Supreme Court of India Judgements

46420 Judgements hosted as on 27/04/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Month: November 2022

Service Matters
Service

Service Law – Dismissal – CISF Constable – Gross negligence and dereliction of duty – – Desirability of continuing the constable in the Armed Forces is certainly questionable and the Disciplinary Authority could not be expected to wear blinkers in respect of his past conduct while imposing the penalty of dismissal from service on him

Nov 27, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS @PPELLANT Vs. SUBRATA NATH — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, CJI. and Hima Kohli, JJ. )…

Electricity Act

Electricity Act, 2003 – Sections 61, 62 and 63 – Determination of tariff – – The Electricity Act 2003 seeks to distance the State Governments from the determination and regulation of tariff, placing such power completely within the ambit of the Appropriate Commissions

Nov 27, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH THE TATA POWER COMPANY LIMITED TRANSMISSION — Appellant Vs. MAHARASHTRA ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud,…

Arbitration

A & C act 1996 – The court at the referral stage can interfere only when it is manifest that the claims are ex facie time-barred and dead, or there is no subsisting dispute – In the context of issue of limitation period, it should be referred to the Arbitral Tribunal for decision on merits – Similar would be the position in case of disputed “no claim certificate” or defence on the plea of novation and “accord and satisfaction”

Nov 27, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S. MEENAKSHI SOLAR POWER PVT. LTD. — Appellant Vs. M/S. ABHYUDAYA GREEN ECONOMIC ZONES PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : B.R.…

Land Acquisition

Acquisition of land – Development charge – Land owners, whose land has been utilized 40 years back, now cannot be compelled to pay the development charge for the development which has already taken place, only for a parcel of land to which they have not given compensation up to decades.

Nov 27, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. ISMAIL BHAI AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : S. Abdul Nazeer and J.K. Maheshwari,…

Electricity Act

Contract Act, 1872 – Sections 2 and 10 – Contract concluded – If the proposals containing the essential terms have been accepted, and the acceptance is communicated and, if the other conditions in Section 2 of the Indian Contract Act are complied with, viz., that is there is consideration and the contract is enforceable in law, within the meaning of Section 10 of the Act, it would lead to the creation of a concluded contract.

Nov 27, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LIMITED — Appellant Vs. JSW ENERGY LIMITED (EARLIER KNOWN AS JINDAL THERMAL POWER COMPANY LIMITED AND JINDAL TRACTABEL POWER COMPANY…

Accident

HELD – SCOI assess the wholebody disability at 30% and propose to enhance the compensation under the heads of pain and suffering due to two surgeries undergone and future surgeries to be undergone. Also towards loss of future amenities and towards loss of income during laid up period for a period of twelve months compensation is enhanced –

Nov 27, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH T. J. PARAMESHWARAPPA @ PARAMESHWARAPPA @ J.T. PARAMESHWARAPPA @ TALALKENA GOWDRA PARAMESHWARAPPA — Appellant Vs. THE BRANCH MANAGER,NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. AND OTHERS…

Tenders & Contracts

HELD It is the duty of the Court, while interpreting the contract to decipher the true and correct meaning the parties intended and enforce the rights arising out of the contract – Officers administering the contract will not have any discretion whatsoever to admit or deny escalation after the conditions specified in a contract are satisfied.

Nov 27, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH — Appellant Vs. M/S SEW CONSTRUCTION LIMITED AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : A.S. Bopanna and Pamidighantam Sri…

Tenders & Contracts

HELD as the responsibility of loading and unloading of foodgrains from railway wagons is absent in the present contract. For this reason, the Corporation in the present contract has chosen not to include the power to recover demurrages and as such the expression “charges” cannot be interpreted to include demurrages.

Nov 27, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. ABHIJIT PAUL — Respondent ( Before : A.S. Bopanna and Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, JJ. )…

SARFAESI

HELD per Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act the seller was bound to disclose any buyer any material defect in the property of which the buyer is not aware and which the buyer could not ordinarily discover. Under the circumstances also the submission on behalf of the Bank that the property was put to auction on “as is where is” and “as is what is” condition, thereafter the plaintiff shall not be entitled to compensation of the less area cannot be accepted.

