Supreme Court of India

14,826 judgments

Year:

Diyora and Bhanderi Corporation v. Sarine Technologies Ltd.

30 Jul 2018 · Abhay Manohar Sapre; Uday Umesh Lalit

The Supreme Court upheld the appointment of a foreign expert for software code comparison but restricted the scope of comparison to the registered version 6.0 of the plaintiff's software, emphasizing confidentiality and adherence to court orders.

civil appeal_allowed Significant copyright infringement software source code object code expert appointment

Ruby Tour Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India

30 Jul 2018 · A.K. Sikri; Ashok Bhushan
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld rejection of two PTOs' Haj 2018 registration applications for non-compliance with policy conditions, allowed one petition on trivial document discrepancies, and awarded compensation for wrongful rejection.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Private Tour Operator Haj Policy 2018 registration rejection turnover certificate

Ruby Tour Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India

30 Jul 2018 · A.K. Sikri; Ashok Bhushan
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld the rejection of two PTOs' Haj 2018 registration applications for non-compliance with policy conditions but allowed one PTO's petition, awarding compensation for wrongful rejection based on trivial document discrepancies.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Private Tour Operator Haj Policy 2018 registration rejection turnover certificate

Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai v. M/s. Dilip Kumar and Company & Ors.

30 Jul 2018 · Ranjan Gogoi; N. V. Ramana; R. Banumathi; Mohan M. Shantanag...
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that tax exemption notifications must be strictly construed and any ambiguity therein must be resolved in favor of the revenue, overruling the earlier principle favoring the assessee in such cases.

tax appeal_allowed Significant tax exemption notification strict interpretation ambiguity in tax law benefit of exemption

Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai v. M/s. Dilip Kumar and Company & Ors.

30 Jul 2018 · Ranjan Gogoi; N. V. Ramana; R. Banumathi; Mohan M. Shantanag...
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court overruled the principle favoring assessees in ambiguous tax exemption notifications, holding that such ambiguities must be strictly construed against the assessee and in favor of the revenue.

tax appeal_allowed Significant tax exemption notification strict interpretation ambiguity in tax law charging provision

Dhanraj v. The State of Maharashtra

30 Jul 2018 · Kurian Joseph; Sanjay Kishan Kaul

The Supreme Court allowed restoration of a land acquisition reference dismissed for non-payment of court fee, subject to payment of fees and waiver of statutory benefits for the delay period.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Section 18 reference dismissal court fee

State of Madhya Pradesh v. Gangabishan @ Vishnu & Ors.

27 Jul 2018 · Abhay Manohar Sapre; S. Abdul Nazeer

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's acquittal of co-accused and confirmed conviction of the main accused for culpable homicide not amounting to murder based on medical evidence and lack of intent to cause death.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 302 IPC Section 304 Part I IPC culpable homicide intention to cause death

K. Ramalingam v. Anjalai

27 Jul 2018 · Kurian Joseph; Sanjay Kishan Kaul · 2018 INSC 645

The Supreme Court disposed of a civil appeal by recording the parties' amicable settlement reached through mediation, incorporating the settlement terms into its order.

civil appeal_allowed amicable settlement mediation Memorandum of Settlement civil appeal

K. Ramalingam v. Anjalai

27 Jul 2018 · Kurian Joseph; Sanjay Kishan Kaul

The Supreme Court disposed of a civil appeal by recording the parties' amicable settlement reached through mediation.

civil appeal_allowed civil appeal amicable settlement mediation Memorandum of Settlement

M/S. NANDHINI DELUXE v. M/S. KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS FEDERATION LTD.

26 Jul 2018 · A.K. Sikri; Ashok Bhushan · 2018 INSC 642

The Supreme Court allowed registration of the mark 'NANDHINI' for restaurant-related goods, holding no likelihood of confusion with the respondent's well-known 'NANDINI' mark for milk products despite similarity and same class classification.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant Trade Marks Act, 1999 Section 9 Section 11 Well-known trademark

M/S. NANDHINI DELUXE v. M/S. KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS FEDERATION LTD.

26 Jul 2018 · A.K. Sikri; Ashok Bhushan

The Supreme Court allowed the appellant's appeal, holding that the trademark 'NANDHINI' can be registered for goods other than milk and milk products without causing confusion with the respondent's well-known 'NANDINI' mark.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant Trademark registration Likelihood of confusion Well-known mark Trade Marks Act 1999

Central Board of Trustees v. M/s Indore Composite Pvt. Ltd.

26 Jul 2018 · Abhay Manohar Sapre; Navin Sinha · 2018 INSC 643

The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's dismissal of the writ petition for lack of reasoned order and remanded the case for fresh consideration on merits.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Employees Provident Fund Act Section 7A Section 14B writ petition

Central Board of Trustees v. M/s Indore Composite Pvt. Ltd.

26 Jul 2018 · Abhay Manohar Sapre; Navin Sinha

The Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s dismissal of a writ petition for lack of reasoned order and remanded the case for fresh consideration on merits under the Employees Provident Fund Act.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Employees Provident Fund Act Section 14B writ petition reasoned order

ANWAR HUSENA BAMMANALI v. UMA MAHADEVAN

26 Jul 2018 · Kurian Joseph; Sanjay Kishan Kaul

The Supreme Court directed the Government of Karnataka to appoint the petitioner against available vacancies, clarifying seniority from the date of appointment, and disposed of related contempt petitions.

administrative appeal_allowed appointment vacancies seniority Superintendent Grade-I

Union of India v. Dyagala Devamma & Ors.

25 Jul 2018 · Abhay Manohar Sapre; Uday Umesh Lalit

The Supreme Court restored the Reference Court's award holding that a 50% deduction towards developmental charges for large undeveloped land acquisition was justified, setting aside the High Court's reduction to 25%.

property appeal_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 market value developmental charges land valuation

Union of India v. Dyagala Devamma & Ors.

25 Jul 2018 · Abhay Manohar Sapre; Uday Umesh Lalit

The Supreme Court upheld a 50% deduction towards developmental charges in land acquisition compensation, restoring the Reference Court's award and setting aside the High Court's enhancement.

property appeal_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 market value developmental charges compensation

Manju Kumari Singh v. Avinash Kumar Singh

25 Jul 2018 · Abhay Manohar Sapre; Uday Umesh Lalit

The Supreme Court upheld the dissolution of marriage on grounds of desertion and cruelty, directing permanent maintenance and disposal of all pending matrimonial litigation to ensure justice and peace between the parties.

family appeal_dismissed Significant divorce cruelty desertion irretrievable breakdown

Khajan Singh v. Bankey

25 Jul 2018 · Kurian Joseph; Sanjay Kishan Kaul

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal holding that the suit claiming adverse possession was barred by res judicata due to an earlier inheritance suit filed by the appellant's wife.

civil appeal_dismissed res judicata adverse possession inheritance suit civil appeal

Khajan Singh v. Bankey

25 Jul 2018 · Kurian Joseph; Sanjay Kishan Kaul

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal holding that a suit for adverse possession is barred by res judicata when a prior suit on the same property between the same parties has been decided.

civil appeal_dismissed res judicata adverse possession inheritance suit civil appeal

Bhaskar Shrachi Alloys Ltd. v. Damodar Valley Corporation

23 Jul 2018 · Ranjan Gogoi; R. Banumathi
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that certain provisions of the Damodar Valley Corporation Act, 1948 continue to apply to tariff determination under the Electricity Act, 2003, affirming the Appellate Tribunal's order and upholding the partial exemption granted to DVC.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Damodar Valley Corporation Electricity Act 2003 Tariff determination Fourth proviso to Section 14