Supreme Court of India

16,793 judgments

Year:

M/s. Chebrolu Enterprises v. Andhra Pradesh Backward Class Cooperative Finance Corporation Ltd.

28 Oct 2015 · Anil R. Dave; Vikramajit Sen

The Supreme Court upheld an Arbitral Award fixing a lower price for supplied goods based on suppliers' undertaking that quoted prices were the lowest, dismissing appeals challenging the Tribunal's jurisdiction and findings.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitral Award price determination undertaking Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

Union of India v. Manoj Deswal

28 Oct 2015 · Anil R. Dave; Adarsh Kumar Goel
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld the lawful discharge of a non-attested trainee soldier without prior show cause notice, affirming the Commanding Officer's authority under Army Rules to terminate probationary service for unauthorized absence and desertion.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Army Rules 1954 discharge of non-attested soldier principles of natural justice summary enquiry

Lal Babu Priyadarshi v. Amritpal Singh

27 Oct 2015 · Ranjan Gogoi; R. K. Agrawal

The Supreme Court held that the name of a holy book "RAMAYAN" cannot be registered as a trademark due to lack of distinctiveness and extensive use by multiple traders, dismissing the appellant's appeal.

intellectual_property appeal_dismissed Significant trademark registration religious names public juris distinctiveness

GMR ENERGY LTD. v. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, BANGALORE

27 Oct 2015 · A. K. Sikri; R. F. Nariman
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court held that the invoice values declared under a rotable exchange programme represent the true value for customs duty, disallowed additional valuation based on returned parts, and upheld exemption benefits under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus.

customs appeal_allowed Significant Customs Valuation Rules, 1988 Long Term Assured Parts Supply Agreement Rotable Exchange Programme Transaction value

Director General of Foreign Trade and Another v. M/s. Kanak Exports and Another

27 Oct 2015 · A. K. Sikri; Rohinton Fali Nariman

The Supreme Court upheld the Central Government's retrospective amendments to the EXIM Policy 2002-2007 excluding certain exports from duty free entitlement benefits, affirming the statutory power to amend trade policy in public interest.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant EXIM Policy 2002-2007 Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 Section 5 amendment power Duty Free Credit Entitlement Scheme

M/S. MERIDIAN INDUSTRIES LTD v. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

27 Oct 2015 · A.K. Sikri; Rohinton Fali Nariman

The Supreme Court held that imported wax used in manufacturing cotton yarn constitutes raw material, disqualifying the appellant from excise duty exemption under Notification No.8/97-C.E.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Export Oriented Undertaking Notification No.8/97-C.E. raw material consumable

Ashok Rangnth Nagar v. Shrikant Govindrao Sangvikar

27 Oct 2015 · M.Y. Eqbal; C. Nagappan

The Supreme Court held that the High Court must formulate a substantial question of law before entertaining or deciding a second appeal under Section 100 CPC and remitted the matter for fresh disposal accordingly.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 100 CPC second appeal substantial question of law High Court jurisdiction

Mehboob Ali & Anr. v. State of Rajasthan

27 Oct 2015 · H.L. Dattu; Arun Mishra
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld convictions for fake currency offences, holding that statements leading to discovery of facts under section 27 of the Evidence Act are admissible even if recorded during police custody.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 27 Evidence Act Confession admissibility Fake currency Discovery of fact

Dr. Sandeep v. Union of India

27 Oct 2015 · Dipak Misra; Prafulla C. Pant

The Supreme Court upheld domicile-based reservation in super-specialty medical admissions under Article 371-D and the Presidential Order, ruling it constitutionally valid despite general merit-based admission principles.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant Article 371-D Presidential Order 1974 domicile-based reservation super-specialty medical courses

Kamlesh v. Attar Singh

27 Oct 2015 · H. L. Dattu; Arun Mishra
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that in motor accident cases involving composite negligence, all drivers are jointly and severally liable, allowing claimants to recover full compensation from any one of them.

civil appeal_allowed Significant composite negligence joint tort-feasors motor accident claim compensation

Managing Director, K.S.R.T.C. v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd.

