Supreme Court of India

18,257 judgments

Year:

Darshan Singh Saini v. Sohan Singh

23 Jul 2015 · Jagdish Singh Khehar; Adarsh Kumar Goel

The Supreme Court held that limitation under Section 468 CrPC is computed from the complaint filing date, upheld the High Court's initiation of proceedings under Section 323 IPC, and dismissed charges under the SC/ST Act due to absence of caste-based allegations.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant limitation Section 468 CrPC cognizance Section 216 CrPC

Prabhu Dayal Khandelwal v. Chairman, U.P.S.C.

23 Jul 2015 · Jagdish Singh Khehar; Adarsh Kumar Goel

The Supreme Court held that uncommunicated Annual Confidential Reports cannot be considered for promotion, directing reconsideration of the appellant's promotion based on communicated reports.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Annual Confidential Report Promotion Communication of ACR Article 14

Abhay Dharamshi Narottam v. Central Bureau of Investigation

23 Jul 2015 · Jagdish Singh Khehar; Adarsh Kumar Goel

The Supreme Court maintained convictions of brokers and bank employees in financial conspiracy cases but modified their sentences to the period already served, while abating the appeal of a deceased appellant.

criminal sentence_modified Significant conviction sentence modification financial transactions conspiracy

Union of India v. Balwant Singh

22 Jul 2015 · Jagdish Singh Khehar; Adarsh Kumar Goel

The Supreme Court upheld the lawful discharge of a disciplined force member under Assam Rifles Act and internal regulations for repeated indiscipline, rejecting the High Court's order of reinstatement.

labor appeal_allowed Significant Assam Rifles Act, 1941 Record of Office Instructions 1/2004 Red Ink entries Discharge from service

Commissioner of Central Excise, Bhavnagar v. M/s Gujarat Maritime Board

22 Jul 2015 · A. K. Sikri; R. F. Nariman

The Supreme Court held that no service tax was payable on wharfage charges collected by Gujarat Maritime Board from a licensee since no taxable port service was rendered under the license agreement.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant service tax port services wharfage charges Gujarat Maritime Board Act

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, AURANGABAD v. M/S. GOODYEAR SOUTH ASIA TYRES PVT. LTD.

22 Jul 2015 · A. K. Sikri; Rohinton Fali Nariman · 2015 (4) SCALE 631
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that mutuality of interest is essential to classify parties as related persons under Central Excise law, and absent such mutuality and predominant sales to related persons, valuation adjustments and duty demands cannot be sustained.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant related persons mutuality of interest Central Excise Act, 1944 valuation of goods

Robert John D’Souza v. Stephen V. Gomes

21 Jul 2015 · Dipak Misra; Prafulla C. Pant

The Supreme Court quashed a criminal complaint alleging breach of trust and cheating by Society officials, holding that essential ingredients of offences were not made out and the prosecution was an abuse of process.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant entrustment criminal breach of trust cheating Section 406 IPC

Delhi Development Authority v. P.R. Samanta

21 Jul 2015 · VikramaJit Sen; Shiva Kirti Singh

The Supreme Court held that in absence of unfair trade practice, the contractual interest rate on refund of registration amount cannot be enhanced by the Commission and set aside the order awarding higher interest and litigation costs.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 contractual interest rate refund of registration amount unfair trade practice

M/S. COASTAL PAPER LTD v. COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE

21 Jul 2015 · A.K. Sikri; Rohinton Fali Nariman
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that waste gunny bags and jute waste do not constitute 'rags' under the excise Notification, entitling the appellant to concessional excise duty on paper manufactured from such pulp.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Central Excise Notification No. 22/94-CE concessional excise duty non-conventional raw materials

MURAD ABDUL MULANI v. SALMA BABU SHAIKH & ORS

21 Jul 2015 · Jagdish Singh Khehar; Adarsh Kumar Goel

The Supreme Court directed the Home Secretary of Maharashtra to examine allegations of deliberate investigative lapses by police officers and decide on departmental and criminal action, modifying the High Court's earlier directions.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant police investigation deliberate inaction disciplinary action criminal prosecution

