Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
81839b77cd6aa5659db672e3627c0f8d91b093bc662b120745d84b37f6e96ffd
The Supreme Court upheld the appellant's conviction for murder and kidnapping, affirming the reliability of forensic evidence and the prosecution's burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt.
UNION OF INDIA v. PARMAR CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
The Supreme Court held that the Arbitration Amendment Act, 2015 does not apply to arbitrations commenced before its commencement, no claim certificates do not bar arbitration if signed under duress, and courts must respect agreed arbitration appointment procedures unless failure justifies independent arbitrator appointment under Section 11(6).
Union of India v. Parmar Construction Company
The Supreme Court held that the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015 does not apply to arbitration proceedings commenced before its commencement, no claim certificates signed under economic duress do not bar arbitration, and the High Court rightly appointed independent arbitrators under Section 11(6) of the pre-amended Act due to failure of the appellants to follow the agreed appointment procedure.
Union of India v. Parmar Construction Company
The Supreme Court held that arbitration proceedings commenced before the 2015 Amendment Act are governed by the pre-amended law, no claim certificates do not bar arbitration if signed under duress, 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 demands made before the 2015 Amendment 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.
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Antique Art Exports Pvt. Ltd.
The Supreme Court held that absent prima facie evidence of coercion, a full and final discharge voucher accepted without protest extinguishes arbitral disputes, and the High Court erred in appointing an arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act.
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 duress do not bar arbitration, 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 the High Court rightly appointed independent arbitrators due to failure to follow agreed appointment procedures.
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 the High Court rightly appointed independent arbitrators due to failure of parties to follow agreed appointment procedures.
Union of India v. Parmar Construction Company
The Supreme Court held that arbitration proceedings initiated before the 2015 Amendment Act are governed by the pre-amended law, no claim certificates signed under financial duress do not discharge 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 the Arbitration Amendment Act, 2015 does not apply to proceedings commenced before its commencement, no claim certificates do not bar arbitration if signed under duress, and the agreed arbitration appointment procedure must be followed before court intervention.
6c81f32fc796b934ccac4ed1c0b829ed758f2c291c6f1d5ae11baebcfe86be5d
The Supreme Court upheld the legality of investigation and arrests by SFIO under the Companies Act beyond the initial investigation period upon extension, dismissing writ petitions challenging remand orders and interim bail granted by the High Court.
Lahari Sakhamuri v. Sobhan Kodali
The Supreme Court held that Indian courts lack jurisdiction over custody of minor children who are US citizens and not ordinarily resident in India, affirming the US Court's custody orders and emphasizing the paramountcy of the child's welfare and comity of courts.
through LRs. Gurbinder Singh .... v. The State of Haryana & Others Etc. Etc. .
The Supreme Court enhanced compensation for land acquired in Faridabad under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, applying a 12% per annum cumulative increase reflecting the land's locational advantage and market escalation.
Balwant Singh v. The State of Haryana
The Supreme Court enhanced compensation for land acquired in Faridabad under the Land Acquisition Act, applying a 12% annual cumulative increase to reflect true market value based on location and development potential.
94ebe254821cf06d7695da19e05e68eb0b244ba944942703237a896db82f90a2
The Supreme Court upheld the conviction and sentence under Section 302 IPC and POTA based on reliable circumstantial evidence and voluntary confessions, affirming procedural compliance and fair trial guarantees.
State of Himachal Pradesh v. Vijay Kumar Alias Pappu
The Supreme Court upheld the conviction under Section 326 IPC for acid attack causing 16% burns, reduced sentence to 5 years, and directed additional victim compensation from accused and State.
State of Himachal Pradesh v. Vijay Kumar Alias Pappu
The Supreme Court upheld conviction under Section 326 IPC for acid attack causing 16% burns, refused to restore attempt to murder charge, and directed additional victim compensation from accused and State.