Supreme Court of India

16,356 judgments

Year:

Dr Nallapareddy Sridhar Reddy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

21 Jan 2020 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Hrishikesh Roy

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's order allowing alteration and addition of charges under Sections 406 and 420 IPC before judgment, emphasizing the wide power of courts under Section 216 CrPC to ensure fair trial without prejudice to the accused.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 216 CrPC alteration of charge framing of charge Sections 406 and 420 IPC

Karnataka State Seeds Development Corporation Limited v. H.L. Kaveri

21 Jan 2020 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Ajay Rastogi

The Supreme Court held that non-enclosure of mandatory experience certificates as per recruitment advertisement justifies rejection of application and writ jurisdiction cannot be used to override eligibility conditions.

civil appeal_allowed Significant recruitment advertisement mandatory eligibility experience certificate application rejection

Nirmal Kumar Parsan v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

21 Jan 2020 · A. M. Khanwilkar; Dinesh Maheshwari
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

Sales of imported goods stored in bonded warehouses within West Bengal to foreign-going ships as ship stores are taxable sales within the State and do not qualify as sales in the course of import exempt from sales tax.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant sale in the course of import customs frontiers of India bonded warehouse sales tax

Nirmal Kumar Parsan v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

21 Jan 2020 · A. M. Khanwilkar; Dinesh Maheshwari
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

Sales of imported goods stored in bonded warehouses within West Bengal and sold as ship stores to foreign-going ships are taxable sales within the State and do not qualify as sales in the course of import exempt from sales tax.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant sales tax course of import bonded warehouse customs frontiers

Kamlesh v. Union of India

20 Jan 2020 · S. Abdul Nazeer; Deepak Gupta

The Supreme Court held that a provisional appointment does not confer a right to regularization or back wages, dismissing the appeal but permitting continuation in service until regular appointment.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant provisional appointment Extra Departmental Employee regularization seniority

Kamlesh v. Union of India

20 Jan 2020 · S. Abdul Nazeer; Deepak Gupta

The Supreme Court held that a provisional appointment does not confer any right to regularization or back wages, dismissing the appellant’s claim and permitting her to hold the post only until regular appointment is made.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant provisional appointment regularization Extra Departmental Employee seniority

Yashita Sahu v. State of Rajasthan

20 Jan 2020 · Deepak Gupta; Aniruddha Bose

The Supreme Court held that in international child custody disputes, the child's welfare is paramount, foreign court orders are persuasive but not binding, and issued directions balancing custody and visitation rights while rejecting coercive orders against an adult spouse.

family appeal_allowed Significant writ of habeas corpus child custody foreign court orders doctrine of comity

Yashita Sahu v. State of Rajasthan

20 Jan 2020 · Deepak Gupta; Aniruddha Bose

The Supreme Court held that in international child custody disputes, the child's welfare prevails over foreign court orders and directed custody and visitation arrangements balancing parental rights and the child's best interests.

family appeal_allowed Significant habeas corpus child custody foreign court orders doctrine of comity

M/S FAIR COMMUNICATION AND CONSULTANTS & ANR v. SURENDRA KERDILE

20 Jan 2020 · Indira Banerjee; S. Ravindra Bhat
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decree for recovery of ₹80,000 loan, rejecting the appellants' benami and evidentiary objections and affirming the burden of proof on benami claims.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant loan recovery benami transaction General Power of Attorney photocopy admissibility

Pawan Kumar Gupta v. State of NCT of Delhi

20 Jan 2020 · R. Banumathi; Ashok Bhushan; A.S. Bopanna · 2020 INSC 55

The Supreme Court held that once a plea of juvenility is conclusively rejected by all courts including the Supreme Court, it cannot be re-agitated by filing a fresh application under Section 7A of the Juvenile Justice Act.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant juvenility juvenile justice Section 7A JJ Act age determination

