Supreme Court of India Judgements

46660 Judgements hosted as on 19/11/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Arbitration

Arbitration

Rajasthan Land Acquisition Act, 1953 – Sections 4 and 6 – Arbitration Act, 1940 – Section 17 – Contract Act, 1872 – Section 23 – Execution of Award – Execution of an award can be only to the extent what has been awarded/decreed and not beyond the same – Arbitrator in its Award had only declared the price of land and nothing more – Thus, the question of execution of a sale deed of the land at the price so declared by the Arbitrator in its Award, could not be directed

Apr 26, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH FIRM RAJASTHAN UDYOG AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. HINDUSTAN ENGINEERING AND INDUSTRIES LTD. — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit and Vineet…

Arbitration

The question involved in the present appeal is the enforceability of the foreign award, against NAFED. HELD the award is ex facie illegal, and in contravention of fundamental law, no export without permission of the Government was permissible and without the consent of the Government quota could not have been forwarded to next season. The export without permission would have violated the law, thus, enforcement of such award would be violative of the public policy of India.

Apr 23, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION OF INDIA — Appellant Vs. ALIMENTA S.A. — Respondent ( Before : Arun Mishra, M.R. Shah and B.R.…

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Section 11(6) – Appointment of arbitrator – Arbitration agreement entered into between the parties provides Hong Kong as the place of arbitration – Agreement between the parties choosing “Hong Kong” as the place of arbitration by itself will not lead to the conclusion that parties have chosen Hong Kong as the seat of arbitration -HELD Section 11 has no application to “International Commercial Arbitrations” seated outside India – Words in Clause 17.1 “without regard to its conflicts of laws provisions and courts at New Delhi shall have the jurisdiction” do not take away or dilute the intention of the parties in Clause 17.2 that the arbitration be administered in Hong Kong

Mar 7, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH MANKASTU IMPEX PRIVATE LIMITED — Appellant Vs. AIRVISUAL LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : R. Banumathi, A.S. Bopanna and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ. ) Arbitration…

Arbitration

Arbitration Act, 1940 – Arbitration proceedings – Contract agreement between Appellant and Respondent for construction of Sutlej Yamuna Link Canal (Punjab) HELD It is ordered that in addition to the Claim No.1 allowed by the High Court, the claimant is also entitled to the amount under Claim Nos.2, 3, 8 and 12

Feb 14, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH CHANDIGARH CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED — Appellant Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : R. Banumathi and A.S. Bopanna, JJ.…

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Section 17 – Interim measures ordered by arbitral tribunal – Gujarat Public Works Contracts Disputes Arbitration Tribunal Act, 1992 – Section 3 – Works contract – Whether the Gujarat Public Works Contract Disputes Arbitration Tribunal constituted under Section 3 of the Gujarat Public Works Contracts Disputes Arbitration Tribunal Act, 1992 has jurisdiction to make interim orders in terms of Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Held, YES

Jan 8, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF GUJARAT THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. AMBER BUILDERS — Respondent ( Before : Deepak Gupta and Aniruddha Bose, JJ.…

Arbitration

General Conditions 64 (3)(a)(ii) and 64 (3)(b) of the Contract HELD -The appellant is directed to send a fresh panel of four retired officers in terms of Clause 64(3)(b) of the General Conditions of Contract within a period of thirty days from today under intimation to the respondent-contractor. The respondent-contractor shall select two from the four suggested names and communicate to the appellant within thirty days from the date of receipt of the names of the nominees.

Dec 23, 2019 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH RAILWAY ELECTRIFICATION — Appellant Vs. M/S ECI-SPIC-SMO-MCML (JV) A JOINT VENTURE COMPANY — Respondent ( Before : R. Banumathi, A.S. Bopanna And Hrishikesh Roy,…

You missed

Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 376 and 313 — Rape — False promise of marriage — Physical relationship with the complainant under the false promise of marriage, leading to her pregnancy and subsequent abortions — Whether the FIR should be quashed based on the allegations and the delay in filing the complaint — The petitioner argued that the relationship was consensual and the delay in filing the FIR undermines the credibility of the allegations — The respondent claimed that the petitioner deceived her with a false promise of marriage, leading to non-consensual physical relations — The Supreme Court quashed the FIR, noting the long-term consensual relationship and the lack of prima facie evidence for rape under Section 376 IPC —The Court emphasized the delay in filing the FIR and the nature of the relationship, which appeared consensual —The Court referred to previous judgments, highlighting the importance of prima facie evidence and the misuse of legal provisions —The FIR and all proceedings based on it were quashed, preventing abuse of the legal process.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 420, 468, 471 and 120-B —Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 13(2) and 13(1)(d) — Financial misconduct and conspiracy — Whether the High Court was correct in discharging the respondent from the charges of conspiracy and financial misconduct — The CBI argued that the High Court conducted a mini-trial at the charge-framing stage and that there was sufficient suspicion to frame charges against the respondent — The respondent’s counsel argued that the material in the charge sheet did not make out a case against the respondent and that the High Court rightly discharged him —The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision to discharge the respondent, stating that mere suspicion was not enough to frame charges – The Court found that the respondent’s role was limited to signing the memorandum prepared by senior officers and participating in the Management Committee meeting, which approved the proposal — The Court emphasized that the proposal had passed through various committees and that the respondent’s actions did not amount to criminal misconduct — The appeal was dismissed, and the respondent was discharged from the charges — The trial against other accused persons will continue.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Municipal Laws

Patna Municipal Corporation Act, 1951 — Sections 146, 423 and 488(1) — The Patna Municipal Corporation imposed a royalty on advertisements, which was later increased — The respondents challenged this imposition, arguing it was a tax without legislative backing — Whether the royalty imposed by the Corporation was a tax and if it was legally enforceable without legislative sanction — The Corporation argued that the royalty was agreed upon by the parties and was not a tax — They contended that the enhancement of the rate was within their rights — The respondents argued that the imposition was a tax, which required legislative sanction, and the Corporation had no authority to levy it — The Division Bench quashed the enhancement, ruling that the Corporation had no power to impose the tax without legislative backing — The Court found that the royalty was not a tax but a fee agreed upon by the parties — It held that the Corporation’s actions were within the scope of the agreement — The Court distinguished between royalty and tax, emphasizing that royalty is based on an agreement, not statutory provision — The Court upheld the imposition of royalty as per the agreement but noted that the enhancement in rates was not challenged effectively — The judgment of the Division Bench was set aside.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Constitution

Citizenship Act, 1955 — Section 6A — Special provisions as to citizenship of persons covered by the Assam Accord — The case involves the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act 1955, which grants citizenship to certain migrants from Bangladesh to Assam —The main issues include whether Parliament had the legislative competence to enact Section 6A, and if Section 6A violates Articles 6, 7, 14, 29, and 355 of the Constitution — Petitioners argue that Section 6A is unconstitutional as it conflicts with Articles 6 and 7, adopts unreasonable cut-off dates, and violates Articles 14, 29, and 355 — Respondents contend that Section 6A is within Parliament’s legislative competence under Article 11 and does not violate the Constitution — The judgment addresses the legislative competence of Parliament, the reasonableness of cut-off dates, and the impact on Assamese cultural identity — The court examines the historical context of citizenship provisions, the legislative intent behind Section 6A, and the scope of judicial review under Article 14 — The court analyzes the constitutional provisions on citizenship, the legislative objective of Section 6A, and the balance between legislative intent and constitutional mandates —The court concludes that Section 6A of the Citizenship Act is constitutional and does not violate the cited Articles of the Constitution.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw