Supreme Court of India
16,355 judgments
VST INDUSTRIES LIMITED v. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.
The Supreme Court restrained further recovery of interest on Entry Tax arrears from the appellant pending final adjudication of the writ petition challenging the demand.
Maars Software International Ltd. & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal against the High Court's restoration of FEMA penalty, remanding the case for fresh consideration of material evidence on merits.
Maars Software International Ltd. v. Union of India
The Supreme Court allowed the appeals and remanded the case to the High Court for fresh consideration of FEMA penalty appeals, emphasizing the need to consider all relevant material on record.
Naresh Chandra Bhardwaj v. Bank of India
The Supreme Court modified the appellant's disciplinary penalty from removal to compulsory retirement on the ground of parity with similarly placed officers, emphasizing limited judicial interference in punishment quantum.
State of Rajasthan v. Mukesh Sharma
The Supreme Court upheld the validity of a State rule requiring life convicts to serve 14 years plus earn four years remission before remission consideration, holding the rule consistent with Section 433-A Cr.P.C. and that non-laying before the legislature was directory.
Nand Kumar Manjhi & Anr. v. State of Bihar & Ors.
The Supreme Court held that appointments made beyond advertised vacancies are illegal and seniority can only be reckoned from the date of regularisation, dismissing the appellants' claim for seniority from their initial illegal appointment date.
Nand Kumar Manjhi & Anr. v. State of Bihar & Ors.
The Supreme Court upheld that seniority in the Bihar Forest Service must be reckoned from the date of regularisation, not from illegal initial appointments made beyond advertised vacancies.
ANIL KUMAR ANAND v. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (PREVENTIVE)
The Supreme Court held that Customs Valuation Rules must be applied sequentially, setting aside revaluation and penalty orders for failure to consider transaction values of identical or similar goods before resorting to other valuation methods.
Kumar Ghimirey v. State of Sikkim
The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred in enhancing the sentence without giving notice to the accused, setting aside the enhanced sentence while affirming conviction and original sentence under the POCSO Act.
Kumar Ghimirey v. State of Sikkim
The Supreme Court held that a High Court cannot enhance sentence in an appeal filed by the accused without issuing notice for enhancement, setting aside the enhanced sentence while upholding conviction under the POCSO Act.
G. Shashikala v. G. Kalawati Bai
The Supreme Court allowed the appeals and remanded the case for fresh hearing after holding that the High Court committed jurisdictional error by improperly deciding applications for additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC without following binding precedents.
G. Shashikala v. G. Kalawati Bai
The Supreme Court allowed the appeals and remanded the case for fresh hearing after holding that the High Court committed jurisdictional error in deciding applications for additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC without applying binding precedents.
Bikash Ranjan Rout v. State through the Secretary (Home), Government of NCT of Delhi, New Delhi
The Supreme Court held that a Magistrate cannot suo moto order further investigation after discharging the accused under Section 227 CrPC; such further investigation can only be ordered upon application by the investigating agency under Section 173(8) CrPC.
Bikash Ranjan Rout v. State through the Secretary (Home), Government of NCT of Delhi, New Delhi
The Supreme Court held that a Magistrate cannot suo moto order further investigation after discharging the accused, and such power lies only with the investigating agency applying under Section 173(8) of the CrPC.
Manju Devi v. State of Rajasthan & Anr.
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal directing the Trial Court to summon and record the evidence of the foreign post-mortem doctor through commission or video-conferencing under Section 311 CrPC to ensure a just decision.
Manju Devi v. State of Rajasthan & Anr.
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal directing the Trial Court to summon and record evidence of a foreign medical witness through commission or video-conferencing under Section 311 CrPC to ensure a just decision despite trial delay.
Nisha Singla v. Adarsh Colony Cooperative House Building Society Ltd.
The Supreme Court directed an enquiry and ordered possession of a 250 sq. yard plot to a cooperative society member who accepted allotment but was denied possession, emphasizing procedural fairness and estoppel principles.
Nisha Singla v. Adarsh Colony Cooperative House Building Society Ltd.
The Supreme Court directed an enquiry into the appellant's plot allotment and possession rights in a cooperative housing society dispute, emphasizing lawful allotment and possession rights under the Punjab Cooperative Societies Act.
PR. Commissioner of Income Tax Central 2 v. M/s A.A. Estate Pvt. Ltd.
The Supreme Court held that the High Court must frame substantial questions of law under Section 260-A before admitting and deciding income tax appeals, and remanded the case for fresh adjudication following proper procedure.
PR. Commissioner of Income Tax Central 2 v. M/s A.A. Estate Pvt. Ltd.
The Supreme Court allowed the Revenue's appeal, holding that the High Court erred in dismissing the appeal without framing substantial questions of law under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act and remanded the case for fresh adjudication.