Month: July 2025

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Contract Act, 1872 — Section 2(d) — Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal — Compensation — Notional Income Future Prospects — Multiplier — Contributory Negligence — Attendant Charges — Future Medical Expenses — Loss of Marital Prospects — Discomfort — Extra Nourishment — Medical Bills — Motor Accident — Amputation — Functional Disability — In a motor accident case involving a young engineering student who suffered amputation of his leg due to the negligence of multiple parties, the Supreme Court enhanced the compensation by reassessing the notional income, elaborating on future prospects, applying an appropriate multiplier, and reinstating the original attendant charges awarded by the Tribunal, deeming the High Court’s reduction unjustified

2025 INSC 905 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH S. MOHAMMED HAKKIM Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND OTHERS ( Before : Sudhanshu Dhulia and Aravind Kumar, JJ. ) Civil…

Kerala Cricket Association Byelaws, not specified — Blacklisting of member — KCA blacklisted the appellant life-ban for alleged concealment of facts before the High Court — Supreme Court struck down the blacklisting order as consequential to the erroneous rejection of the writ petition and writ appeal by the High Court, finding the High Court’s view of the appellant approaching with “unclean hands” to be harsh and not substantiated by the facts presented.

2025 INSC 906 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SANTHOSH KARUNAKARAN Vs. OMBUDSMAN CUM ETHICS OFFICER, KERALA CRICKET ASSOCIATION AND ANOTHER ( Before : Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, JJ.…

Education Law — Admissions — Eligibility Criteria — Prospectus issued by University — Amendments and Addendums — Appellant admitted to postgraduate program based on provisional admission — Completed course and received degree — University withdrew degree based on initial ineligibility — Court held that due to confusion and uncertainty caused by frequent changes in eligibility criteria, the benefit should go to the appellant, especially since she had completed the course with good marks.

2025 INSC 882 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SAKSHI CHAUHAN Vs. DR. YASHWANT SINGH PARMAR UNIVERSITY OF HORTICULTURE & FORESTRY, NAUNI AND ANOTHER ( Before : B.R. Gavai, CJI.…

Transfer Petition — Jurisdiction — Courts — Petition seeking transfer of matrimonial and criminal cases from one state to another filed by both parties, wife seeking transfer of divorce case from Delhi to UP, husband seeking transfer of criminal cases from UP to Delhi. Parties have also filed special leave petitions against High Court orders. Supreme Court has the power to transfer cases.

2025 INSC 883 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHIVANGI BANSAL Vs. SAHIB BANSAL ( Before : B.R. Gavai, CJI. and Augustine George Masih, JJ. ) Transfer Petition (C) No.…

Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 302, 34, 120B — Murder — Appeal against conviction and sentence for murder — Key eyewitness evidence of the deceased’s son and wife — Distance allegedly covered on bicycle within thirty minutes questioned — Improbability of covering 16 kilometers in that timeframe raised substantial doubt about their presence at the crime scene — Absence of corroboration from other witnesses, who turned hostile and suggested multiple assailants, further weakens the prosecution’s case — Post-mortem report indicating numerous injuries, consistent with multiple attackers — Deceased’s history as a habitual drunkard and criminal suggests potential enmity with various individuals — Conviction based solely on questionable eyewitness testimony not sustainable when reasonable doubt exists about accused’s presence and involvement — Appeal allowed, conviction and sentence set aside

2025 INSC 880 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ESAKKIMUTHU AND OTHERS Vs. STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ( Before : Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, JJ. )…

Service Matters

Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, Rule 13(2) and Rule 14, Appendix 3 — Disciplinary proceedings for major penalties — Initiation of by authority competent to impose minor penalties — Permissible — Rule 13(2) allows a disciplinary authority competent to impose minor penalties to institute proceedings for major penalties, even if not competent to impose major penalties itself. – Charge Sheet — Validity of issuance by General Manager (Telecommunications) for major penalties — Held valid as the General Manager is competent to impose minor penalties and Rule 13(2) permits initiation of proceedings for major penalties by such an authority.

2025 INSC 898 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs. R. SHANKARAPPA ( Before : Sanjay Kumar and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — Section 18 — Maharashtra Industrial Development Act, 1961 — Compensation — Enhancement of — While determining market value, the highest bona fide sale exemplar should generally be considered, not an average of varying sale prices, unless prices have only marginal variations — Averaging of sale instances with significantly different prices is impermissible. Section 51A — Evidence — Certified copies of sale deeds have presumptive value as evidence of the transaction recorded therein — If the state does not produce rebuttal evidence, these documents can be relied upon to determine market value.

2025 INSC 900 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MANOHAR AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ( Before : B.R. Gavai, CJI and Augustine George Masih, JJ.…

Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 420, 468, 471 — Cheating, Forgery, Using Forged Document — Essential Ingredients — Complaint based on a GPF nomination form from 1996 failed to establish fraudulent intent or any act attributable to the accused; it did not override statutory birth certificates, nor did it prove falsification by the accused — No evidence of dishonest inducement, wrongful gain, or loss — Allegations based on conjecture and surmises, intended to malign the accused — Continuation of proceedings amounts to abuse of process when allegations are inherently improbable and no case is made out.

2025 INSC 903 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH CHIRAG SEN AND ANOTHER ETC. Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER ( Before : Sudhanshu Dhulia and Aravind Kumar, JJ. )…

we are of the view that the order of status quo passed by the trial court was justified in the facts and circumstances of the case. We are not entering into the merits of the matter as it may influence the trial court. We, therefore, allow this appeal, set aside the impugned order of the High Court dated 30.06.2022 maintaining the order of the trial court in order to advance justice between the parties.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HARISH ISHWARBHAI PATEL — Appellant Vs. JATIN ISHWARBHAI PATEL AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Aniruddha Bose and Vikram Nath, JJ. ) Civil…

Abkari Act, 1077 – Section 8 – Carrying 5 litres of illicit arrack – Conviction based solely on testimony of official witnesses – Delay in investigation – Testimonies of official witnesses can not be discarded simply because independent witnesses were not examined – Mere urging that delay casts a suspicion on the investigation, without any evidence being led in furtherance thereof, cannot be sustained

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH  SATHYAN — AppellantVs.STATE OF KERALA — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Sanjay Karol, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. 2363 of 2023…

You missed