Hindu female’s property devolves equally on husband and daughter separately; gift of undivided coparcenary share needs no co-owner’s consent. A. Hindu Succession Act, 1956 — Section 15(1)(a) — Devolution of Female Intestate’s Property — Properties of a Hindu female dying intestate devolve, in the absence of sons/daughters’ issue predeceasing her, upon her husband and daughter in equal shares under Section 15(1)(a); such undivided share in the husband’s hands does not partake the character of coparcenary property.
2026 INSC 757 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MARAGADHAM Vs. PERIYARAJA AND OTHERS ( Before : Sanjay Kumar and Sanjeev Sachdeva, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No. 12190 of 2025…
Armed Forces — Air Force Order No. 33/2017 — Prior Permission for Civil Post — Mandatory Nature — Requirement of seeking prior permission before applying for a civil post, and subsequent grant of NOC, held mandatory and not merely procedural/directory, since AFO 33/2017 has necessary nexus with regulating premature discharge of Airmen and its object of maintaining operational preparedness of the Air Force.
2026 INSC 758 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NAKHAT SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ( Before : Ujjal Bhuyan and Atul S. Chandurkar, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…
Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Deficiency of Service — Maintenance Contractor’s Liability — Elevator Malfunction — Comprehensive maintenance contractor, being both manufacturer and repair contractor with exclusive technical knowledge of safety interlocks and brake mechanisms, held principally deficient in service for failing to act on its own identified remedy (voltage stabiliser) despite repeated notice of persistent malfunction over several months preceding fatal accident.
2026 INSC 756 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S OTIS ELEVATOR CO. (INDIA) LTD. Vs. RASHMI HANDA AND OTHERS ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok Aradhe, JJ.…
Public Service Commission consultation before extending officiating appointment is directory not mandatory; ad-hoc service counts towards seniority computation. A. Uttaranchal Civil Services (Executive Branch) Rules, 2005 — Rule 24(4) — Uttaranchal Public Service Commission (Limitations of Functions) Regulations, 2003 — Regulation 5(a) — Nature of Requirement — Requirement of consulting Commission before continuation of officiating appointment beyond one year held directory, not mandatory, applying the classic test of statutory construction; non-compliance does not invalidate the appointment where treating it as void would cause serious inconvenience to persons with no control over the defaulting authority.
2026 INSC 759 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Vs. JAGDISH CHANDRA KANDPAL AND OTHERS ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok Aradhe, JJ. )…
Reinstated judicial officer entitled to Selection/Super Time Scale despite missing ACRs; employer cannot benefit from its own wrongful discharge. A. Rajasthan Judicial Service Rules, 2010 — Rules 49, 50 — Full Court Resolution dated 15.01.2011 — Selection Scale/Super Time Scale — Application on facts — Applying the valid ACRs for 2013 and 2014 (Parts I & II) — all rated “Very Good”/”Good” with integrity certified — the Judicial Officer, having completed five years’ notional service considering reinstatement with continuity, was held entitled to Selection Scale with effect from 16.07.2018 and, upon three years therein, Super Time Scale with effect from 16.07.2021, aligned with the dates of eligibility applied to junior officers.
2026 INSC 762 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN Vs. ABHAY JAIN ( Before : J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, JJ. ) Miscellaneous Application…
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 2(28), S. 2(34) — “Motor vehicle” — “Public place” — Inland Container Depot — A Reach Stacker weighing 71.8 to 102 metric tonnes, far exceeding the permissible gross vehicle weight for vehicles on public roads, is a vehicle of special type adapted for use only within enclosed premises and falls within the exclusionary limb of Section 2(28); the internal roads of an ICD, being a customs-bonded area accessible only to authorized personnel, do not constitute a “public place”.
2026 INSC 763 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH CONTAINER CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED Vs. RISHI RANJAN MISHRA AND OTHERS ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, JJ.…
Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 45, 53 — Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Sections 2(17), 4 — “Life imprisonment” — Meaning — Life imprisonment under Section 53 read with Section 45 IPC (and correspondingly under the BNS) means imprisonment for the rest of the convict’s natural life, terminable only by commutation or remission by competent authority, and not a fixed term of 14 years.
2026 INSC 764 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAMASREY @ FAKKAD Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Augustine George Masih, JJ. ) Writ Petition…
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Sections 165, 166 — Death allegedly caused by murder inside a motor vehicle — Claim for compensation — Requirement of causal link between death and “use” of motor vehicle — Held, mere presence of a motor vehicle in the chain of circumstances leading to death does not attract liability under MVA — Some nexus between the vehicle and the death must be established.
2026 INSC 736 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DILIP AGARWAL Vs. RAJSHRI AGARWAL AND OTHERS ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Augustine George Masih, JJ. ) Civil Appeal Nos….of…
Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976 — Section 2(25) — “Occupier” — Scope of definition — The MHAD Act defines only “occupier,” which includes any person liable to pay rent, an owner in occupation, a rent-free tenant, a licensee, or one liable to pay damages for use and occupation — Occupancy is not a statutory tenancy dependent on the owner’s will, and even a person in possession without formal rent liability may claim occupancy status for reallotment purposes.
2026 INSC 737 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MRS. MAHABANOO CONTRACTOR AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S. KALIKUND DEVELOPERS AND OTHERS ( Before : J. B. Pardiwala and K. Vinod Chandran,…
Stamp Act, 1899 — Section 26, proviso — Mining lease — Stamp duty on instrument with indeterminate value — Determinant of stamp duty — Where value of subject-matter is indeterminate at execution, proviso to S.26 specifically governs mining leases, directing that estimated royalty or value of share, as estimated by the Collector where State is lessor, suffices for stamp duty purposes — Proviso held not inconsistent with main provision — actual value of mining lease is ascertainable only once mining operations commence
2026 INSC 738 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S BIRLA CORPORATION LIMITED Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Augustine George Masih,…