Insurance Law — Fire Insurance Claim — Assessment of Loss — Survey Report — Admissibility and Weightage — Admissibility of Survey Report as Primary Evidence — In insurance claims, a survey report, prepared by an expert after physical inspection, is considered primary and significant evidence — It cannot be disregarded without strong contrary evidence showing arbitrariness or unreasonableness.
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION M/S. A.P. KNITWEARS Vs. SBI GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND OTHERS ( Before : A.P. Sahi, President and Bharatkumar Pandya, Member ) First Appeal…
Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 2(1)(d) — Consumer — A person purchasing a vehicle for business to earn livelihood is a consumer. — Deficiency in service — No deficiency in service if a vehicle model is not available and another available model is given to the buyer as per mutual understanding and agreement, and the buyer fails to make payments for the second vehicle.
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION PROGRESSIVE AUTOMOBILES PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS Vs. BHAJAN DEBNATH ( Before : Inder Jit Singh, Presiding Member and Sudhir Kumar Jain, Member ) Second…
Regularisation of contractual/ad hoc employees — Notifications dated 16.06.2014 and 18.06.2014, which sought to regularise the services of Group ‘B’, ‘C’, and ‘D’ employees were found to be valid as they aimed to provide benefits to employees left out from a previous regularisation policy and had clear criteria for eligibility such as working on sanctioned posts and possessing necessary qualifications.
2026 INSC 379 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MADAN SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Atul S. Chandurkarm, JJ.…
Environmental Law and Wildlife Protection — Illegal Sand Mining — Supreme Court’s Suo Motu Cognizance — The Supreme Court took suo motu cognizance of rampant illegal sand mining in the National Chambal Gharial Sanctuary, recognizing its severe impact on wildlife habitats, including endangered Gharials. The Court issued notices to concerned states and authorities, highlighting that such destruction of habitats violates environmental protection laws like the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 and the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.
2026 INSC 380 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH “IN RE: ILLEGAL SAND MINING IN THE NATIONAL CHAMBAL SANCTUARY AND THREAT TO ENDANGERED AQUATIC WILDLIFE.” ( Before : Vikram Nath…
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Clause 25 of Bill of Lading — Interpretation of “can” — A clause stating that disputes “can be settled by arbitration” does not create a mandatory arbitration agreement — It implies a future possibility and requires further agreement between the parties to refer disputes to arbitration, as opposed to a definitive commitment.
2026 INSC 384 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NAGREEKA INDCON PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. Vs. CARGOCARE LOGISTICS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, JJ.…
Subsidy Withdrawal — Authorities cannot withdraw an already granted subsidy or demand its refund without providing specific reasons or demonstrating non-compliance with scheme conditions. Merely finding a facility ‘in closed condition’ during an inspection, without further inquiry or evidence of failure to operate, is insufficient justification for withdrawal.
2026 INSC 385 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH AGRICULTURE PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE, DEESA Vs. NATIONAL HORTICULTURE BOARD AND OTHERS ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Augustine George Masih, JJ.…
Matrimonial law — Maintenance — Deductions from husband’s salary — Voluntary deductions for asset creation (e.g., loan repayments) cannot dilute primary maintenance obligation — Husband’s duty to maintain spouse is primary and continuing, enabling wife to live with dignity.
2026 INSC 370 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DEEPA JOSHI Vs. GAURAV JOSHI ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Augustine George Masih, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. ….of 2026…
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 7 Rule 11(d) and Order 2 Rule 2 — Rejection of Plaint — Bar by Law — Applicability of Order 2 Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure does not by itself constitute a ground for rejection of plaint under Order 7 Rule 11(d) — Rejection of plaint under Order 7 Rule 11(d) is based on the suit being barred by law, where the bar is apparent from the plaint itself — A plea under Order 2 Rule 2 requires evidence to establish the bar, and therefore cannot typically be a basis for rejecting a plaint at the initial stage.
2026 INSC 372 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH S. VALLIAMMAI AND OTHERS Vs. S. RAMANATHAN AND ANOTHER ( Before : B.V. Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…
Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 — Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for Translation and Transmission of Records for Legal Aid Appeals and Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) — The Supreme Court has approved and directed implementation of an SOP to streamline the process of translation, digitization, and filing of records in legal aid cases, with specific timelines and responsibilities for various stakeholders to ensure timely access to justice.
2026 INSC 369 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHANKAR MAHTO Vs. STATE OF BIHAR ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. ….of…
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 22(3)(b) — Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (COFEPOSA) — Sections 3(1), 8(c), 8(e) — Right to legal representation before Advisory Board — A detenu does not have a right to be represented by a legal practitioner before the Advisory Board — This right only arises if the detaining authority or government uses a legal practitioner, in which case the detenu must also be allowed legal representation — Mere assistance by officials in producing records does not grant this right
2026 INSC 371 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PRIYANKA SARKARIYA Vs. THE UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER ( Before : M. M. Sundresh and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, JJ. )…