Supreme Court of India Judgements

46650 Judgements hosted as on 11/11/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Month: May 2020

Constitution

Sabarimala Reference: SC Gives Reasons For Holding That Questions Of Law Can Be Referred To Larger Bench In Review HELD(REASONS) Writ Petitions filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India do not fall within the purview of civil and criminal proceedings. Therefore, the limitations in Order XLVII, Rule 1 do not apply to review petitions filed against judgments or orders passed in Writ Petitions filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. Court noted that the Article 137 of the Constitution of India empowers the Supreme Court to review any judgment pronounced or order made by it subject to the provisions of any law made by the Parliament or any rules made under Article 145

May 12, 2020 sclaw

Sabarimala Reference: SC Gives Reasons For Holding That Questions Of Law Can Be Referred To Larger Bench In Review [Read Order] LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK 11 May 2020 4:38 PM The…

Land Acquisition

Gujarat Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 – Sections 6, 9, 10, 10(5) and 20(1)(a) – Physical possession – The settled legal position that it is difficult to take physical possession of the land under compulsory acquisition – HELD Subsequent thereto, the retention of possession would tantamount only to illegal or unlawful possession.HELD that the writ petition filed in the year 2001 by the appellants with limited relief of questioning the Possession Panchnama dated 20.3.1986, suffered from laches.

May 8, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KAPILABEN AMBALAL PATEL AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar and Dinesh Maheshwari,…

Constitution

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) – Section 141 – Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 226 – When the petition raises complex questions of fact, which may for their determination require oral evidence to be taken, and on that account the High Court is of the view that the dispute should not appropriately be tried in a writ petition, the High Court may decline to try a petition. HELD we have no hesitation in taking the view that in the facts of the present case, the High Court should have been loath to entertain the writ petition filed by the respondent No. 1 and should have relegated the respondent No. 1 to appropriate remedy

May 8, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. ATMANAND SINGH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar and Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ.…

C P C

Specific Relief Act, 1963 – Section 34 – Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) – Order 23 Rule 3A – Transfer of Property Act, 1882 – Section 52 – Bar to suit – Compromise decree – Merely because the appellant was not party to the compromise decree in the facts of the present case, will be of no avail to the appellant, much less give him a cause of action to question the validity of the compromise decree passed by the High Court by way of a substantive suit before the civil Court to declare it as fraudulent, illegal and not binding on him

May 8, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH TRILOKI NATH SINGH — Appellant Vs. ANIRUDH SINGH(D) THR. LRS AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar and Ajay Rastogi, JJ. )…

Contempt

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 – Sections 12 and 14 – Rules to Regulate Proceedings for Contempt of the Supreme Court, 1975 – Rule 3 – Suit for permanent injunction, possession and for recovery of rent and damages/mesne profits till the recovery of possession – This Court find force in the explanation offered by the respondent that as per its bona fide understanding, there was no outstanding dues payable to the petitioner – Moreover, as observed by the High Court, these aspects could be answered by the executing Court if the parties pursue their claim(s) before it in that regard

May 8, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HUKUM CHAND DESWAL — Appellant Vs. SATISH RAJ DESWAL — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar and Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. ) Contempt Petition…

Corporate

Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 – Section 31 – Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 226 – Assessment order – It is well settled that rejection of delay application by the appellate forum does not entail in merger of the assessment order with that order – Appeal allowed.  

May 8, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (CT) LTU, KAKINADA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. M/S. GLAXO SMITH KLINE CONSUMER HEALTH CARE LIMITED — Respondent ( Before :…

You missed

Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 376 and 313 — Rape — False promise of marriage — Physical relationship with the complainant under the false promise of marriage, leading to her pregnancy and subsequent abortions — Whether the FIR should be quashed based on the allegations and the delay in filing the complaint — The petitioner argued that the relationship was consensual and the delay in filing the FIR undermines the credibility of the allegations — The respondent claimed that the petitioner deceived her with a false promise of marriage, leading to non-consensual physical relations — The Supreme Court quashed the FIR, noting the long-term consensual relationship and the lack of prima facie evidence for rape under Section 376 IPC —The Court emphasized the delay in filing the FIR and the nature of the relationship, which appeared consensual —The Court referred to previous judgments, highlighting the importance of prima facie evidence and the misuse of legal provisions —The FIR and all proceedings based on it were quashed, preventing abuse of the legal process.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 420, 468, 471 and 120-B —Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 13(2) and 13(1)(d) — Financial misconduct and conspiracy — Whether the High Court was correct in discharging the respondent from the charges of conspiracy and financial misconduct — The CBI argued that the High Court conducted a mini-trial at the charge-framing stage and that there was sufficient suspicion to frame charges against the respondent — The respondent’s counsel argued that the material in the charge sheet did not make out a case against the respondent and that the High Court rightly discharged him —The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision to discharge the respondent, stating that mere suspicion was not enough to frame charges – The Court found that the respondent’s role was limited to signing the memorandum prepared by senior officers and participating in the Management Committee meeting, which approved the proposal — The Court emphasized that the proposal had passed through various committees and that the respondent’s actions did not amount to criminal misconduct — The appeal was dismissed, and the respondent was discharged from the charges — The trial against other accused persons will continue.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Municipal Laws

Patna Municipal Corporation Act, 1951 — Sections 146, 423 and 488(1) — The Patna Municipal Corporation imposed a royalty on advertisements, which was later increased — The respondents challenged this imposition, arguing it was a tax without legislative backing — Whether the royalty imposed by the Corporation was a tax and if it was legally enforceable without legislative sanction — The Corporation argued that the royalty was agreed upon by the parties and was not a tax — They contended that the enhancement of the rate was within their rights — The respondents argued that the imposition was a tax, which required legislative sanction, and the Corporation had no authority to levy it — The Division Bench quashed the enhancement, ruling that the Corporation had no power to impose the tax without legislative backing — The Court found that the royalty was not a tax but a fee agreed upon by the parties — It held that the Corporation’s actions were within the scope of the agreement — The Court distinguished between royalty and tax, emphasizing that royalty is based on an agreement, not statutory provision — The Court upheld the imposition of royalty as per the agreement but noted that the enhancement in rates was not challenged effectively — The judgment of the Division Bench was set aside.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Constitution

Citizenship Act, 1955 — Section 6A — Special provisions as to citizenship of persons covered by the Assam Accord — The case involves the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act 1955, which grants citizenship to certain migrants from Bangladesh to Assam —The main issues include whether Parliament had the legislative competence to enact Section 6A, and if Section 6A violates Articles 6, 7, 14, 29, and 355 of the Constitution — Petitioners argue that Section 6A is unconstitutional as it conflicts with Articles 6 and 7, adopts unreasonable cut-off dates, and violates Articles 14, 29, and 355 — Respondents contend that Section 6A is within Parliament’s legislative competence under Article 11 and does not violate the Constitution — The judgment addresses the legislative competence of Parliament, the reasonableness of cut-off dates, and the impact on Assamese cultural identity — The court examines the historical context of citizenship provisions, the legislative intent behind Section 6A, and the scope of judicial review under Article 14 — The court analyzes the constitutional provisions on citizenship, the legislative objective of Section 6A, and the balance between legislative intent and constitutional mandates —The court concludes that Section 6A of the Citizenship Act is constitutional and does not violate the cited Articles of the Constitution.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw