Supreme Court of India

14,826 judgments

Year:

Abdul Hakeem M.A. & Ors. v. Mahatma Gandhi University & Ors.

28 Feb 2019 · Uday Umesh Lalit; Indira Banerjee · 2019 INSC 293

The Supreme Court held that teachers appointed against substantive University posts without explicit temporary terms are permanent employees entitled to pay revisions, overruling the University's claim of temporary status for self-financing institution staff.

civil appeal_allowed Significant permanent appointment self-financing institution University Statutes pay revision

Abdul Hakeem M.A. & Ors. v. Mahatma Gandhi University & Ors.

28 Feb 2019 · Uday Umesh Lalit; Indira Banerjee

The Supreme Court held that teachers appointed against substantive University posts through proper procedures are permanent employees entitled to pay revision benefits, rejecting the University's claim of temporary status for Self Financing Institution faculty.

civil appeal_allowed Significant permanent appointment self financing institution pay revision University Statutes

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd v. Malana Power Company Ltd

28 Feb 2019 · R. Subhash Reddy; Hrishikesh Roy
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld the consumer commission's order allowing the insured's claim under a special contingency insurance policy, holding no suppression or fraud was proved to justify repudiation.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant insurance contract suppression of material facts non-disclosure repudiation of claim

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd v. Malana Power Company Ltd

28 Feb 2019 · R. Subhash Reddy; Hrishikesh Roy
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld the insured's claim under a Special Contingency Insurance Policy, ruling no suppression of material facts occurred and repudiation by insurer was unjustified.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant insurance policy suppression of material facts non-disclosure special contingency policy

Department of Customs v. Sharad Gandhi

27 Feb 2019 · Ashok Bhushan; K.M. Joseph
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that prosecution under the Customs Act is barred for offences covered by the Antiquities and Art Treasures Act, 1972, as the latter is a special statute that prevails and excludes Customs Act prosecution in such cases.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Antiquities and Art Treasures Act, 1972 Customs Act, 1962 prosecution maintainability Sections 132 and 135 Customs Act

Department of Customs v. Sharad Gandhi

27 Feb 2019 · Ashok Bhushan; K.M. Joseph
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that prosecution under the Customs Act is barred by the special provisions of the Antiquities and Art Treasures Act, 1972, and the Customs Act is not included within 'any other law' under Section 30 of the Antiquities Act.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Antiquities and Art Treasures Act, 1972 Customs Act, 1962 prosecution maintainability ejusdem generis

Shri Ram Mandir Indore v. State of Madhya Pradesh

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

The Supreme Court held that Shri Ram Mandir is a public temple with the Deity as owner, management vested in the State, and dismissed the appellant's claim of private ownership and exclusive control.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant public temple private temple pujari Mahant

Shri Ram Mandir Indore v. State of Madhya Pradesh

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

The Supreme Court held that Shri Ram Mandir is a public temple with property vested in the Deity, dismissing the appellant's claim of private ownership and management rights.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant public temple private temple pujari Mahant

Gaddam Ramulu v. Joint Collector, Adilabad District & Ors.

27 Feb 2019 · Abhay Manohar Sapre; Dinesh Moheshwari · 2019 INSC 281

The Supreme Court upheld the illegality of unauthorized transfer of protected tenancy agricultural lands under the Andhra Pradesh Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, dismissing the appellants' appeal against the show-cause notice and related orders.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Protected tenancy lands Andhra Pradesh Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 Section 19 show-cause notice Unauthorized transfer

Gaddam Ramulu v. Joint Collector, Adilabad

27 Feb 2019 · Abhay Manohar Sapre; Dinesh Maheshwari

The Supreme Court upheld the cancellation of protected tenancy rights under the Andhra Pradesh Tenancy Act due to unauthorized alienation and non-cultivation of the land by the appellants.

property appeal_dismissed protected tenancy Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 Section 19 Section 40

Gaddam Ramulu v. Joint Collector, Adilabad District & Ors.

