Supreme Court of India

18,587 judgments

Year:

Telecommunication Ltd. v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.

28 Jul 2016 · Dipak Misra; Rohinton Fali Nariman
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court held that an insurer waives the right to repudiate a transit loss claim based on delayed intimation if it appoints a surveyor and does not mention delay in repudiation, thereby restoring the consumer forum's award for compensation.

civil appeal_allowed Significant insurance claim transit loss waiver duration clause

BABY @ SEBASTIAN & ANR. v. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ADIMALY

26 Jul 2016 · V. Gopala Gowda; R. K. Agrawal
Cites 5 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court restored the trial court's acquittal of appellants in a murder case, emphasizing the sanctity of acquittal orders and the need for manifest illegality to interfere.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant acquittal appeal against acquittal Section 302 IPC presumption of innocence

BAKSHI SECURITY AND PERSONNEL SERVICES PVT. LTD. v. DEVKISHAN COMPUTED PVT. LTD. AND ORS.

26 Jul 2016 · Dipak Misra; R.F. Nariman

The Supreme Court held that bids not conforming to essential tender conditions, including minimum wage compliance and fixed pricing, must be rejected and that courts cannot rewrite tender contracts under writ jurisdiction.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant tender conditions minimum wages fixed price bid open-ended bid

Union of India & Anr. v. Premco-DKSPL (JV) & Ors.

25 Jul 2016 · Shiva Kirti Singh; R. Banumathi

The Supreme Court held that an application under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act filed before expiry of the contractual time frame for appointment of arbitrators is premature and set aside the appointment made on that basis.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11 appointment of arbitrator forfeiture of right

Dev Narayan Mandal v. State of U.P.

25 Jul 2016 · Kurian Joseph; Rohinton Fali Nariman

The Supreme Court allowed the appellant to finalize the auction as highest bidder for two plots, subject to timely payment and conditions, setting aside the cancellation of allotment.

civil appeal_allowed allotment cancellation auction highest bidder earnest money

Sukh Ram v. State of Himachal Pradesh

25 Jul 2016 · V. Gopala Gowda; R. Banumathi

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of a Gram Sewak for forgery of loan documents, holding that voluntarily given specimen signatures before an Executive Magistrate during investigation are admissible for handwriting comparison under Section 73 of the Evidence Act.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant forgery handwriting expert specimen signatures Section 73 Evidence Act

Devraj v. State of Chhattisgarh

25 Jul 2016 · S. A. Bobde; Ashok Bhushan

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of Devraj for murder under Section 302 IPC, holding that evidence of hostile witnesses can be relied upon if corroborated and that concurrent findings of fact by lower courts should not be disturbed absent perversity.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant hostile witness Section 302 IPC Article 136 Constitution concurrent findings

ETOILE CREATIONS v. SARL DANSET DECO

25 Jul 2016 · T. S. Thakur; R. Banumathi; Uday Umesh Lalit

The Supreme Court appointed a sole arbitrator under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to adjudicate disputes arising from a Buyers Agreement containing a valid arbitration clause, emphasizing the primacy of arbitration over court jurisdiction.

civil petition_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(5) Section 11(9) Buyers Agreement

Ranveer Singh v. State of U.P.

22 Jul 2016 · Shiva Kirti Singh; A. M. Khanwilkar

The Supreme Court held that acceptance of compensation under a consent agreement bars subsequent claims for interest under Section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Section 34 interest consent award agreement under Section 11(2)

State of Madhya Pradesh v. Marico Industries Ltd

22 Jul 2016 · Dipak Misra; Prafulla C. Pant
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that Mediker is a medicinal drug exempt from entry tax and Revive starch is not a chemical liable to entry tax, dismissing the State's appeal.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant entry tax medicinal product common parlance test Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940

Santosh Singh v. Union of India

22 Jul 2016 · T S Thakur; Dr D Y Chandrachud

The Supreme Court held that mandating moral science as a compulsory school subject is a policy matter beyond judicial review and dismissed the petition seeking such a directive under Article 32.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant moral education value-based education Article 32 fundamental rights

The Energy and Resources Institute v. Suhrid Sudarshan Shah

22 Jul 2016 · T.S. Thakur; A.M. Khanwilkar; D.Y. Chandrachud

The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's cancellation of leases of government orchards to private parties for lack of proper adjudication and procedural fairness, remanding the matter for fresh consideration.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant public interest litigation lease of government orchards public-private partnership Article 226 Constitution of India

AMAR JAIN MEDICAL RELIEF SOCIETY AND ANR v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS

22 Jul 2016 · KURIAN JOSEPH; ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN

The Supreme Court stayed the interim order directing deposit of Urban Development Tax pending the High Court's decision on the writ petition and urged expeditious disposal.

administrative appeal_allowed Urban Development Tax interim order stay of coercive action writ petition

Amin Merchant v. Chairman, Central Board of Excise & Revenue & Ors.

22 Jul 2016 · Madan B. Lokur; N.V. Ramana
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld the tariff rates prescribed by Parliament under the Finance Act for compound alcoholic preparations, rejecting the appellant's claim based on Budget Proposals and refusing to direct issuance of exemption notifications under the Customs Act.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Customs Tariff Act, 1975 Section 25 Customs Act, 1962 Budget Proposals Finance Act

Food Corporation of India v. Rice Millers Association, District Gondia

22 Jul 2016 · Kurian Joseph; Rohinton Fali Nariman

The Supreme Court disposed of the appeal with liberty to the appellants to seek a Bank Guarantee direction from the High Court and directed expeditious disposal of the writ petition.

civil appeal_dismissed Procedural Bank Guarantee Food Corporation of India writ petition civil appeal

BUNGA DANIEL BABU v. M/S SRI VASUDEVA CONSTRUCTIONS

22 Jul 2016 · Dipak Misra; N. V. Ramana

The Supreme Court held that a landowner under a construction agreement without joint control is a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act and remitted the matter for fresh adjudication accordingly.

consumer_protection appeal_allowed Significant consumer definition joint venture commercial purpose deficiency of service

Avtar Singh v. Union of India & Ors.

21 Jul 2016 · Ranjan Gogoi; Arun Mishra
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that suppression of material information regarding criminal cases in verification forms justifies termination or denial of appointment in disciplined services, subject to due procedure and employer's discretion.

administrative other Significant suppression of information false declaration verification form criminal prosecution

ELECTRICAL MFG. CO. LTD. v. POWER GRID CORPN. OF INDIA LTD. & ANR

20 Jul 2016 · Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla; Uday Umesh Lalit

The Supreme Court upheld the validity of arbitration proceedings and the arbitral award in a power transmission contract dispute, restoring the Single Judge's order and setting aside the Division Bench's judgment that had set aside the award.

civil appeal_allowed Significant arbitration contractual dispute Engineer decision appointment of arbitrators

Manju Bala v. Vinod Kumar

19 Jul 2016 · T.S. Thakur; Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla; A.K. Sikri; S...

The Supreme Court held that it has constitutional power under Articles 32 and 142 to transfer civil and criminal cases to or from Jammu and Kashmir courts to ensure the fundamental right of access to justice, despite the non-applicability of Central procedural codes.

constitutional appeal_allowed Landmark access to justice Article 21 Article 32 Article 142

Pragati Mahila Samaj v. Arun

19 Jul 2016 · J. Chelameswar; Abhay Manohar Sapre

The Supreme Court held that a temporary part-time appointment under the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools Act does not confer permanent status, and termination on expiry of the fixed term is lawful, setting aside the High Court's order of reinstatement.

labor appeal_allowed Significant temporary appointment permanent appointment Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools Act termination