Supreme Court of India

18,256 judgments

Year:

Arasmeta Captive Power Company Private Limited and another v. Lafarge India Private Limited

12 Dec 2013 · Anil R. Dave; Dipak Misra
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that the Chief Justice or designate under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act must not decide arbitrability or excepted matters but leave such issues to the arbitral tribunal, setting aside the High Court's merits-based opinion while upholding the appointment of the arbitrator.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 11(6) Arbitration and Conciliation Act appointment of arbitrator arbitrability excepted matters

Erach Boman Khavar v. Tukaram Shridhar Bhat

12 Dec 2013 · Anil R. Dave; Dipak Misra

The Supreme Court held that an interlocutory order disposing of an application without merit adjudication does not operate as res judicata to bar a subsequent application for leave under Section 446 of the Companies Act, 1956, allowing the appellant to institute an eviction suit against a company in liquidation.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 446 Companies Act 1956 res judicata interlocutory order leave to institute suit

Ghanshyam v. State of Rajasthan

12 Dec 2013 · Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya; V. Gopala Gowda

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's order remanding a criminal breach of trust case for fresh trial, emphasizing that failure to account for entrusted property can justify an inference of dishonest misappropriation.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant criminal breach of trust Section 405 IPC entrustment of property failure to account

Fakhruzamma v. State of Jharkhand

12 Dec 2013 · K.S. Radhakrishnan; A.K. Sikri

The Supreme Court held that prior sanction under Section 197 Cr.P.C. is not required for prosecuting a police officer removed from service by the competent authority empowered under the police manual without State Government approval.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 197 Cr.P.C. sanction for prosecution police officer removal Jharkhand Police Manual

Deaf Employees Welfare Association & Another v. Union of India & Others

12 Dec 2013 · K. S. Radhakrishnan; A. K. Sikri

The Supreme Court held that hearing impaired government employees are entitled to transport allowance on par with blind and orthopedically handicapped employees under the Disabilities Act, and denial thereof violates Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.

constitutional appeal_allowed Significant Persons with Disabilities Act 1995 transport allowance hearing impairment discrimination

Kamlesh Kumar v. State of Bihar & Anr.

11 Dec 2013 · K.S. Radhakrishnan; A.K. Sikri

The Supreme Court held that a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is not maintainable if the legal notice is issued beyond the prescribed 30-day period from the date the complainant receives information of cheque dishonour, allowing the appeal and quashing the complaint.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act Section 142 Negotiable Instruments Act limitation period legal notice

Manohar Prajapat v. State of Madhya Pradesh

11 Dec 2013 · Ranjana Prakash Desai; J. Chelameswar
Cites 0 · Cited by 3

The Supreme Court allowed the appellant a final opportunity to summon defense witnesses despite procedural delay, emphasizing the right to a fair trial over strict adherence to procedural timelines.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant alibi defense summoning witnesses right to fair trial procedural delay

Samta Aandolan Samiti & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.

11 Dec 2013 · K.S. Radhakrishnan; A.K. Sikri
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld AIIMS's counseling procedure, ruling that reserved category candidates admitted on general merit are treated as general category for reservation computation, and the 50% reservation ceiling was not breached.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant reservation policy meritorious reserved candidates 50% reservation ceiling educational admissions

Bank of Baroda v. S.K. Kool

11 Dec 2013 · Chandramauli Kr. Prasad; Jagdish Singh Khehar

The Supreme Court held that employees removed from service with superannuation benefits under a bipartite settlement are entitled to pension if eligible under the statutory pension regulation, harmonizing conflicting provisions.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant superannuation benefits removal from service pension entitlement Bank of Baroda Pension Regulation 1995

Suresh Kumar Koushal v. NAZ Foundation

11 Dec 2013 · G.S. Singhvi; Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya

The Supreme Court upheld the Delhi High Court’s ruling that Section 377 IPC is unconstitutional insofar as it criminalizes consensual sexual acts between adults in private, affirming the right to privacy, dignity, and equality under the Constitution.

constitutional appeal_dismissed Significant Section 377 IPC constitutional validity right to privacy Article 21

B.S.N.L. v. Bhurumal

11 Dec 2013 · K.S. Radhakrishnan; A.K. Sikri

The Supreme Court upheld illegal termination of a daily wage worker by BSNL but substituted reinstatement with monetary compensation, emphasizing that reinstatement is not automatic under Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act.

labor appeal_allowed Significant daily wage worker illegal termination Section 25-F Industrial Disputes Act reinstatement

DLF Limited v. B. Jaishankar & Ors.

