Supreme Court of India

14,826 judgments

Year:

Vivek Mudgil v. State of U.P. & Ors.

05 Dec 2018 · L. Nageswara Rao; R. Subhash Reddy

The Supreme Court upheld the mandatory requirement of ten years teaching experience for appointment as Principal, rejecting retrospective exemption and confirming cancellation of the appellant's appointment.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant teaching experience study leave mandatory qualification exemption

M/S SIMPLEX INFRASTRUCTURE LTD v. UNION OF INDIA

05 Dec 2018 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Vineet Saran
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that the statutory limitation period under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is mandatory and a delay beyond thirty days cannot be condoned, dismissing the application filed after 514 days as barred by limitation.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 Limitation Act, 1963 Section 5 Limitation Act

S C Singh v. State of Uttarakhand

05 Dec 2018 · U U Lalit; Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud · 2018 INSC 1155

The Supreme Court held that the tenure limitation under UGC guidelines applies to all Directors of the College Development Council, dismissing the appellant's claim to continue beyond two terms.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant College Development Council Director tenure University Grants Commission guidelines Deputation

S C Singh v. State of Uttarakhand

05 Dec 2018 · U U Lalit; Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud

The Supreme Court held that the tenure limitation of two terms of three years each for the Director of the College Development Council applies to all appointees, including those permanently absorbed, and dismissed the appeal seeking continuation beyond this tenure.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant College Development Council Director tenure University Grants Commission guidelines appointment on deputation

Viran Gyanlal Rajput v. The State of Maharashtra

05 Dec 2018 · N. V. Ramana; Mohan M. Shantanagoudar; Hemant Gupta

The Supreme Court upheld the appellant’s conviction for kidnapping, rape, and murder but commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment with a 20-year minimum term, emphasizing the need to balance aggravating and mitigating factors in capital punishment cases.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant circumstantial evidence last seen witness rape and murder death penalty

M. Arjunan v. The State

04 Dec 2018 · R. Banumathi; Indira Banerjee · 2018 INSC 1150

The Supreme Court overturned the conviction under Section 306 IPC, holding that mere financial pressure and abusive language without intent to instigate suicide do not constitute abetment.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 306 IPC abetment of suicide instigation suicide note

M. Arjunan v. The State

04 Dec 2018 · R. Banumathi; Indira Banerjee

The Supreme Court overturned the conviction under Section 306 IPC, holding that mere financial pressure and abusive language without intent to instigate suicide do not constitute abetment.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 306 IPC abetment of suicide intention to instigate suicide note

SP Singla Constructions Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Himachal Pradesh

04 Dec 2018 · R. Banumathi; Indira Banerjee
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld the validity of an arbitrator appointed by designation under a government contract clause and held that challenges to such appointment must be made under Sections 13 or 34, not Section 11(6), while setting aside termination of arbitration proceedings to allow the appellant to present its claim.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant arbitration agreement appointment of arbitrator Section 11(6) Arbitration Act Section 12(5) Arbitration Act amendment

Mohd. Akhtar @ Kari & Ors. v. State of Bihar & Anr.

04 Dec 2018 · L. NAGESWARA RAO; R. SUBHASH REDDY

The Supreme Court restored the trial court's acquittal of appellants in a murder case, emphasizing the high threshold for overturning acquittals on appeal.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant appeal against acquittal presumption of innocence eyewitness identification delay in FIR

SRI MAHABIR PROSAD CHOUDHARY v. M/S. OCTAVIUS TEA AND INDUSTRIES LTD. AND ANR.

04 Dec 2018 · Ashok Bhushan; Indu Malhotra

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's setting aside of an ex parte industrial award due to violation of mandatory service of written statement and principles of natural justice, directing a fresh hearing.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant ex parte award Industrial Tribunal Rule 20B(5) Rule 21

SRI MAHABIR PROSAD CHOUDHARY v. M/S. OCTAVIUS TEA AND INDUSTRIES LTD. AND ANR.