Pawan Kumar Gupta v. State of NCT of Delhi

20 Jan 2020 · R. Banumathi; Ashok Bhushan; A.S. Bopanna

The Supreme Court held that once a plea of juvenility is conclusively rejected by all courts including the Supreme Court, it cannot be re-agitated by filing a fresh application under Section 7A of the Juvenile Justice Act.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant juvenility juvenile justice Section 7A JJ Act age verification

Sangrur Sales Corporation v. United India Insurance Company Limited

17 Jan 2020 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Hrishikesh Roy

The Supreme Court held that an insurance policy exclusion for damage caused by excavation applies only to the insured's own property, not third-party excavation, and restored the insured's claim for loss due to adjacent excavation.

civil appeal_allowed Significant insurance policy exclusion clause excavation damage subsidence

Sangrur Sales Corporation v. United India Insurance Company Limited & Anr

17 Jan 2020 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Hrishikesh Roy
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that an insurance policy exclusion for excavation damage applies only to excavations by the insured on their own property, allowing the insured's claim for damage caused by a third party's adjacent excavation.

civil appeal_allowed Significant insurance policy exclusion clause excavation damage subsidence

M/S. PAWAN HANS LIMITED v. AVIATION KARMACHARI SANGHATANA

17 Jan 2020 · Uday Umesh Lalit; Indu Malhotra

The Supreme Court held that contractual employees of a Government Company are entitled to provident fund benefits under the company's PF Trust Regulations and the EPF Act, rejecting the company's claim of exemption under Section 16 and limiting retrospective benefits to the date of litigation.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 Section 16 exemption contractual employees provident fund benefits

Union of India v. Chandra Bhushan Yadav

17 Jan 2020 · L. NAGESWARA RAO; DEEPAK GUPTA
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that the Air Force Act and Rules exclude mandatory FIR registration under CrPC, upheld the validity of Court Martial proceedings, and dismissed the appeal against the acquittal of the Respondent for lack of evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Air Force Act, 1950 Court Martial Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 FIR registration

M/S. PAWAN HANS LIMITED v. AVIATION KARMACHARI SANGHATANA

17 Jan 2020 · Uday Umesh Lalit; Indu Malhotra

The Supreme Court held that contractual employees of a Government Company are entitled to provident fund benefits under the company’s PF Trust Regulations, rejecting the Company’s claim of exemption under Section 16 of the EPF Act, but limited retrospective benefits to the date of the writ petition.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 Section 16 exemption contractual employees provident fund benefits

Union of India v. Brig. Balbir Singh

16 Jan 2020 · L. NAGESWARA RAO; HEMANT GUPTA · 2020 INSC 48
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that Army officers appointed on tenure basis in MES are not entitled to the same grade pay as civilian Chief Engineers under IDSE Rules, affirming the validity of classification between military and civilian personnel for pay purposes.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant equal pay for equal work grade pay Military Engineering Service Indian Defence Service of Engineers

Union of India v. Brig. Balbir Singh

16 Jan 2020 · L. NAGESWARA RAO; HEMANT GUPTA
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that Army Officers appointed on tenure basis in MES are not entitled to grade pay parity with civilian Chief Engineers governed by IDSE Rules, affirming the validity of classification between military and civilian personnel.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant grade pay Military Engineering Service Indian Defence Service of Engineers equal pay for equal work

Hanuman Laxman Aroskar v. Union of India & Ors.

16 Jan 2020 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Hemant Gupta

The Supreme Court upheld the Expert Appraisal Committee's recommendation to grant Environmental Clearance for the Mopa airport project, affirming the adequacy of its expertise, appraisal process, and environmental safeguards.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Environmental Clearance Expert Appraisal Committee Environmental Impact Assessment Western Ghats

The State of Uttar Pradesh v. Ali Hussain Ansari

15 Jan 2020 · S. Abdul Nazeer; Sanjiv Khanna

The Supreme Court held that the first respondent's appointment date shall be treated as actual joining date for service benefits, excluding salary arrears, and awarded equitable compensation for the period of non-appointment.

civil appeal_allowed Significant post-retirement benefits seniority no work no pay appointment date