Supreme Court of India

16,355 judgments

Year:

SODEXO SVC INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

09 Dec 2015 · A.K. Sikri; Rohinton Fali Nariman

The Supreme Court held that Sodexo Meal Vouchers are not 'goods' but represent a service, and thus are not liable to Octroi or Local Body Tax under the Maharashtra Municipal Corporation Act.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Sodexo Meal Vouchers goods vs service Local Body Tax Octroi

INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD v. A.P. INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUCTURE CORPORATION LTD

09 Dec 2015 · A.K. Sikri; Rohinton Fali Nariman

The Supreme Court held that LPG and water storage tanks qualify as 'houses' under the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, making them liable to property tax, and dismissed Indian Oil Corporation's challenge to the tax demands.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant property tax Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 definition of house storage tanks

S.K. Verma v. Union of India

09 Dec 2015 · Anil R. Dave; Adarsh Kumar Goel

The Supreme Court dismissed the civil appeals but directed an ex-gratia payment to the appellant's widow to settle the dispute and barred future litigation.

civil appeal_dismissed civil appeal ex-gratia payment litigation settlement appeal dismissal

Sat Parkash v. State of Haryana

09 Dec 2015 · Jagdish Singh Khehar; Rohinton Fali Nariman

The Supreme Court set aside the conviction of Sat Parkash under Section 366-A IPC, holding that inducing a minor to go with intent to force or seduce her to illicit intercourse with another person was not proved, and acquitted him of kidnapping and rape charges.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant kidnapping procuration of minor Section 366-A IPC suicide note

M/S GUJARAT AMBUJA EXPORTS LTD & ANR. v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ORS

09 Dec 2015 · V. Gopala Gowda; Amitava Roy
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that the Uttarakhand State Legislature lacked competence to levy market fee on agricultural produce brought into the market area solely for manufacturing, striking down the relevant provision of the Act as unconstitutional.

constitutional appeal_allowed Significant legislative competence market fee development cess Uttarakhand Agricultural Produce Marketing Act

Prajwala v. Union of India

09 Dec 2015 · Anil R. Dave; Madan B. Lokur; Kurian Joseph

The Supreme Court disposed of the writ petition on trafficking after the Government committed to establishing a specialized agency and constituting a Committee to draft comprehensive anti-trafficking legislation.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant trafficking victim protection Organized Crime Investigative Agency comprehensive legislation

Sri Ch. Narasimha Rao v. Land Acquisition Officer, Eluru

09 Dec 2015 · Anil R. Dave; Adarsh Kumar Goel

The Supreme Court held that limitation for filing Reference Applications under Section 18(1) of the Land Acquisition Act begins from the date of final confirmation of acquisition, allowing delayed applications filed promptly after such confirmation.

property appeal_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Section 18(1) limitation reference application

Ruchika Abbi & Anr. v. State of National Capital Territory of Delhi & Anr.

09 Dec 2015 · J. Chelameswar; Abhay Manohar Sapre

The Supreme Court directed the Family Court to decide the custody dispute of a minor child on merits within six months, granted temporary custody to the father, and emphasized parental cooperation for the child's welfare.

family appeal_allowed Significant custody dispute minor child welfare habeas corpus petition Family Court jurisdiction

DR. NTR UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES v. L. PRAKASAM REDDY

08 Dec 2015 · Kurian Joseph; Arun Mishra

The Supreme Court set aside the dismissal of a university employee due to procedural irregularities in disciplinary proceedings and directed substitution of punishment with restoration of benefits.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant departmental proceedings procedural irregularities natural justice dismissal from service

Ali Hasan @ Mallah v. State of Uttarakhand

08 Dec 2015 · Kurian Joseph; Arun Mishra

The Supreme Court reduced the sentence under Section 376 IPC from ten years to the prescribed minimum of seven years due to lack of reasons for maximum punishment, allowing the appeal partly and ordering concurrent sentences.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 376 IPC Section 506 IPC quantum of sentence minimum sentence

Rattan Singh v. Union of India

08 Dec 2015 · VikramaJit Sen; Shiva Kirti Singh

The Supreme Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation is neither paid nor deposited in court within five years of the Award predating the 2013 Act.

property appeal_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 Section 24(2) compensation payment

State of Haryana v. R.K. Gupta

08 Dec 2015 · Kurian Joseph; Arun Mishra

The Supreme Court dismissed the State of Haryana's appeal upholding the High Court's limitation of additional Dearness Allowance benefits to 38 months preceding the writ petition, reaffirming the finality of its earlier judgment.

civil appeal_dismissed additional Dearness Allowance finality of judgment limitation monetary benefits

A. Andisamy Chettiar v. A. Subburaj Chettiar

08 Dec 2015 · Dipak Misra; Prafulla C. Pant
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred in setting aside the appellate court's order allowing additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC and directed the appellate court to reconsider the application afresh.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order 41 Rule 27 CPC additional evidence appellate court Section 115 CPC

M/S. STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD v. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

07 Dec 2015 · A.K. Sikri; Rohinton Fali Nariman
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that interest under Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act is not payable on differential excise duty arising from retrospective price escalation agreed after removal of goods.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Central Excise Act, 1944 Section 11AB interest on delayed payment transaction value

Parivartan Kendra v. Union of India

07 Dec 2015 · M.Y. Eqbal; C. Nagappan · (2015) 5 SCALE 77
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court enhanced compensation for acid attack victims beyond the minimum prescribed, directed timely payment and comprehensive medical care, and emphasized State responsibility for victim rehabilitation and regulation of acid sale.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant acid attack compensation victim rehabilitation Section 357A CrPC

Maya Devi v. State of Haryana

07 Dec 2015 · Vikramajit Sen; R.K. Agrawal

The Supreme Court upheld convictions under Sections 304B and 498A IPC, affirming that continuous dowry-related harassment soon before death creates a rebuttable presumption of dowry death, which the accused failed to disprove.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant dowry death Section 304B IPC Section 498A IPC Section 113B Evidence Act

Susana Rani David v. Esther Jaspher Swaminathan

07 Dec 2015 · Anil R. Dave; Adarsh Kumar Goel

The Supreme Court allowed appeals to permit exhibition of a sale deed affecting a party's property share and directed the High Court to reconsider its judgment accordingly, upholding the compromise deed for other parties.

civil appeal_allowed Significant sale deed compromise deed property dispute share of defendant

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD v. HILLI MULTIPURPOSE COLD STORAGE PVT. LTD.

04 Dec 2015 · ANIL R. DAVE; VIKRAMAJIT SEN; PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE

The Supreme Court reaffirmed that under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, the opposite party must file its version within a maximum of 45 days, and this limitation period is mandatory and cannot be extended.

civil other Significant Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Section 13(2)(a) limitation period written statement

CIT (CENTRAL) KANPUR & ORS v. RAJENDRA KUMAR VERMA

04 Dec 2015 · Anil R. Dave; Adarsh Kumar Goel
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's order, and remanded the matter for fresh consideration in light of recent legal principles.

tax appeal_allowed Significant remand High Court order Special Leave Petition Income Tax

OPG Securities Private Ltd. v. S.E.B.I. & Anr.

04 Dec 2015 · VikramaJit Sen; Shiva Kirti Singh

The Supreme Court held that after Schedule IIIA's applicability, SEBI cannot demand registration fees under Schedule III for turnover accrued thereafter, and fees must be paid monthly as per Schedule IIIA.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant SEBI registration fee Schedule III Schedule IIIA stock-broker turnover