04 Dec 2018 · Ashok Bhushan; Indu Malhotra

The Supreme Court upheld the setting aside of an ex parte industrial award due to non-service of the written statement violating natural justice and held that the Tribunal retains jurisdiction to recall such awards despite delay.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant ex parte award industrial dispute written statement Rule 20B(5)

Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai v. Pratibha Industries Ltd.

04 Dec 2018 · R. F. Nariman; M. R. Shah · 2018 INSC 1151

The Supreme Court held that absent a valid arbitration agreement, the High Court has inherent jurisdiction under Article 215 to recall its order appointing an arbitrator, setting aside the Division Bench's contrary ruling under the Arbitration Act.

civil appeal_allowed Significant High Court inherent jurisdiction recall of orders arbitration agreement Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai v. Pratibha Industries Ltd.

04 Dec 2018 · R. F. Nariman; M. R. Shah

The Supreme Court held that the High Court has inherent jurisdiction to recall its order appointing an arbitrator where no valid arbitration agreement exists, setting aside the Division Bench's contrary decision.

civil appeal_allowed Significant High Court inherent jurisdiction recall of orders arbitration agreement Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

Surendra Singh v. State of Uttarakhand

04 Dec 2018 · Abhay Manohar Sapre; Indu Malhotra

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of appellants for murder based on a complete chain of circumstantial evidence and concurrent findings of fact by lower courts.

criminal appeal_dismissed circumstantial evidence murder Sections 302, 380, 457 IPC concurrent findings

Farida Begum v. State of Uttarakhand

04 Dec 2018 · N. V. Ramana; Mohan M. Shantanagoudar; M. R. Shah · 2018 INSC 1146

The Supreme Court upheld the murder convictions of Farida Begum and Mohd. Ashraf based on credible eyewitness evidence, while acquitting Raees Ahmed @ Satna due to lack of direct evidence, emphasizing the proper application of benefit of doubt.

criminal appeal_allowed and appeal_dismissed Significant murder Section 302 IPC Section 149 IPC benefit of doubt

Farida Begum v. State of Uttarakhand

04 Dec 2018 · N. V. Ramana; Mohan M. Shantanagoudar; M. R. Shah

The Supreme Court upheld the murder convictions of Farida Begum and Mohd. Ashraf based on credible eyewitness evidence and common intention, while acquitting Raees Ahmed @ Satna and Raees Ahmed on benefit of doubt.

criminal appeal_allowed (for Accused No. 5), appeal_dismissed (for Accused Nos. 1 and 2), conviction_upheld (for Accused Nos. 1 and 2), acquittal_granted (for Accused Nos. 4 and 5) Significant Section 302 IPC Section 149 IPC common intention eyewitness testimony

V.K. Girija v. Reshma Parayil & Ors.

04 Dec 2018 · Ashok Bhushan; Ajay Rastogi

The Supreme Court held that recruitment to Higher Secondary School Teacher posts in aided schools is governed by Kerala Education Rules, 1959, which mandate filling vacancies first by transfer, and set aside a direct recruitment appointment made contrary to this scheme.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Higher Secondary School Teacher direct recruitment transfer Kerala Education Rules, 1959

SP Singla Constructions Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Himachal Pradesh

04 Dec 2018 · R. Banumathi; Indira Banerjee
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that an arbitrator appointed by designation under a valid arbitration clause in a government contract cannot be challenged under Section 11(6) once appointed, and the 2015 amendment barring government employees as arbitrators does not apply retrospectively to proceedings commenced before the amendment.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(6) Section 12(5) Appointment of arbitrator

Johra & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Ors.

03 Dec 2018 · Abhay Manohar Sapre; Indu Malhotra

The Supreme Court set aside a High Court order passed without hearing the appellants, emphasizing the mandatory requirement of giving parties an opportunity of hearing before passing any judicial order.

civil appeal_allowed Significant natural justice opportunity of hearing writ petition unauthorized encroachment

Johra v. State of Haryana

03 Dec 2018 · Abhay Manohar Sapre; Indu Malhotra

The Supreme Court set aside a High Court order restoring encroached Gram Panchayat land for lack of hearing to the appellants, emphasizing the mandatory requirement of natural justice.

civil appeal_allowed Significant natural justice opportunity of hearing writ petition unauthorized encroachment