Supreme Court of India Judgements

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

Month: March 2022

Land Acquisition

Land owners having had the benefit of interim orders granted in their favour in proceedings initiated by them against the acquisition cannot take benefit under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013 – High Court or the civil courts which may have granted interim orders in favour of the land owners, ought to consider the aforesaid aspect before applying Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013 in favour of the land owners.

Mar 29, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKETING COMMITTEE, BANGALORE — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V.…

Service Matters
Service

Except stating that “it is noticed that there is apparent error on the face of record which calls for interference”, nothing has been mentioned on what was that error apparent on the face of the record – Therefore, the impugned order, allowing the review application being a cryptic and non-reasoned order, the same is unsustainable in law – Matter remitted to HC

Mar 29, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RATAN LAL PATEL — Appellant Vs. DR. HARI SINGH GOUR VISHWAVIDYALAYA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ.…

Land Acquisition

A consent award cannot be the basis to award and/or determine the compensation in other acquisition, more particularly, when there are other evidences on record – There may be different market prices/compensation with respect to different lands, may be in the same village and/or nearby location – remand the matter to the High Court

Mar 29, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. N. SAVITHA — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. ) Civil…

Service Matters
Service

Merely because some other officers involved in the incident are exonerated and/or no action is taken against other officers cannot be a ground to set aside the order of punishment when the charges against the individual concerned – delinquent officer are held to be proved in a departmental enquiry

Mar 29, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. RAJIT SINGH — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. )…

Tenders & Contracts

Any contract of public service should not be interfered with lightly and in any case, there should not be any interim order derailing the entire process of the services meant for larger public good – Grant of interim injunction by the learned Single Bench of the High Court has helped no-one except a contractor

Mar 29, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S. N.G. PROJECTS LIMITED — Appellant Vs. M/S. VINOD KUMAR JAIN AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Hemant Gupta and V. Ramasubramanian, JJ.…

POSCO

Is the Special Court debarred from taking cognizance of an offence under Section 23 of POCSO and obliged to discharge the accused under Section 227 of the Cr.P.C., only because of want of permission of the jurisdictional Magistrate to the police, to investigate into the offence? – Matter to be heard by appropriate bench.

Mar 29, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH GANGADHAR NARAYAN NAYAK @ GANGADHAR HIREGUTTI — Appellant Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHER — Respondent ( Before : Indira Banerjee and J.K. Maheshwari,…

Cr P C

(CrPC) – Sections 164, 190, 193 and 190(1)(b) – Summoning of accused – HELD Such jurisdiction to issue summons can be exercised even in respect of a person whose name may not feature at all in the police report, whether as accused or in column (2) thereof if the Magistrate is satisfied that there are materials on record which would reveal prima facie his involvement in the offence.

Mar 19, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NAHAR SINGH — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Vineet Saran and Aniruddha Bose, JJ. )…

Education

Education Law – NEET-SS Admissions – Academic year 2021-2022 – Reservation – No case is made out for continuing the interim protection which was granted for the academic year 2020-2021 vide interim order dated 27th November, 2020 – State of Tamil Nadu would be at liberty to continue the counselling for academic year 2021-2022 by taking into consideration the reservation provided by it as per the said G.O. – Writ Petition rejected.

Mar 19, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DR. N. KARTHIKEYAN AND OTHERS — Appellant THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao and B.R.…

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