M/S. HCL LIMITED v. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

21 Jul 2015 · A.K. Sikri; Rohinton Fali Nariman

The Supreme Court held that the Risograph machine is a printing machine under sub-heading 8443.50 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, overruling its prior classification as a duplicating machine and allowing the appellant's appeal.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Customs Tariff Act, 1975 Risograph machine printing machinery duplicating machine

P.A.JOSE v. COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX, KOTTAYAM

15 Jul 2015 · Anil R. Dave; Arun Mishra; Amitava Roy

The Supreme Court held that under Section 27A of The Wealth Tax Act, 1957, the High Court must frame a substantial question of law before deciding an appeal, and failure to do so warrants remand for fresh hearing.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Wealth Tax Act, 1957 Section 27A substantial question of law High Court

Ravinder Singh v. State of Haryana & Ors.

15 Jul 2015 · T. S. Thakur; R. Banumathi

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction but declined to interfere with the High Court's reduction of sentence to the period already undergone, while enhancing compensation to the victim's heirs.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 304 Part II IPC sentence reduction compensation judicial discretion

State of Madhya Pradesh v. Maharani Ushadevi

15 Jul 2015 · Ranjan Gogoi; N. V. Ramana

The Supreme Court held that disputes over property rights arising from pre-Constitution Covenants with Indian Rulers are barred by Article 363, dismissing the plaintiff’s suit for declaration of title and bhumiswami rights.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Article 363 Constitution of India Covenant Private property Bhumiswami rights

Ponnaiyah Ramajayam Institute of Science and Technology Trust v. Medical Council of India

15 Jul 2015 · M.Y. Eqbal; C. Nagappan

The Supreme Court held that the Central Government must exercise discretion to consider applications for medical college establishment on merits despite delayed submission of essential documents, directing reconsideration of the petitioner's application.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 Section 10A Essentiality Certificate cut-off date

Kirpal Kaur v. Jitender Pal Singh & Ors.

14 Jul 2015 · V. Gopala Gowda; C. Nagappan
Cites 2 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court reversed lower courts' dismissal of the appellant's claim, holding that the disputed property is joint family property and the appellant is entitled to a share, invalidating a gift deed executed pendente lite.

civil appeal_allowed Significant partition suit joint family property self-acquired property gift deed

Vijay Mallya v. Enforcement Directorate, Min. of Finance

13 Jul 2015 · J. Chelameswar; Adarsh Kumar Goel

The Supreme Court held that failure to comply with lawful summons under FERA constitutes an independent criminal offence punishable under Section 56, dismissing the appellant's plea for quashing despite departmental exoneration and repeal of the Act.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 Section 40 FERA Section 56 FERA summons non-compliance

Om Prakash v. Union of India & Ors.

09 Jul 2015 · Dipak Misra; N.V. Ramana
Cites 4 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction under Section 304 Part-II IPC based on admissible summary evidence and a complete chain of circumstantial evidence in a General Court Martial proceeding.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant General Court Martial Section 304 Part-II IPC Army Act 1950 Rule 23 Army Rules 1954

State of Madhya Pradesh v. Anand Mohan

09 Jul 2015 · Dipak Misra; Prafulla C. Pant · 2015 (1) SCALE 457
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that the Law Department was the competent authority to grant prior sanction for prosecution under the Prevention of Corruption Act, overruling the High Court's quashing of such sanction.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant sanction for prosecution Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 competent authority delegation of power

FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA v. SANKAR GHOSH & ORS.

08 Jul 2015 · T. S. Thakur; R. K. Agrawal; R. Banumathi

The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order directing regularization of casual workers engaged through a contractor and remanded the matter for fresh consideration in light of recruitment rules and fresh evidence.

labor appeal_allowed Significant regularization casual labourers promotional post Food Corporation of India