Supreme Court of India Judgements

46640 Judgements hosted as on 10/10/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Month: February 2022

Service Matters
Service

Fixation of pension – his emoluments for the purpose of ascertaining the average would be taken, at what they would have been, had he not been absent from duty or suspended provided that the benefit of pay in any officiating post would be admissible only if it is certified that he would have continued to hold that officiating post but for leave or suspension

Feb 6, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF KERALA AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. ANIE LUKOSE — Respondent ( Before : Indira Banerjee and J.K. Maheshwari, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

Tenders & Contracts

HELD The Respondent had the option not to lease out its property to the Appellant. The situation of an owner of property, executing a lease agreement in respect of his property cannot be equated with a contract of employment executed by and between an employee and a mighty employer, where the employee has little option but to accept the terms and conditions offered by the employer.

Feb 6, 2022 sclaw

INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED THROUGH ITS SENIOR MANAGER — Appellant Vs. M/S SHREE GANESH PETROLEUM RAJGURUNAGAR THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR MR. LAXMAN DAGDU THITE — Respondent ( Before : Indira Banerjee…

Acquittal

Acquittal – Use of the gun itself is not established by the FSL report – Ingredients of Section 307/34 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act have not been proved by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt – Trial Court and High Court committed error in convicting the appellant for the charge under Section 307/34 IPC read with Section 27 Arms Act – Conviction and sentence set­ aside.

Feb 6, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VASUDEV — Appellant Vs. STATE OF M.P. — Respondent ( Before : Indira Banerjee and J.K. Maheshwari, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. 388 of…

Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Sections 397 and 401 read with Section 482 – Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 302 – Army Act, 1950 – Sections 69 and 125 – Murder- Consequence of the decision of the High Court is to foist an obligation on the Army Authorities to hold a court-martial despite a clear and unequivocal submission to the jurisdiction of the Court of Sessions – Accused shall be transferred from military custody to civil custody to face trial – Appeal allowed.

Feb 6, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF SIKKIM — Appellant Vs. JASBIR SINGH AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and Surya Kant, JJ.…

Will & Succession

Hindu Succession Act, 1956 – Section 14(1) – Property of a female Hindu to be her absolute property – Objective of Section 14(1) – There cannot be a fetter in a owner of a property to give a limited estate if he so chooses to do including to his wife but of course if the limited estate is to the wife for her maintenance that would mature in an absolute estate under Section 14(1) of the said Act.

Feb 6, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH JOGI RAM — Appellant Vs. SURESH KUMAR AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M.M. Sundresh, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

Corporate

Partnership Act, 1932 – Section 69 – Suit for declaration and injunction by unregistered firm – HELD that Section 69(2) of the Act of 1932 is not a bar to a suit filed by an unregistered firm, if the same is for enforcement of a statutory right or a common law right.

Feb 6, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHIV DEVELOPERS THROUGH ITS PARTNER SUNILBHAI SOMABHAI AJMERI — Appellant Vs. AKSHARAY DEVELOPERS AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dinesh Maheshwari and Vikram…

Labour Cases

Termination – Reinstatement and back wages – Termination of the workman in breach of Sections 25-F and 25-G of the Industrial Disputes Act- When the appointment was purely on contractual basis and on a fixed salary/honorarium of Rs.500/- per month, the order of reinstatement with back wages was not warranted and instead if the lumpsum compensation is awarded in lieu of reinstatement and back wages as observed hereinabove, it will meet the ends of justice

Feb 6, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER MAHARASHTRA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION — Appellant Vs. KALAWATI PANDURANG FULZELE — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ.…

You missed

Cr P C I P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Quashing of Criminal Proceedings under Section 482 in Cases with Predominantly Civil Character — The court reiterated the principle that criminal cases with overwhelmingly and predominantly civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions, matrimonial relationships, or family disputes, should be quashed when the parties have resolved their entire disputes among themselves — This principle is applied in the present case, where the dispute involved a loan transaction between the accused persons and the bank, and the parties had settled the matter through the One Time Settlement (OTS).

Oct 9, 2024 sclaw
Service

The main issue is whether the eligibility criteria requiring AICTE approval for diplomas is valid, given the Supreme Court’s previous ruling that universities do not need AICTE approval for technical courses —The petitioners argued that the eligibility criteria were inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s ruling and that they were unfairly excluded from the recruitment process —The respondents contended that the recruitment process was conducted according to the existing rules and that the petitioners were bound by the doctrine of acquiescence —The Supreme Court directed the Bihar Technical Service Commission to prepare a fresh select list of meritorious candidates, considering the previous High Court order and the AICTE’s stance —The Court found that changing the eligibility criteria after the selection process was completed was impermissible and that the petitioners had a legitimate right to be considered — The appeals were disposed of with directions to prepare a revised select list within three months, ensuring that eligible candidates are considered fairly.

Oct 9, 2024 sclaw
Direct Taxation Income Tax

Income Tax Act, 1961 — Section 139(5) — Revised Income Tax Return — The appellant filed multiple revised returns for the assessment year 1989-90, which were not considered due to being barred by limitation —Whether the assessing officer can consider claims made in a revised return filed after the time limit prescribed by Section 139(5) of the Act — The appellant argued that the assessing officer should consider the claim for deduction of deferred revenue expenditure, even if the revised return was filed late —The respondent contended that the assessing officer has no jurisdiction to consider claims made in a time-barred revised return —The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the High Court’s decision that the assessing officer cannot consider claims in a time-barred revised return —The Court emphasized that the assessing officer’s jurisdiction is limited by the time constraints set in Section 139(5) —The Court referred to previous judgments, including Wipro Finance Ltd. and Goetze (India) Ltd., to support its decision —The appeal was dismissed, affirming that claims in a time-barred revised return cannot be considered by the assessing officer.

Oct 9, 2024 sclaw
Tenders & Contracts

Coal Mining Bid — Rejection of — Eligibility criteria — Appellants challenged the rejection of its technical bid by Respondent-BCCL for a coal mining project, while the bid of Respondent No. 8 was accepted despite non-compliance with mandatory requirements —Whether BCCL was justified in rejecting the appellant’s bid and accepting the bid of Respondent No. 8, which did not meet the eligibility criteria — Appellant argues that the rejection was arbitrary and discriminatory — The appellant complied with all requirements, while Respondent No. 8 was allowed to submit missing documents later — BCCL argues that the appellant’s bid was non-compliant due to issues with the Power of Attorney — The Tender Committee could seek shortfall documents but not replace them —The Supreme Court found BCCL’s actions arbitrary and illegal, setting aside the rejection of the appellant’s bid and the acceptance of Respondent No. 8’s bid — The appellant’s Power of Attorney was valid and notarized before submission — BCCL’s acceptance of Respondent No. 8’s bid despite non-compliance was unjustified —Government bodies must act fairly and transparently in awarding contracts — The decision-making process must be free from arbitrariness and bias —The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside BCCL’s decision and any subsequent agreements, and directed BCCL to initiate a fresh tender process.

Oct 9, 2024 sclaw