Supreme Court of India

16,355 judgments

Year:

KANTA YADAV v. OM PRAKASH YADAV

24 Jul 2019 · L. NAGESWARA RAO; HEMANT GUPTA · 2019 INSC 808

The Supreme Court held that probate under Section 213 of the Indian Succession Act is not required for Wills made by Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, or Jains outside Bengal, Madras, or Bombay territories, including the National Capital Region of Delhi, dismissing the appeal against the High Court's order allowing the suit without probate.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Indian Succession Act, 1925 Section 213 probate letters of administration

KANTA YADAV v. OM PRAKASH YADAV

24 Jul 2019 · L. NAGESWARA RAO; HEMANT GUPTA

The Supreme Court held that probate is not required under Section 213 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 for Wills executed in Delhi by Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, or Jains, dismissing the appeal and upholding the maintainability of suits without probate.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Indian Succession Act, 1925 Section 213 Section 57 probate

K. Anjaneyulu v. T. Ashok Raju

24 Jul 2019 · R. Banumathi; A. S. Bopanna

The Supreme Court upheld the validity of executive memos issued under statutory powers for preparing integrated seniority lists of LDCs and Typists including training periods, dismissing the challenge based on Regulation 26.

service_law appeal_dismissed Significant integrated seniority Lower Division Clerk Typist Upper Division Clerk

K. Anjaneyulu v. T. Ashok Raju

24 Jul 2019 · R. Banumathi; A. S. Bopanna

The Supreme Court upheld the validity of executive Memos issued under statutory powers for preparing integrated seniority lists including training periods for promotion, dismissing the challenge based on Regulation 26.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant integrated seniority training period promotion Lower Division Clerks

Lucknow Development Authority v. Gopal Das

24 Jul 2019 · L. Nageswara Rao; Hemant Gupta

The Supreme Court held that development charges are payable on restoration of acquired land if the development authority has developed the acquired area as a whole, but the demand must be preceded by an opportunity of hearing.

property appeal_allowed Significant development charges land acquisition restoration of land Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973

Provident Fund Office & Anr v. M/s Godavari Garments Limited

24 Jul 2019 · Abhay Manohar Sapre; Indu Malhotra

The Supreme Court held that home-based women workers paid on a piece-rate basis are employees under Section 2(f) of the EPF Act, entitling them to Provident Fund benefits, and restored the Provident Fund dues order against the employer.

labor appeal_allowed Significant Employees’ Provident Fund Act Section 2(f) employee definition home-based workers

Ex-Hav Ashok Kumar v. Union of India & Ors

24 Jul 2019 · Dhananajaya Y Chandrachud; Indira Banerjee

The Supreme Court held that discharge during extended service due to permanent low medical category entitles a soldier to disability pension but not to ex-gratia compensation under the Defence Ministry’s policy.

service_law appeal_dismissed Significant disability pension ex-gratia compensation extended tenure permanent low medical category

Postman Vengaisamy & Ors. v. State Represented by Inspector of Police & Ors.

24 Jul 2019 · L. Nageswara Rao; Hemant Gupta · 2019 INSC 802
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld convictions under Sections 302 and 149 IPC, holding that credible injured witnesses corroborated by medical evidence suffice to prove common object in unlawful assembly murder cases.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant unlawful assembly common object Section 149 IPC culpable homicide

Postman Vengaisamy & Ors. v. State Represented by Inspector of Police & Ors.

24 Jul 2019 · L. Nageswara Rao; Hemant Gupta
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld murder convictions based on credible injured eyewitness testimony corroborated by medical evidence and established common object of unlawful assembly, dismissing the appeal.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant unlawful assembly common object Section 302 IPC Section 149 IPC

Surinder Pal Soni v. Sohan Lal

23 Jul 2019 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Indira Banerjee

The Supreme Court held that the appellate decree merges the trial court's decree for specific performance, making it executable despite non-deposit within the trial court's stipulated time, and set aside the High Court's order substituting the decree with refund of earnest money.

civil appeal_allowed Significant specific performance doctrine of merger Section 28 Specific Relief Act execution of decree

