Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
Ku. Bhawana v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
The Supreme Court upheld that a teacher appointed as trained before another acquires training qualification ranks senior under the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools Rules, 1981, dismissing the appellant's claim to seniority.
KU. BHAWANA v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
The Supreme Court held that a teacher appointed as a trained teacher before another acquires the requisite qualification is senior under the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools Rules, 1981, dismissing the appellant's claim to seniority.
17b4139fba985ac4b9f3d244bafce31908512ba0b91e5103424c13b4458d78f5
The Supreme Court held that pay fixation must comply with applicable service rules and government orders, directing revision of pay scales for the petitioner and similarly situated employees effective from 1996 and 2006.
54a52bb65785c22921d26b9f2937d2f7026569c0c0f28f5ff2da36e611d88d8c
The High Court held that inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to quash criminal charges must be exercised sparingly and refused to quash charges of attempted murder and related offences, directing trial to proceed.
e991f5ba79272df4927535cf47cb970480590f8d745a59d43f28ea25e6f5dff5
The court held that police action and evidence collection under Sections 60 and 65 of the Tamil Nadu Police Act must comply with statutory procedural safeguards, and set aside the conviction due to non-compliance and inadmissible evidence.
9db57cf5c038df5e27e4fc94692d363183c9ef87e200c6cb38ed6257e8c86978
The High Court upheld the murder conviction under Section 302 IPC based on a complete chain of circumstantial evidence proving the appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
cbf11d78904cf3ceec98dd531deefb49b29dc4b558f3d74082a4eb050de4e5a8
The court upheld the tax demands and penalties imposed under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1947, affirming the correct classification of goods and applicability of government notifications.
Western Coalfields Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise
The Supreme Court held that the six-month limitation period under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act applies independently to buyers claiming refund of excise duty paid under protest by manufacturers, and refund claims filed beyond this period are barred.
WESTERN COALFIELDS LTD. v. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE
The Supreme Court held that the six-month limitation period under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act applies to refund claims by buyers even if the manufacturer paid excise duty under protest, dismissing the buyer's time-barred refund claim.
Western Coalfields Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise
The Supreme Court held that the six-month limitation under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act applies strictly to buyers claiming refund of excise duty paid under protest by manufacturers, dismissing refund claims filed beyond this period.
Western Coalfields Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise
The Supreme Court held that the six-month limitation period under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act applies separately to buyers and manufacturers, and a buyer cannot claim refund of duty paid under protest by the manufacturer beyond this period.
32 Q (1) v. P
The court upheld the validity of land rights mutation and registration under Sections 29, 31, and 32 of the Act, dismissing the petitioner's challenge for lack of illegality or procedural lapse.
Punjab Wakf Board v. Sham Singh Harike; Punjab Wakf Board v. Teja Singh
The Supreme Court held that suits for possession and injunction relating to Wakf properties are maintainable before Wakf Tribunals under the Wakf Act, 1995, clarifying the limits of civil court jurisdiction and distinguishing the Ramesh Gobindram precedent.
Punjab Wakf Board v. Sham Singh Harike; Punjab Wakf Board v. Teja Singh
The Supreme Court held that prior to the 2013 amendment, suits for eviction or possession relating to Wakf properties are maintainable only before civil courts and not Wakf Tribunals, dismissing the Punjab Wakf Board's appeals.
Union of India v. Parmar Construction Company
The Supreme Court held that arbitration proceedings requested before the 2015 Amendment Act are governed by the pre-amended law, no claim certificates signed under duress do not bar arbitration, and courts must respect contractual procedures for appointing arbitrators.
M/s. ACHAL INDUSTRIES v. STATE OF KARNATAKA
The Supreme Court upheld the levy of turnover tax on total turnover under Section 6-B(1) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, rejecting the appellant's contention that tax should be levied only on taxable turnover.
5c92bd66ade5bdb364c49863a0e6337493eec52561a74c5e5ef7841dd5b2d421
The court upheld the appellant's conviction for murder and related offences, affirming that the prosecution proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt through consistent and corroborated evidence.
Union of India v. Parmar Construction Company
The Supreme Court held that arbitration proceedings commenced before the 2015 Amendment Act are governed by pre-amendment law, no claim certificates signed under financial duress do not extinguish disputes, and courts must respect agreed arbitration appointment procedures before appointing independent arbitrators.
UNION OF INDIA v. PARMAR CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
The Supreme Court held that arbitration proceedings commenced before the 2015 Amendment Act are governed by pre-amendment law, no claim certificates do not bar arbitration if signed under duress, and courts must respect agreed arbitration appointment procedures before appointing independent arbitrators.