 2010 · Abhay S. Oka; Rajesh Bindal
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court restored the trial court's decree granting possession to the appellants, holding that respondents failed to disprove appellants' ownership of the disputed property forming part of Khasra No. 4833 and that adverse possession was not established.

civil appeal_allowed Significant possession adverse possession Khasra No. 4833 Local Commissioner report

Trust v. Sh. Diwan Chand

05 Apr 2010 · Abhay S. Oka; Rajesh Bindal

The Supreme Court restored the trial court's decree granting possession to the appellants, holding that the disputed property is part of Khasra No. 4833 owned by them and rejecting respondents' adverse possession claim.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Khasra No. 4833 adverse possession possession suit Local Commissioner report

Gurmeet Singh v. State of Punjab

15 Mar 2010 · N. V. Ramana; Surya Kant; Aniruddha Bose · REPORTABLE RE 2021 INSC 299
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction under Section 304-B IPC for dowry death, affirming the application of the presumption under Section 113-B Evidence Act and rejecting the appellant's defense.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 304-B IPC dowry death Section 113-B Evidence Act presumption of dowry death

Gurmeet Singh v. State of Punjab

15 Mar 2010 · N. V. Ramana; Surya Kant; Aniruddha Bose

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction under Section 304-B IPC for dowry death, affirming the application of the presumption under Section 113-B Evidence Act and rejecting the appellant's defense.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 304-B IPC dowry death Section 113-B Evidence Act presumption of dowry death

Avtar Singh v. State of Punjab

15 Jan 2010 · Abhay S. Oka; Rajesh Bindal
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Supreme Court set aside conviction under the Essential Commodities Act as the seizure by an unauthorized police officer was invalid under the LPG Order, 1988.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Essential Commodities Act, 1955 Liquefied Petroleum Gas Order, 1988 search and seizure unauthorized possession

37ad7bc124628620f455cb6aa5e033775100149ee56e659340012f3055381271

04 Jan 2010 · Ajay Rastogi; Abhay S. Oka · 2021 INSC 679

The Supreme Court held that termination without compliance with Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is unlawful retrenchment entitling workmen to reinstatement with back wages.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 25F retrenchment retrenchment compensation

Bijender @ Mandar v. State of Haryana

07 Sep 2009 · N.V. Ramana; Surya Kant; Hima Kohli · AIR 1954 SC 1
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court acquitted the appellant, holding that conviction solely on disclosure statements without credible corroborative evidence and in presence of hostile witnesses cannot sustain.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant disclosure statement recovery of incriminating articles benefit of doubt concurrent findings

N. Raghavender v. State of Andhra Pradesh, CBI

18 Jun 2009 · N.V. Ramana; Surya Kant; Hima Kohli
Cites 0 · Cited by 3

The Supreme Court set aside the appellant's conviction for criminal breach of trust, cheating, and falsification of accounts due to insufficient evidence and procedural lapses, emphasizing the necessity of proving mens rea and lawful authorization in bank fraud cases.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant criminal breach of trust Section 409 IPC cheating Section 420 IPC

National Insurance Company Ltd. v. M/s. Hareshwar Enterprises (P) Ltd.

27 Mar 2009 · A. S. Bopanna
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court held that the limitation period for filing a consumer complaint against an insurer runs from the date of repudiation or failure to settle the claim, and that a surveyor's report, while important, is not conclusive if credible contrary evidence is produced.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant limitation cause of action consumer protection insurance claim

Himachal Road Transport Corporation & Anr. v. Himachal Road Transport Corporation Retired Employees Union

08 Jan 2009 · Ashok Bhushan; R. Subhash Reddy; M.R. Shah
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld the validity of a cut-off date for pension scheme implementation, ruling that employees retired under a different scheme before that date do not form a homogeneous class entitled to retrospective pension benefits.

labor appeal_allowed Significant Pension Scheme Cut-off date Contributory Provident Fund Article 14

Himachal Road Transport Corporation & Anr. v. Himachal Road Transport Corporation Retired Employees Union

08 Jan 2009 · Ashok Bhushan; R. Subhash Reddy; M.R. Shah
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld the validity of a cut-off date for pension benefits, distinguishing retirees under a prior provident fund scheme from employees eligible under a newly introduced pension scheme, and held that such classification is not arbitrary or discriminatory.

labor appeal_allowed Significant Pension Scheme Cut-off date Contributory Provident Fund Article 14

DKG Buildcon Private Ltd. v. The Adjudicating & Enquiry Officer

07 Jan 2009 · Ajay Rastogi; B. V. Nagarathna

The Supreme Court upheld SEBI's imposition of maximum penalty on companies for willful non-compliance with investigation summons relating to securities market manipulation, affirming the authority of SEBI's Investigating Officer and the applicability of amended penalty provisions.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant SEBI Section 15A(a) SEBI Act Section 11C(3) SEBI Act penalty for non-compliance

Balvir Singh v. State of Uttarakhand

13 May 2007 · J. B. Pardiwala; Prashant Kumar Mishra
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court upheld the murder and harassment convictions of a husband and mother-in-law, applying Section 106 of the Evidence Act to draw adverse inference from the accused’s failure to explain the presence of poison causing the wife’s death.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 302 IPC Section 498A IPC Section 106 Evidence Act circumstantial evidence

The Chairman & Managing Director, City Union Bank Ltd. & Anr. v. R. Chandramohan

01 Feb 2007 · Ajay Rastogi; Bela M. Trivedi
Cites 0 · Cited by 3

The Supreme Court held that consumer forums cannot entertain complaints involving disputed facts or fraud allegations in summary proceedings and dismissed the complaint for lack of proof of deficiency in banking service.

civil appeal_allowed Significant deficiency in service Consumer Protection Act, 1986 disputed facts summary proceedings

Gas Authority of India Limited v. Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Limited

08 Feb 2003 · Sanjay Kishan Kaul; Abhay S. Oka

The Supreme Court upheld the maintainability of a writ petition challenging arbitrary transportation loss charges imposed by a State monopoly in a gas supply contract, struck down the impugned clauses as violative of Article 14, and limited refund claims to three years prior to filing.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant writ petition maintainability Article 14 violation unequal bargaining power transportation loss charge