Supreme Court of India

15,089 judgments

Year:

State of Bihar v. Dr Chaitraya Kumar Singh

19 Jul 2019 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Indira Banerjee

The Supreme Court held that an employee who delayed enforcing a re-allocation order and continued service until retirement in the original State cannot claim absorption in the other State post-retirement, allowing the State of Bihar's appeal.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant State reorganization Employee allocation Mutual consent Superannuation

Pradeep Singh Bisht & Anr. v. State of Uttarakhand

19 Jul 2019 · Ranjan Gogoi; Deepak Gupta; Aniruddha Bose · 2019 INSC 779

The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's eviction order against appellants due to lack of documentary evidence and procedural lapses by the Municipal Corporation, emphasizing proper statutory action before judicial intervention.

civil appeal_allowed Significant unauthorized construction eviction removal of encroachments Advocate-Commissioners report

Pradeep Singh Bisht & Anr. v. State of Uttarakhand

19 Jul 2019 · Ranjan Gogoi; Deepak Gupta; Aniruddha Bose

The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's eviction order due to lack of documentary evidence and emphasized that statutory authorities must exercise their powers before judicial eviction directions.

civil appeal_allowed Significant eviction unauthorized construction Advocate-Commissioners report Municipal Corporation

RADHEY SHYAM PANDEY v. KANPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

18 Jul 2019 · R. BANUMATHI; A.S. BOPANNA

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court order for non-impleadment of the State Government, and remitted the matter for fresh adjudication on the appellant's claim for arrears as a stenographer.

civil appeal_allowed service centralization stenographer pay arrears of salary necessary party

Wasim v. National Capital Territory of Delhi

18 Jul 2019 · L. Nageswara Rao; Hemant Gupta · 2019 INSC 776
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court acquitted the appellant of dowry cruelty and abetment of suicide charges due to insufficient evidence, clarifying the distinct requirements for convictions under Sections 498A and 306 IPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 498A IPC Section 306 IPC dowry harassment cruelty

Wasim v. National Capital Territory Delhi

18 Jul 2019 · L. Nageswara Rao; Hemant Gupta
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction under Section 498A IPC for cruelty but acquitted the appellant of Section 306 IPC for abetment of suicide due to lack of evidence.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 498A IPC Section 306 IPC dowry harassment cruelty

WASIM v. STATE NCT OF DELHI

18 Jul 2019 · L. NAGESWARA RAO; HEMANT GUPTA

The Supreme Court quashed the conviction under Section 498A IPC due to lack of evidence of dowry demand or mental cruelty, affirming that wilful conduct or dowry demand is essential for such conviction.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 498A IPC Section 306 IPC dowry demand mental cruelty

State of Bihar and Ors v. Dilip Kumar and Anr

18 Jul 2019 · Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Indira Banerjee
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that compassionate appointments made under the 2006 Rules after their enforcement cannot be converted into regular government service appointments, setting aside the High Court's direction to that effect.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant compassionate appointment Bihar Panchayat Primary Teacher Rules 2006 Nagar Shikshak executive instruction vs statutory rules

State of Bihar and Ors v. Dilip Kumar and Anr

18 Jul 2019 · Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Indira Banerjee
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that compassionate appointments after the 2006 Rules are governed exclusively by those Rules and cannot be upgraded to regular government posts, setting aside the High Court's direction to grant such appointments on a regular pay scale.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant compassionate appointment Bihar Municipal Body Elementary Teachers Rules 2006 Nagar Shikshak government service posts

Union of India v. Dimple Happy Dhakad

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

The Supreme Court upheld detention orders under COFEPOSA against gold smuggling detenues, ruling that delayed service of voluminous relied upon documents within statutory time and subjective satisfaction of detaining authority suffice for valid preventive detention.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant preventive detention COFEPOSA Act Article 22(5) Constitution subjective satisfaction

Union of India v. Dimple Happy Dhakad

18 Jul 2019 · R. Banumathi; A. S. Bopanna
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld detention orders under COFEPOSA, ruling that serving voluminous relied upon documents within five days complies with law and that subjective satisfaction of detaining authority regarding bail likelihood need not be expressly stated if evident from grounds.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant preventive detention COFEPOSA Act Article 22(5) Constitution of India subjective satisfaction

RADHEY SHYAM PANDEY v. KANPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

18 Jul 2019 · R. BANUMATHI; A.S. BOPANNA

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court order for non-impleadment of the State Government in a service matter, and remitted the case for fresh adjudication with the State impleaded.

civil appeal_allowed Significant service centralization necessary party State Government arrears of salary

Radhey Shyam Pandey v. Kanpur Development Authority

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

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court order for non-impleadment of the State Government in a centralized service matter, and remitted the case for fresh adjudication.

civil appeal_allowed Significant centralized service impleadment of necessary party service arrears stenographer pay scale

SHREE CHAITANYA CONSTRUCTIONS v. SUDHIR POONAMCHAND PARAKH

17 Jul 2019 · R. F. Nariman; Sanjiv Khanna; Surya Kant · 2019 INSC 773

The Supreme Court held that non-filing of a written Vakalatnama does not justify recalling an appellate judgment when the party was duly served and chose not to appear, thereby restoring the decree for specific performance.

civil appeal_allowed Significant specific performance service of notice Vakalatnama review petition

SHREE CHAITANYA CONSTRUCTIONS v. SUDHIR POONAMCHAND PARAKH

17 Jul 2019 · R. F. Nariman; Sanjiv Khanna; Surya Kant

The Supreme Court held that non-filing of a written Vakalatnama does not justify recalling a judgment if the party was duly served and effectively represented, allowing the appeal decreeing specific performance.

civil appeal_allowed Significant specific performance suit service of notice Vakalatnama review petition

Gurmit Singh Bhatia v. Kiran Kant Robinson

17 Jul 2019 · M. R. Shah; D. Y. Chandrachud

The Supreme Court held that a third party purchaser who is not party to the original contract and against whom no relief is claimed cannot be impleaded as a defendant in a suit for specific performance against the plaintiffs' wishes.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant specific performance impleadment Order 1 Rule 10 CPC dominus litis

RB Dealers Private Limited v. The Metro Railway, Kolkata

17 Jul 2019 · Arun Mishra; M. R. Shah · 2019 INSC 771

The Supreme Court held that solatium under Section 30(1) of the 2013 Land Acquisition Act is payable only on the compensation amount excluding the additional 12% per annum amount under Section 30(3).

property appeal_dismissed Significant solatium Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013 market value compensation

RB Dealers Private Limited v. The Metro Railway, Kolkata

17 Jul 2019 · Arun Mishra; M. R. Shah

The Supreme Court held that solatium under Section 30(1) of the 2013 Land Acquisition Act is to be calculated only on the compensation amount excluding the additional 12% per annum amount under Section 30(3), dismissing the petitioner's appeal.

property appeal_dismissed Significant solatium Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013 Section 30 market value

Namdeo Shankar Govardhane v. State of Maharashtra

17 Jul 2019 · Abhay Manohar Sapre; Indu Malhotra

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's reduction of compensation rates for agricultural land acquisition, emphasizing reliance on relevant sale deeds proximate to the acquisition date.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 compensation market value agricultural land

Namdeo Shankar Govardhane v. State of Maharashtra

17 Jul 2019 · Abhay Manohar Sapre; Indu Malhotra

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's reduction of compensation rates for agricultural land acquisition, emphasizing reliance on sale deeds proximate to acquisition date and rejecting exclusive reliance on small land parcel prices.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 compensation determination market value agricultural land