Supreme Court of India

15,089 judgments

Year:

M/S CRAFT INTERIORS(P) LTD. v. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (INTELLIGENCE) & ANR.

02 Jul 2019 · A. M. Khanwilkar; Ajay Rastogi

The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of Rule 6(4)(m)(i) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Rules, holding that deductions for goods used in the same form do not expand the charging section under Section 5B of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 Rule 6(4)(m)(i) works contract charging provision

M/S CRAFT INTERIORS(P) LTD. v. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (INTELLIGENCE) & ANR.

02 Jul 2019 · A. M. Khanwilkar; Ajay Rastogi

The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of Rule 6(4)(m)(i) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Rules, 1957, holding that deductions for goods used in the same form do not expand the charging section and that transformed goods are separately taxable under Section 5B of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 Rule 6(4)(m)(i) works contract charging provision

Sunil Vasudeva v. Sundar Gupta

02 Jul 2019 · A. M. Khanwilkar; Ajay Rastogi
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s review order restoring a writ petition challenging an Income Tax Department auction sale of property, emphasizing the applicability of Section 293 Income Tax Act and principles of review jurisdiction.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant review petition Order 47 Rule 1 CPC Section 293 Income Tax Act auction sale

Arshnoor Singh v. Harpal Kaur

01 Jul 2019 · Uday Umesh Lalit; Indu Malhotra
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that property inherited before 1956 remains coparcenary property and sale deeds executed without legal necessity or consideration by a coparcener are void, allowing the appellant's appeal to set aside such sales.

civil appeal_allowed Significant coparcenary property Mitakshara law Hindu Succession Act, 1956 legal necessity

Madhav Prasad Aggarwal & Anr. v. Axis Bank Ltd. & Anr.

01 Jul 2019 · A.M. Khanwilkar; Ajay Rastogi
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that under Order 7 Rule 11(d) CPC, a plaint cannot be rejected only against one defendant and set aside the High Court's partial rejection of the plaint against the bank, restoring the suit to proceed.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order 7 Rule 11(d) CPC Section 34 SARFAESI Act partial rejection of plaint maintainability of suit

Pradeep Ram v. State of Jharkhand & Anr

01 Jul 2019 · Ashok Bhushan; K. M. Joseph

The Supreme Court held that NIA's re-registration of FIR is not a second FIR, further investigation after charge sheet is permissible, and earlier bail does not automatically cover newly added offences requiring fresh bail or court permission for arrest.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant bail new offences re-registration of FIR second FIR

Pradeep Ram v. State of Jharkhand & Anr

01 Jul 2019 · Ashok Bhushan; K. M. Joseph

The Supreme Court held that re-registration of FIR by NIA under statutory powers is valid, further investigation after charge sheet is permissible, and earlier bail does not automatically extend to newly added offences requiring fresh bail application or court permission for arrest.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant bail re-registration of FIR National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967

VASAVI ENGINEERING COLLEGE PARENTS ASSOCIATION v. STATE OF TELANGANA

01 Jul 2019 · Arun Mishra; Navin Sinha

The Supreme Court held that courts must exercise judicial restraint and cannot substitute their own view for the expert statutory committee's fee fixation unless there is arbitrariness or illegality, restoring the TAFRC's fee structure for Telangana unaided professional institutions.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant judicial review fee fixation educational institutions Telangana Admission and Fee Regulatory Committee

Parminder Singh v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd.

01 Jul 2019 · Indu Malhotra; M. R. Shah
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court enhanced compensation for a permanently disabled motor accident victim, held the insurer liable to pay initially despite invalid driver licenses, and emphasized just compensation considering actual income, disability, and attendant care.

civil appeal_allowed Significant permanent disability compensation loss of future earnings invalid driving license

Reckitt Benckiser (India) Private Limited v. Reynders Label Printing India Private Limited

01 Jul 2019 · A.M. Khanwilkar; Ajay Rastogi

The Supreme Court held that a non-signatory group company cannot be bound by an arbitration agreement absent clear assent, dismissing the petition against respondent No.2 but appointing an arbitrator for domestic arbitration between petitioner and respondent No.1.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant arbitration agreement non-signatory group of companies doctrine assent to arbitration

