Supreme Court of India Judgements

46468 Judgements hosted as on 12/05/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Month: April 2021

Constitution

High Court shall not pass order of not to arrest and/or “no coercive steps” either during the investigation or till the investigation is completed and/or till the final report/chargesheet is filed under Section 173 Cr.P.C., while dismissing/disposing of the quashing petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and/or under Article 226

Apr 25, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH M/S NEEHARIKA INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED — Appellant Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, M.R. Shah…

Corruption

Demand of bribe – At the stage of framing of the charge and/or considering the discharge application, the mini trial is not permissible – At this stage, it is to be noted that even as per Section 7 of the PC Act, even an attempt constitutes an offence – Therefore, the High Court has erred and/or exceeded in virtually holding a mini trial at the stage of discharge application

Apr 25, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF RAJASTHAN — Appellant Vs. ASHOK KUMAR KASHYAP — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and M.R. Shah, JJ. ) Criminal…

I B C

IBC, 2016 – Once a resolution plan is duly approved by the Adjudicating Authority under sub-section (1) of Section 31, the claims as provided in the resolution plan shall stand frozen and will be binding on the Corporate Debtor and its employees, members, creditors, including the Central Government, any State Government or any local authority, guarantors and other stakeholders

Apr 25, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH GHANASHYAM MISHRA AND SONS PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH THE AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY — Appellant Vs. EDELWEISS ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED THROUGH THE DIRECTOR AND OTHERS —…

Accident

Drunken driving – Breath analyzer test or blood test is not mandatory for an insurer to deny an accident policy claim on the ground of drunken driving – Presence of alcohol in excess of 30 mg per 100 ml. of blood is not an indispensable requirement to enable an Insurer to successfully invoke the clause – What is required to be proved is driving by a person under the influence of the alcohol –

Apr 18, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED — Appellant Vs. PEARL BEVERAGES LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit, Indira Banerjee and K.M.…

Constitution

Conspiracy to Destabilize Judiciary – Phone call conspiracy against the High Court Chief Justice and a senior sitting Judge of the Supreme Court – Investigation- Authenticity and genuineness of the transcript having been admitted to the extent as contained in audio tape – Direction by the High Court calling for report from Justice R.V. Raveendran need not be allowed to continue – Order accordingly.

Apr 18, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH (RETD.) — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Ashok Bhushan and R. Subhash Reddy, JJ.…

Cheque Dishonour

A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI) – Section 138 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Section 258 – Cheque Bouncing Cases – Power to Stop Proceedings – Section 258 of the Code is not applicable to complaints under Section 138 of the Act. B. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI) – Section 138 – Dishonour of cheque – Expeditious Trial – Directions

Apr 17, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CONSTITUTION BENCH IN RE: EXPEDITIOUS TRIAL OF CASES UNDER SECTION 138 OF N.I. ACT 1881. ( Before : S.A. Bobde, CJI, Nageswara Rao, B.R. Gavai, A.S.…

Specific Performance

A suit for specific performance cannot be dismissed on the sole ground of delay or laches – Escalation of prices cannot be the sole ground to deny specific performance -However, an exception to this rule is where an immovable property is to be sold within a certain period, time being of the essence, and it is not found that owing to some default on the part of the plaintiff, the sale could not take place within the stipulated time.

Apr 11, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH A.R. MADANA GOPAL ETC.ETC. — Appellant Vs. M/S RAMNATH PUBLICATIONS PVT. LIMITED AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao and S.…

You missed

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 376(2)(g) and 506(1) – Tamil Nadu Prevention of Women Harassment Act, 1998 – Section 4 – Gang Rape – The victim’s testimony, along with her mother and aunt’s statements, was consistent with the initial complaint and corroborated by medical evidence – The defense argued that the long gap between the victim’s examination-in-chief and cross-examination led to inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies – Whether the long gap between the victim’s examination-in-chief and cross-examination led to inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies – The inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies were not significant and did not affect the overall credibility of the evidence – The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction of the appellant for gang rape and related charges – The court rejected the defense’s argument that the long gap between the victim’s examination-in-chief and cross-examination led to inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies – The court found that the evidence presented was sufficient to convict the appellant for gang rape and related charges – The Supreme Court found that the evidence presented was sufficient to convict the appellant and rejected the defence’s arguments regarding inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies.

May 12, 2024 sclaw
Limitation

Dismissal of Civil Suit – Condonation of delay – Standing to file an application – The court clarified that only parties to a suit or those who have accrued a right in the lis can file an application for condonation of delay in filing an application for restoration of the suit. A stranger to the proceedings cannot file such an application.

May 12, 2024 sclaw
Limitation

Limitation Act, 1963 – Haryana Public Moneys (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1979 – Section 3(1)(b) – State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 – Section 29 – The appeals arise from a High Court judgment regarding the recovery of time-barred debts under the Act, 1979, and the Act, 1951 – The main issue is whether a debt time-barred under the Limitation Act can be recovered using the aforementioned Acts – The appellants argued that time-barred debts cannot be recovered under the Recovery of Dues Act, citing the precedent set in V.R. Kalliyanikutty – The respondents argued that the Recovery of Dues Act and the State Financial Corporations Act allow for time-barred debt recovery, as they only bar the remedy, not the right – The court examined whether the Recovery of Dues Act creates a new right for creditors and allows for time-barred debt recovery – The court discussed the distinction between a debt and the right of action for its recovery, noting that the statute of limitation bars the latter but not the former – The court concluded that the Recovery of Dues Act and the State Financial Corporations Act provide an alternative mechanism for recovering debts, even if they are time-barred – Matter needs to be placed before the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India to constitute an appropriate three-judge bench.

May 12, 2024 sclaw
Consumer

Consumer Law – Policy Claim – The appellants, family of the deceased, filed a complaint after the LIC repudiated their claim on a policy following the policyholder’s accidental death – The main issue was whether there was a concluded contract between the deceased and LIC at the time of his death, which would obligate LIC to pay the insurance benefits – The appellants argued that LIC had accepted the first premium and issued a receipt, thereby assuming risk and concluding the contract before the policyholder’s death – LIC contended that the policy was not communicated to the deceased and was blocked due to his demise, implying no concluded contract existed – The Supreme Court set aside the NCDRC’s order, restored the District Forum’s order in favor of the appellants, and directed LIC to pay the insurance benefits as per the policy terms – The Court found clear presumption of acceptance of the policy by LIC, as the first premium receipt indicated the corporation was on risk from the receipt date – The Court relied on precedents that establish the principles of insurance contracts and the obligations of good faith expected from insurers – The Supreme Court concluded that LIC had indeed entered into a contract with the policyholder before his death, and thus, was liable to pay the insurance benefits to the appellants.

May 12, 2024 sclaw