Nov 27, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MRS. LEELAMMA MATHEW — Appellant Vs. M/S INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Krishna Murari, JJ. )…

You missed

Stamp Act State Laws

“Supreme Court Clarifies State’s Power to Levy Stamp Duty on Insurance Policies” Stamp Act, 1899 – Rajasthan Stamp Law (Adaptation) Act, 1952 – Power to levy and collect stamp duty – The primary issues are the legislative competence of the State to levy stamp duty on insurance policies and the applicability of the Rajasthan Stamp Law (Adaptation) Act, 1952 or the 1998 Act – LIC contends that the state lacks legislative competence to impose stamp duty on insurance policies and challenges the demand for stamp duty payment for policies issued using stamps purchased from Maharashtra – The State of Rajasthan argues that it has the power to collect stamp duty on insurance policies under Entry 44 of List III, as per the rate prescribed by the Parliament under Entry 91 of List I – The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals, upheld the High Court’s judgment, and affirmed the state’s power to levy stamp duty. However, it directed that the state shall not demand and collect the stamp duty as per the orders dated between 1993-94 and 2001-02 – The Court reasoned that the state has the legislative competence to impose and collect stamp duty on insurance policies, and the 1952 Act applies to the case – The Court analyzed the constitutional provisions and previous judgments to conclude that the state can impose stamp duty using rates prescribed by the Parliament – The Supreme Court concluded that while the state’s power to levy stamp duty is upheld, the specific demands for stamp duty payment in this case were set aside due to the circumstances presented.

May 5, 2024 sclaw
I P C

“Supreme Court Overturns Lower Courts, Orders Trial for Alleged Marriage Fraud and Conspiracy (IPC Sections 420 & 120-B)” Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 420 read with Section 120-B – The appellant challenged lower courts’ orders regarding the summoning of respondents for alleged dishonest inducement in a marriage – The appellant claimed he was deceived into marrying a married respondent and that all respondents conspired to induce him into marriage and leave him with a significant sum of money – The respondents argued that there was no concealment or cheating, as all facts were disclosed to the appellant from the beginning – The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the orders of the High Court and Sessions Court, and restored the Magistrate’s order for the respondents to face trial – The court found that a prima facie case was made out for issuing process against the respondents, and the lower courts’ approach was not legally sustainable – The court concluded that the respondents should face trial for the alleged offences, and the case will be decided on its merits based on the evidence presented by the parties.

May 5, 2024 sclaw
Specific Relief Act

Specific Relief Act, 1963 – Section 6 – Suit by person dispossessed of immovable property – The appellants, owner of the property, allegedly evicted the respondent illegally and by force – The main issue was the maintainability of the suit under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, and the illegal dispossession – The appellants contended voluntary handover of possession and challenged the maintainability of the suit – The respondent filed a suit within six months of dispossession under Section 6 of the Act – The Trial Court decreed in favor of the respondent, and the High Court dismissed the appellant’s revision – The High Court concurred with the Trial Court on the illegal dispossession and maintainability of the suit – The appeal was dismissed based on concurrent findings and evidence on record – The Supreme Court found no merit in the appeal and upheld the decisions of the lower courts.

May 5, 2024 sclaw
I P C

“Conspiracy Theory Revived: Supreme Court Orders Trial in Forged Documents Case Involving Government Land” Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 477(A), 120(B) and 34 – The case involves allegations of a conspiracy to illegally transfer government land using forged documents – The respondents, along with others, are accused of manipulating judicial processes and revenue records to acquire government lands – The primary issue is whether the High Court was correct in quashing the order taking cognizance against the respondents, given the evidence of a conspiracy and manipulation of documents – The State argues that the High Court overlooked circumstantial evidence of a broader conspiracy and failed to appreciate the severity of the offences, which could undermine public trust in land administration – The respondents challenged the order of cognizance, arguing insufficient evidence directly implicating them in the conspiracy – The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court’s order, and directed the trial to proceed against the respondents – The Court found that the High Court’s decision was based on an incomplete assessment of facts and that a detailed trial is necessary to fully unravel the extent of the alleged conspiracy – The Court emphasized the need for a thorough examination of evidence and witnesses by the Trial Court to determine the actual harm caused to the public exchequer – The Supreme Court concluded that the case should not be dismissed at the preliminary stage and must be examined judiciously in a trial setting to ensure the integrity of ongoing investigations and judicial processes.

May 5, 2024 sclaw