Reckitt Benckiser (India) Private Limited v. Reynders Label Printing India Private Limited

01 Jul 2019 · A. M. Khanwilkar; Ajay Rastogi

The Supreme Court held that a non-signatory company cannot be bound by an arbitration agreement absent clear evidence of intention to be bound, dismissing the petition against respondent No.2 and appointing an arbitrator for domestic arbitration between the petitioner and respondent No.1.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant arbitration agreement non-signatory group of companies doctrine intention to be bound

Srilekha Sentilkumar v. Deputy Superintendent of Police, CBI

01 Jul 2019 · Abhay Manohar Sapre; Dinesh Maheshwari · 2019 INSC 703

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal against the dismissal of the discharge application under Section 239 Cr.P.C., holding that disputed issues must be tried on merits after evidence is adduced.

criminal appeal_dismissed Section 239 Cr.P.C. discharge application Prevention of Corruption Act trial on merits

Srilekha Sentilkumar v. Deputy Superintendent of Police, CBI

01 Jul 2019 · Abhay Manohar Sapre; Dinesh Maheshwari

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal against the dismissal of the discharge application under Section 239 Cr.P.C., holding that disputed issues must be tried on merits after evidence is adduced.

criminal appeal_dismissed Section 239 Cr.P.C. discharge application prima facie case Prevention of Corruption Act

The Executive Engineer, M.I.W. v. Vitthal Damodar Patil

01 Jul 2019 · A.M. Khanwilkar; Ajay Rastogi
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's acceptance of a valuation report without proper scrutiny and remanded the land acquisition compensation dispute for fresh consideration on merits.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 compensation valuation report expert witness

DODDAMUNIYAPPA v. MUNISWAMY

01 Jul 2019 · A. M. Khanwilkar; Ajay Rastogi

The Supreme Court held that a compromise entered into by some joint family members without consent of other coparceners does not bind the non-consenting members in respect of their share in joint family property.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant joint family property compromise decree reconveyance clause coparcenary property

DODDAMUNIYAPPA v. MUNISWAMY

01 Jul 2019 · A. M. Khanwilkar; Ajay Rastogi

The Supreme Court held that a compromise in execution proceedings by some joint family members without consent of other coparceners does not bind the non-consenting coparceners' rights in ancestral joint family property.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant joint family property ancestral property coparcenary compromise decree

Union of India v. Ranjit Kumar Saha

01 Jul 2019 · L. Nageswara Rao; M.R. Shah
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that the General Assam Rifles Court has jurisdiction to try offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act against Assam Rifles personnel under the Assam Rifles Act, 2006, overruling the High Court's contrary view.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Assam Rifles Act, 2006 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 General Assam Rifles Court jurisdiction

Satvinder Singh Saluja & Ors. v. State of Bihar

01 Jul 2019 · Ashok Bhushan; K. M. Joseph · 2019 INSC 710

The Supreme Court held that a private vehicle on a public road qualifies as a public place under Bihar Excise law, validating cognizance of liquor consumption offence, but allowed appellants to seek discharge at trial.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Bihar Excise (Amendment) Act, 2016 public place private vehicle consumption of liquor

Satvinder Singh Saluja & Ors. v. State of Bihar

01 Jul 2019 · Ashok Bhushan; K. M. Joseph

The Supreme Court held that a private vehicle on a public road can be a 'public place' under Bihar Excise law, upheld cognizance of liquor consumption offence, and allowed appellants to seek discharge before the Magistrate.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Bihar Excise (Amendment) Act, 2016 public place definition consumption of liquor private vehicle

The State of Tamil Nadu v. Dr. Vasanthi Veerasekaran

01 Jul 2019 · A.M. Khanwilkar; Ajay Rastogi

The Supreme Court held that the State Government is not legally obligated to allot alternative housing sites to landowners displaced by acquisition for a Central Government MRTS project absent any statutory or policy mandate, setting aside the High Court's direction to the contrary.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act 1894 alternative housing site Mass Rapid Transport System compensation