Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL v. MINOSHA INDIA LIMITED
The Supreme Court held that the moratorium period under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is excluded from limitation computation for proceedings initiated by the corporate debtor, dismissing the appeal challenging arbitration appointment as time-barred.
TOMMORROWLAND LIMITED v. SHAKTI AND CO.
The Delhi High Court disposed of an execution petition under Order XXI CPC based on the judgment debtors' counsel's undertaking to pay the remaining decretal amount within two weeks.
Kiran Nanik Motwane & Anr. v. Uday Indukumar Jasani & Ors.
The court upheld the Municipal Commissioner's discretionary approval of revised building plans with condoned open space deficiencies and dismissed the plaintiffs' suit challenging construction on adjacent plot for non-compliance and maintainability issues.
Union of India v. Mr. Shahid Hussain
The Bombay High Court upheld the Railway Claims Tribunal's award of compensation to a passenger injured due to accidental fall from a train, holding that absence of ticket and negligence do not bar compensation without proof of intentional self-inflicted injury.
Mrs. Jagruti Rajesh Shah v. M/s. Mahek Developers & Ors.
The High Court dismissed the appeal against refusal of temporary injunction, holding that non-parties to the suit agreement cannot be compelled under MOFA and that the agreement was not enforceable as a concluded contract.
Union of India v. Mr. Shahit Hussain
The Bombay High Court upheld the Railway Claims Tribunal's award of compensation to a passenger injured due to accidental fall from a running train, holding that absence of ticket does not negate bonafide passenger status and negligence without intention does not bar compensation.
Gautam Navlakha v. National Investigation Agency
The Bombay High Court dismissed the petition seeking house arrest for an elderly undertrial accused in a serious UAPA case, holding that the gravity of the offences and prima facie evidence preclude such relief, while directing jail authorities to ensure medical care and the trial court to address detention grievances.
Ramrao Kashinath Rathod v. State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court upheld the rejection of pre-arrest bail for offences under the SC and ST Act, ruling that absence of accused's caste in the FIR does not bar prosecution and prima facie offences were made out.
Satwaratna Co-Op Housing Society Ltd. v. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd.
The Supreme Court held that in absence of statutory prohibition, municipal permission for redevelopment near a refinery cannot be quashed solely on safety concerns, limiting judicial review to jurisdictional errors.
Satwaratna Co-Op Housing Society Ltd. v. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd.
The Supreme Court held that in absence of specific law prohibiting redevelopment near a refinery, the Municipal Commissioner’s permission cannot be quashed by the High Court on safety grounds alone, limiting judicial review to legality and jurisdiction.
Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Ltd v. Chief Controlling Revenue Authority
The Supreme Court held that a Power of Attorney executed as part of an assignment agreement is not liable to separate stamp duty if the assignment agreement is already duly stamped under the Bombay Stamp Act.
Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Ltd. v. Chief Controlling Revenue Authority
The Supreme Court held that stamp duty paid on an assignment deed covers the power of attorney contained therein, and no additional stamp duty under Section 45(f) is payable on the POA.
ASSET RECONSTRUCTION CO. (INDIA) LTD v. CHIEF CONTROLLING REVENUE AUTHORITY
The Supreme Court held that an Assignment Agreement duly charged to stamp duty under Article 20(a) cannot be subjected to additional stamp duty on an incidental Power of Attorney under Article 45(f), setting aside the demand for deficit stamp duty.
Shraddha Gupta v. The State of Uttar Pradesh
The Supreme Court held that prosecution under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters Act can be initiated against a person on the basis of a single FIR if they are found to be a member of a gang indulging in anti-social activities, dismissing the appellant's plea to quash the proceedings.
Shraddha Gupta v. The State of Uttar Pradesh
The Supreme Court held that prosecution under the Gangsters Act, 1986 is valid even on the basis of a single FIR/charge sheet if the accused is found to be a member of a gang indulging in anti-social activities.
Akhilesh Prasad v. Jharkhand Public Service Commission
The Supreme Court held that employees allocated to a successor State after bifurcation retain their reservation benefits in promotional examinations under Sections 73 and 74 of the Bihar Reorganization Act, 2000, and that limited departmental examinations constitute promotion, not fresh recruitment.
Akhilesh Prasad v. Jharkhand Public Service Commission
The Supreme Court held that employees allocated to a successor state post-bifurcation retain their reservation benefits in limited departmental promotion examinations under Sections 72 and 73 of the Bihar Reorganization Act, 2000, overruling the High Court's contrary view.
Rathesh Babu Unnikrishnan v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors.
The High Court correctly refused to quash summons under Section 138 NI Act at the pre-trial stage, emphasizing the limited scope of quashing and the applicability of legal presumptions requiring trial to determine the existence of debt.
Rathish Babu Unnikrishnan v. The State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)
The Supreme Court held that criminal proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act should not be quashed at the pre-trial stage on disputed factual grounds and upheld the legal presumption favoring the complainant.
Rathesh Babu Unnikrishnan v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors.
The Supreme Court held that criminal proceedings under Section 138 NI Act cannot be quashed at the pre-trial stage on mere factual disputes about debt existence, affirming the need for trial to adjudicate such issues.