Supreme Court of India

14,826 judgments

Year:

ANAND KUMAR SHARMA v. BAR COUNCIL OF RAJASTHAN

01 Mar 2019 · L. NAGESWARA RAO; M.R. SHAH

The Supreme Court upheld the cancellation of an advocate's enrolment obtained by suppression of facts and dismissed his repeated attempts for fresh enrolment as an abuse of process.

professional_regulation appeal_dismissed Significant Advocates Act, 1961 Section 26 Advocates Act enrolment cancellation misrepresentation

The Govt. of India & Anr. v. P. Venkatesh

01 Mar 2019 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Hemant Gupta

The Supreme Court held that claims for compassionate appointment must be made within a reasonable period and dismissed a claim made after over a decade, emphasizing the scheme's temporal limitations and the need for finality in adjudication.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant compassionate appointment delay in claim financial crisis Central Administrative Tribunal

Varun Pahwa v. Renu Chourie

01 Mar 2019 · D. Y. Chandrachud; Hemant Gupta
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that procedural errors in pleadings can be amended under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC to reflect the true plaintiff, allowing the appeal and permitting amendment of the plaint.

civil appeal_allowed Significant amendment of plaint Order 6 Rule 17 CPC procedural mistake authorized representative

Varun Pahwa v. Renu Chaudhary

01 Mar 2019 · D. Y. Chandrachud; Hemant Gupta

The Supreme Court allowed amendment of the plaint to correctly name the Private Limited Company as plaintiff, holding that inadvertent mistakes in pleadings should be corrected to serve justice under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC.

civil appeal_allowed Significant amendment of plaint Order 6 Rule 17 CPC inadvertent mistake Power of Attorney

Khoday Distilleries Ltd. and Others v. Sri Mahadeshwara Sahakara Sakkare Karkhane Ltd.

01 Mar 2019 · A.K. Sikri; S. Abdul Nazeer; M.R. Shah
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that a High Court review petition is maintainable if the special leave petition against its judgment was dismissed in limine without reasons, as such dismissal does not attract the doctrine of merger.

civil appeal_allowed Significant special leave petition review petition doctrine of merger Article 136

Securities and Exchange Board of India v. Bhavesh Pabari

28 Feb 2019 · Ranjan Gogoi; Deepak Gupta; Sanjiv Khanna

The Supreme Court held that the factors in Section 15-J SEBI Act are illustrative, preserving adjudicating officer's discretion in penalty quantum, upheld penalties for securities violations, and clarified that penalty provisions do not override this discretion.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Section 15-J SEBI Act Penalty discretion Synchronized trading Reversal trades

Securities and Exchange Board of India v. Bhavesh Pabari

28 Feb 2019 · Ranjan Gogoi; Deepak Gupta; Sanjiv Khanna

The Supreme Court held that the Adjudicating Officer has discretionary power under Section 15-J of the SEBI Act to determine penalty quantum, which is not overridden by mandatory penalty provisions, and upheld penalties imposed for securities law violations including synchronized trading and non-compliance with SEBI summons.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Section 15-J SEBI Act Penalty discretion Synchronized trading SEBI penalty provisions

Ramkrishna Mission v. Koga Konya

28 Feb 2019 · Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud; Hemant Gupta; N. V. Ramana · 2019 INSC 295

The Supreme Court held that the Ramkrishna Mission is not a 'State' under Article 12 and thus not amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226, setting aside the High Court's contrary order.

constitutional appeal_allowed Significant Article 12 Constitution Article 226 Constitution State definition Writ jurisdiction

Ramkrishna Mission v. Koga Kunja

28 Feb 2019 · Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud; Hemant Gupta
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that the Ramkrishna Mission Hospital is not 'State' or 'authority' under Article 12 and thus not amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226, dismissing the appeal.

constitutional appeal_dismissed Significant Article 12 Constitution of India Article 226 Constitution of India State definition Authority under Constitution

Ramakrishna Mission v. Kago Kunya

28 Feb 2019 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Hemant Gupta

The Supreme Court held that Ramakrishna Mission and its hospital do not perform public functions or constitute 'State' under Article 12, and thus are not amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226.