27 Oct 2015 · H.L. Dattu; Arun Mishra

The Supreme Court held that under a lease agreement, the registered owner, insurer, and lessee (KSRTC) are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation for motor vehicle accidents, and the lessee can recover amounts paid from the owner or insurer.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 lease agreement owner liability insurance indemnity

Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai v. M/s. Nebulae Health Care Ltd.

27 Oct 2015 · A.K. Sikri; Rohinton Fali Nariman

The Supreme Court held that SSI Units availing CENVAT credit on inputs for third-party branded goods on job work basis are not disentitled from claiming excise duty exemption on their own branded goods under relevant Notifications.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant SSI exemption Central Excise MODVAT credit CENVAT credit

Rajendra Prakash Agrawal v. Union of India & Anr

26 Oct 2015 · J. Chelameswar; Abhay Manohar Sapre

The Supreme Court granted bail to an elderly accused in a corruption case after investigation completion and charge sheet filing, emphasizing humanitarian grounds and cooperation despite serious charges.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail Prevention of Corruption Act Indian Penal Code charge sheet

A.P. Power Coordination Committee v. M/s. Lanco Kondapalli Power Ltd.

16 Oct 2015 · VikramaJit Sen; Shiva Kirti Singh

The Supreme Court held that the Limitation Act does not apply to proceedings before the Electricity Regulatory Commission under the Electricity Act, 2003, but claims barred by limitation cannot be entertained unless expressly permitted by statute, remanding the dispute for fresh adjudication.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Limitation Act applicability Electricity Regulatory Commission Section 86(1)(f) Electricity Act Capacity charges dispute

Veerendra Kumar Dubey v. Chief of Army Staff

16 Oct 2015 · T.S. Thakur; V. Gopala Gowda; R. Banumathi
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that discharge under Army Rule 13 requires adherence to prescribed procedural safeguards including an impartial enquiry and consideration of mitigating factors, setting aside the appellant's discharge for failure to follow such procedure.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Army Rules 1954 Rule 13 discharge red ink entries procedural fairness

Pratap Kishore Panda v. Agni Charan Das

16 Oct 2015 · VikramaJit Sen; Prafulla C. Pant

The Supreme Court upheld the validity of regularizing reserved category appointments made through an alternative recruitment method when OPSC failed to fill reserved vacancies, affirming the State's power to relax recruitment rules within constitutional and statutory limits.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant regularization reservation seniority Orissa Ministerial Service Rules

Balu @ Bala Subramaniam v. State (U.T. of Pondicherry)

16 Oct 2015 · Jagdish Singh Khehar; R. Banumathi

The Supreme Court held that the appellants could not be convicted for murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC due to lack of common intention, modifying their conviction to a lesser offence.

criminal appeal_partly_allowed Significant Section 34 IPC common intention constructive liability murder

Prakash v. Phulavati

16 Oct 2015 · Anil R. Dave; Adarsh Kumar Goel
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 is prospective and does not confer coparcenary rights retrospectively to daughters whose fathers died before the amendment's commencement.

property appeal_allowed Significant Hindu Succession Act, 1956 Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 retrospective effect coparcenary rights

SHAILESH DHAIRYAWAN v. MOHAN BALKRISHNA LULLA

16 Oct 2015 · R.F. Nariman; A.K. Sikri

The Supreme Court held that upon termination of a named arbitrator's mandate, a substitute arbitrator must be appointed according to the original appointment rules unless expressly excluded, upholding the High Court's appointment of a substitute arbitrator under Section 15(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Section 15(2) Arbitration and Conciliation Act substitute arbitrator arbitration agreement appointment of arbitrator

State of Gujarat v. M/S Kothari and Associates

16 Oct 2015 · VikramaJit Sen; Shiva Kirti Singh
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that claims for damages arising from successive breaches of contract must be filed within three years of each breach, and a suit filed beyond this period is barred by limitation even if the plea was not earlier raised.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Limitation Act, 1963 successive breaches works contract damages for delay