10 Dec 2013 · K.S. Radhakrishnan; A.K. Sikri

The Supreme Court held that community and commercial facilities constructed by a colonizer under the Development Act are not common areas under the Apartment Act unless included in the declaration, affirming apartment owners' rights to undivided interest only in declared common areas and directing the competent authority to decide objections accordingly.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Haryana Apartment Ownership Act, 1983 Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Act, 1975 common areas and facilities community and commercial facilities

Chatterjee Petrochem Co. v. Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd.

10 Dec 2013 · G.S. Singhvi; V. Gopala Gowda
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that the arbitration clause in the principal 2002 agreement remains valid despite subsequent agreements, and parties must resolve disputes through ICC arbitration, dismissing the suit seeking injunction against arbitration.

civil appeal_allowed Significant arbitration clause international arbitration novation exclusive jurisdiction

Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. v. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd.

10 Dec 2013 · H. L. Gokhale; Ranjana Prakash Desai

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal against quashing of permissions for residential-commercial construction near HPCL refinery, emphasizing the need for scientific evidence on security and health risks and remitting the matter for fresh consideration.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant change of land use Development Control Regulations Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act security threat

Abhay Singh v. Union of India

10 Dec 2013 · G. S. Singhvi; C. Nagappan

The Supreme Court restricted the use of red beacon lights and multi-toned horns on vehicles strictly to holders of constitutional offices and emergency vehicles, emphasizing constitutional equality and republicanism, and directed States to amend rules and enforce penalties accordingly.

constitutional appeal_allowed Significant red beacon lights multi-toned horns constitutional offices republicanism

Sebastiao Luis Fernandes v. K.V.P. Shastri

10 Dec 2013 · G.S. Singhvi; V. Gopala Gowda; C. Nagappan
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's reversal of concurrent findings, holding that the plaintiff failed to prove title to one-third share of ancestral property, affirming the principle that burden of proof lies on the plaintiff and that Section 100 CPC permits interference with findings of fact when substantial questions of law arise.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant burden of proof onus of proof Section 100 CPC concurrent findings of fact

Veer Singh v. State of U.P.

10 Dec 2013 · Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya; C. Nagappan

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction and life sentences of appellants based on the credible sole eyewitness testimony and corroborative evidence in a multiple murder case.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant sole eyewitness testimony Section 302 IPC Section 149 IPC quality of evidence

Manoj @ Panu v. State of Haryana

09 Dec 2013 · Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya; V. Gopala Gowda
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld the appellant's conviction for attempted murder and arms offences but modified the sentence to run concurrently, reducing the total imprisonment to 10 years, emphasizing the single transaction rule and the appellant's young age.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 307 IPC Arms Act Sections 25 and 27 concurrent sentences consecutive sentences

Rajeshwar Singh v. Subrata Roy Sahara & Ors.

09 Dec 2013 · G.S. Singhvi; K.S. Radhakrishnan
Cites 1 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court held that it has inherent constitutional powers to initiate contempt proceedings suo motu without Attorney General's consent to protect court-monitored investigations from interference and intimidation.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant contempt of court court-monitored investigation Article 129 Constitution Article 142 Constitution

Mary Pappa Jebamani v. Ganesan & Ors.

09 Dec 2013 · Gyan Sudha Misra; G.S. Singhvi

The Supreme Court remanded the case for fresh consideration by the High Court, holding that revisional orders setting aside conviction must be reasoned, and dismissed the plea for retrial absent extraordinary circumstances.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant revisional jurisdiction acquittal retrial Section 323 IPC