27 Feb 2019 · Abhay Manohar Sapre; Dinesh Maheshwari

The Supreme Court upheld the cancellation of protected tenancy rights where appellants alienated agricultural land in violation of tenancy conditions under the Andhra Pradesh Tenancy Act, dismissing their appeals.

property appeal_dismissed Significant protected tenancy Andhra Pradesh Tenancy Act Section 19 alienation of agricultural land

Gaddam Ramulu v. Joint Collector, Adilabad

27 Feb 2019 · Abhay Manohar Sapre; Dinesh Maheshwari

The Supreme Court upheld the cancellation of protected tenancy rights due to alienation and non-cultivation of land in violation of the Andhra Pradesh Tenancy Act, dismissing the appeals against the High Court's order.

property appeal_dismissed protected tenancy Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 Section 19 Section 40

Commissioner of Income Tax-I v. M/s Rashtradoot (HUF)

27 Feb 2019 · Abhay Manohar Sapre; Dinesh Maheshwari

The Supreme Court held that the High Court must frame and decide substantial questions of law with reasons under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, remanding the case for fresh adjudication due to procedural lapses.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Section 260A Income Tax Act substantial question of law appellate procedure reasoned judgment

Commissioner of Income Tax-I v. M/s Rashtradoot (HUF)

27 Feb 2019 · Abhay Manohar Sapre; Dinesh Maheshwari

The Supreme Court held that the High Court must frame and decide substantial questions of law with reasons under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act and remanded the case for fresh adjudication due to procedural lapses.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Section 260A Income Tax Act substantial question of law Income Tax Appellate Tribunal High Court jurisdiction

Delhi Development Authority v. Virender Lal Bahri

27 Feb 2019 · R. F. Nariman; Vineet Saran · 2019 INSC 287

The Supreme Court held that the proviso to Section 24 of the 2013 Land Acquisition Act applies to subsection (1)(b) and not subsection (2), affirming that acquisition proceedings lapse if possession is not taken or compensation not paid within five years of the award.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Section 24 Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013 proviso interpretation land acquisition lapsing

Delhi Development Authority v. Virender Lal Bahri

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

The Supreme Court referred the question of whether the proviso to Section 24 of the 2013 Act applies to Section 24(1)(b) or Section 24(2) to a larger Bench, emphasizing that a proviso must be read in relation to its main provision and cannot nullify substantive statutory provisions.

property other Significant Section 24 Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013 proviso interpretation land acquisition lapsing

Khusbu Gupta v. State of Uttar Pradesh

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

The Supreme Court held that the power to summon additional accused under Section 319 Cr.P.C. requires strong and cogent evidence beyond mere mention in FIR or vague allegations, and set aside summons against appellants lacking such evidence.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 319 Cr.P.C. summoning additional accused dying declaration Section 302 IPC

Jagdish Chander v. Satish Chander & Ors.

27 Feb 2019 · R. Bhanumati; R. Subhash Reddy · 2019 INSC 283

The Supreme Court upheld the validity of a registered gift deed executed without consideration and restored the concurrent factual findings of lower courts, setting aside the High Court's interference.

civil appeal_allowed Significant gift deed registered gift Transfer of Property Act, 1882 Section 122

Jagdish Chander v. Satish Chander

27 Feb 2019 · R. Banumathi; R. Subhash Reddy · 2019 INSC 283

The Supreme Court held that a registered gift deed not evidenced by consideration is valid and set aside the High Court's judgment that invalidated the gift deed on misconstrued valuation as consideration.

civil appeal_allowed Significant gift deed consideration Transfer of Property Act, 1882 Section 122

Jagdish Chander v. Satish Chander

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

The Supreme Court held that a registered gift deed not supported by consideration and unchallenged by the donor is valid, and the High Court erred in overturning concurrent factual findings by misconstruing valuation as consideration.

civil appeal_allowed Significant gift deed consideration Section 122 Transfer of Property Act mutation