constitutional appeal_allowed Significant Article 12 Constitution of India Article 226 Constitution of India public function writ jurisdiction

VIDYA DROLIA v. DURGA TRADING CORPORATION

28 Feb 2019 · R.F. Nariman; Vineet Saran

The Supreme Court held that landlord-tenant disputes governed solely by the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 are arbitrable and referred the question for reconsideration by a larger Bench, lifting the stay on arbitration proceedings.

civil other Significant arbitrability landlord-tenant dispute Transfer of Property Act, 1882 Section 11(6A) Arbitration Act

Shiv Shankar Prasad Singh v. The State of Bihar

28 Feb 2019 · Abhay Manohar Sapre; R. Subhash Reddy

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of FCI employees for criminal conspiracy and misappropriation of fertilizer bags by falsifying official records, dismissing their appeals and confirming the sentences.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant criminal conspiracy criminal breach of trust Prevention of Corruption Act falsification of records

Neeraj Dutta v. State (NCT of Delhi)

28 Feb 2019 · R. Banumathi; R. Subhash Reddy

The Supreme Court upheld conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act relying on circumstantial evidence and presumption under Section 20 despite absence of direct evidence due to complainant's death.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 Section 7 Section 13(1)(d) Section 20 presumption

Dinesh Textiles v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax, Calicut

28 Feb 2019 · Uday Umesh Lalit; Indu Malhotra

The Supreme Court held that a trader is liable to pay excise duty on the aggregate clearances made through job workers once any single job worker's clearance exceeds the exemption limit under Rule 12B and related notifications.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Rule 12B Central Excise Rules job work textiles excise duty liability aggregate clearance value

Dinesh Textiles v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax, Calicut

28 Feb 2019 · Uday Umesh Lalit; Indu Malhotra

The Supreme Court held that a trader is liable to pay excise duty on the aggregate clearances from all job workers once any single job worker's clearances exceed the exemption limit under Rule 12B and related notifications.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Rule 12B Central Excise Rules job work textiles excise duty liability aggregate clearance value

Neeraj Dutta v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)

28 Feb 2019 · R. Banumathi; R. Subhash Reddy

The Supreme Court held that demand of illegal gratification under the Prevention of Corruption Act can be inferred from circumstantial evidence and legal presumptions even in absence of direct evidence, and referred the issue for larger Bench consideration.

criminal other Significant Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 Section 7 Section 13(1)(d) Section 13(2)

Neeraj Dutta v. State (NCT of Delhi)

28 Feb 2019 · R. Banumathi; R. Subhash Reddy

The Supreme Court upheld conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act based on circumstantial evidence and legal presumptions despite absence of direct evidence due to complainant's death.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 Section 7 Section 13(1)(d) Section 20 presumption

Neeraj Dutta v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)

28 Feb 2019 · R. Banumathi; R. Subhash Reddy

The Supreme Court held that demand of illegal gratification under the Prevention of Corruption Act can be proved by inference from circumstantial evidence and presumption under Section 20, not requiring direct evidence, and referred the issue for larger bench consideration.

criminal other Significant Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 Section 7 Section 13(1)(d) Section 13(2)

Regional Provident Fund Commissioner (II) West Bengal v. Vivekananda Vidyamandir

28 Feb 2019 · Arun Mishra; Navin Sinha · 2019 INSC 288

The Supreme Court held that special allowances paid universally to employees, not linked to extra output, constitute basic wages under the Employees’ Provident Fund Act, 1952 and are liable for provident fund deductions.

labor appeal_allowed and appeal_dismissed Significant basic wages Employees’ Provident Fund Act, 1952 special allowance dearness allowance

Regional Provident Fund Commissioner (II) West Bengal v. Vivekananda Vidyamandir

28 Feb 2019 · Arun Mishra; Navin Sinha

The Supreme Court held that special allowances universally paid to employees, resembling dearness allowance, form part of "basic wages" under the Employees’ Provident Fund Act, mandating provident fund contributions thereon.

labor appeal_allowed Significant basic wages Employees’ Provident Fund Act, 1952 special allowance dearness allowance