Surinder Pal Soni v. Sohan Lal

23 Jul 2019 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Indira Banerjee

The Supreme Court held that the appellate decree merges the trial court's decree in specific performance suits, execution is governed by the appellate decree, and failure to deposit balance sale consideration within stipulated time renders the decree inexecutable unless extended by the court under Section 28 of the Specific Relief Act.

civil appeal_allowed Significant specific performance doctrine of merger Section 28 Specific Relief Act execution of decree

Bikram Chatterji v. Union of India

23 Jul 2019 · Arun Mishra; Uday Umesh Lalit · 2019 INSC 799

The Supreme Court upheld the insolvency code's creditor priority rules while directing Amrapali promoters to complete pending housing projects and protect home buyers' interests amid findings of fund diversion.

civil petition_allowed Significant home buyers Amrapali Group Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 Section 53

Bikram Chatterji v. Union of India

23 Jul 2019 · Arun Mishra; Uday Umesh Lalit

The Supreme Court directed Amrapali Group promoters to complete pending real estate projects under court supervision, recognizing home buyers as unsecured creditors under insolvency law but protecting their interests through specific measures including escrow accounts and co-developer appointments.

civil petition_allowed Significant Amrapali Group home buyers Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 Section 53 IBC

Sri A.M.C.S. Swamy v. Mehdi Agah Karbalai & Anr.

23 Jul 2019 · R. Banumathi; R. Subhash Reddy · 2019 INSC 795

The Supreme Court held that a Special Court under the Electricity Act, 2003, can take cognizance of offences without a committal order, setting aside the High Court's quashing of proceedings for meter tampering.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Electricity Act, 2003 Section 151 Electricity Act Section 193 CrPC Special Court jurisdiction

Sri A.M.C.S. Swamy v. Mehdi Agah Karbalai & Anr.

23 Jul 2019 · R. Banumathi; R. Subhash Reddy

The Supreme Court held that a Special Court under the Electricity Act, 2003 can take cognizance of offences without an order of committal, setting aside the High Court's quashing of proceedings for meter tampering.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Electricity Act, 2003 Section 151 Electricity Act Section 193 CrPC Special Court

Girish Singh v. State of Uttarakhand

23 Jul 2019 · Sanjay Kishan Kaul; K. M. Joseph

The Supreme Court restored the Trial Court's acquittal in a dowry death case, holding that the High Court erred in convicting the appellants without sufficient evidence of cruelty or harassment for dowry demands.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant dowry death Section 304B IPC Section 113B Indian Evidence Act appeal against acquittal

Shiv Prakash Mishra v. State of Uttar Pradesh

23 Jul 2019 · R. Banumathi; A. S. Bopanna · 2019 INSC 798

The Supreme Court held that the power to summon additional accused under Section 319 Cr.P.C. is discretionary and must be exercised sparingly on strong evidence, dismissing the appeal to summon the second respondent due to lack of cogent proof of his involvement.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 319 Cr.P.C. summoning additional accused discretionary power standard of proof

Shiv Prakash Mishra v. State of Uttar Pradesh

23 Jul 2019 · R. Banumathi; A. S. Bopanna

The Supreme Court held that the power to summon additional accused under Section 319 Cr.P.C. is discretionary and must be exercised sparingly on strong evidence, dismissing the appeal to summon the second respondent due to contradictory and insufficient evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 319 Cr.P.C. summoning additional accused discretionary power standard of proof

Ram Gopal v. Central Bureau of Investigation

22 Jul 2019 · Ashok Bhushan; Navin Sinha · 2019 INSC 791

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of bank employees for forgery and criminal conspiracy involving a fictitious account, affirming the sufficiency of handwriting expert evidence and valid prosecution sanction.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant fictitious bank account forgery criminal conspiracy handwriting expert evidence

Ram Gopal v. Central Bureau of Investigation

22 Jul 2019 · Ashok Bhushan; Navin Sinha

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of bank employees for conspiracy and fraud involving a fictitious account, relying on handwriting evidence and valid prosecution sanction despite investigative shortcomings.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant fictitious bank account criminal conspiracy handwriting expert evidence Prevention of Corruption Act