Supreme Court of India Judgements

46448 Judgements hosted as on 05/05/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Month: August 2021

Service Matters
Service

Penalty of compulsory retirement from the post of Additional District and Sessions Judge – Multiple transactions showing deposits and withdrawals of substantial amounts of money, it cannot be said that Full Court was not justified in taking the view that it did – Compulsory retirement upheld

Aug 4, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAJINDER GOEL — Appellant Vs. HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit and Ajay Rastogi,…

Cr P C

REMISSION – if a prisoner has undergone more than 14 years of actual imprisonment, the State Government, as an appropriate Government, is competent to pass an order of premature release, but if the prisoner has not undergone 14 years or more of actual imprisonment, the Governor has a power to grant pardons, reprieves, respites and remissions of punishment or to suspend, remit or commute the sentence of any person de hors the restrictions imposed under Section 433-A of the Constitution

Aug 4, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. RAJ KUMAR @ BITTU — Respondent ( Before : Hemant Gupta and A.S. Bopanna, JJ.…

Cr P C

(IPC) – Ss 425, 427 & 447 – Prevention of Damage of Public Property Act 1984 – S 3(1) – (CrPC) – S 321 – Allowing the prosecution to be withdrawn would only result in a singular result, which is that the elected representatives are exempt from the mandate of criminal law. This is not being in aid of the broad ends of public justice – CJM justified in declining withdrawal of the prosecution under S 321 Cr PC

Aug 1, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF KERALA — Appellant Vs. K. AJITH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and M. R. Shah,…

Arbitration

Arbitral award – Ground of Patent Illegality – No evidence at all or an award which ignores vital evidence in arriving at its decision would be perverse and liable to be set aside on the ground of patent illegality – Impugned Award would come under the realm of ‘patent illegality’ and therefore, has been rightly set aside by the High Court – Appeal Dismissed.

Aug 1, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PSA SICAL TERMINALS PRIVATE LIMITED — Appellant Vs. THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF V.O. CHIDAMBRANAR PORT TRUST TUTICORIN AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before…

Service Matters
Service

Criterion of “seniority – cum – merit” in the matter of promotion postulates that given the minimum necessary merit requisite for efficiency of administration, the senior, even though less meritorious, shall have priority and a comparative assessment of merit is not required to be made

Aug 1, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH TEK CHAND AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. BHAKRA BEAS MANAGEMENT BOARD (B.B.M.S.) AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Navin Sinha and R. Subhash…

You missed

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 120-B read with Section 420 – Cheating – The case involves fraudulent transactions by accused in connivance with Indian Bank officials resulting in interest-free advances to the petitioners – The main issue is whether the petitioners were involved in cheating the bank and if they availed any undue benefit from the fraudulent transactions – The petitioners argued that they were not involved in the cheating, had not availed any undue benefit, and that the transactions were normal business dealings – The court dismissed the Special Leave Petitions, upholding the Trial Court’s conviction of the petitioners for cheating the bank through unauthorized transactions.

May 5, 2024 sclaw
Limitation

Limitation Act, 1963 – Section 5 – Condonation of Delay – Delay of 1663 days – The State of U.P. filed a SLP against an order dated 13.11.2009 by the Allahabad High Court, with a delay of 1,633 days – The main issue was the condonation of the significant delay in filing the SLP – The State argued that the delay was due to the time taken for obtaining legal opinion and permissions, and later, the realization that the appeal was not filed initially – The application for condonation of delay was dismissed, and consequently, the SLP was also dismissed – The court found the explanation for the delay unsatisfactory, especially since the State was aware of the High Court’s order when it was passed – The court did not find sufficient cause to condone the delay, leading to the dismissal of the SLP.

May 5, 2024 sclaw
Property Matters

Partition Suit – The dispute involves partition of properties left by Late ‘R’ with the main contention over roof rights of a property in Kota and another in Jaipur – The primary issue is the valuation of roof rights for further construction and the equal distribution of property among co-sharers – The appellants argue that the valuation report failed to assess the value of roof rights, which would affect the overall property valuation and entitlement of co-sharers – The respondents maintain that the property valuation and shares were appropriately determined by the approved Valuer and upheld by both the Trial Court and High Court – The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, finding no merit in revaluating the property or altering the determined shares of the parties – The Court emphasized the importance of family ties over property disputes and suggested alternative dispute resolution methods for amicable settlements – The Court referenced the case of Afcons Infrastructure Limited vs. Cherian Varkey Construction Company Private Limited, advocating for ADR in family-related property disputes – The Supreme Court concluded that revisiting the valuation and partition would only prolong litigation and upheld the decisions of the lower courts.

May 5, 2024 sclaw
Constitution Municipal Laws

West Bengal Municipal(Building) Rules, 2007 – Rule 50 – Open spaces for building in areas other than municipalities in hill areas – The appellants challenge the High Court of Calcutta’s order regarding a contempt petition related to their residential property construction and its compliance with Rule 50 of Rules, 2007 – The appellants argue that the writ petition was a private matter and should not have been entertained by the High Court – They also claim that municipal authorities are unfairly pressuring them due to the contempt proceedings – The respondent claims that the appellants violated the sanctioned building plan, justifying the High Court’s direction for an enquiry – The Supreme Court allowed the appellants to challenge the enquiry report and show cause notice, ensuring their objections would be considered objectively without prejudice from the contempt or writ proceedings – The court expressed reservations about the High Court’s exercise of writ jurisdiction in a private dispute and suggested the civil court as the appropriate forum for grievances – The appeal was disposed of with the appellants given the liberty to challenge the enquiry report and show cause notice, without cost order.

May 5, 2024 sclaw