Supreme Court of India Judgements

47000 Judgements hosted as on 19/12/2025 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Arbitration

Arbitration

However, the non-service of a S. 21 notice on a person does not, by itself, preclude the arbitral tribunal from impleading that person if they are found to be a party to the arbitration agreement — The primary purpose of S. 21 relates to commencement and time-related aspects, while other functions like informing about claims or potential arbitrators are incidental.

Apr 20, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 507 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ADAVYA PROJECTS PVT. LTD. Vs. M/S VISHAL STRUCTURALS PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Manoj Misra,…

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 37 — Limited Scope of Judicial Interference in Arbitration Awards — The Court reiterated the limited scope of judicial interference in arbitration awards under Section 37 — The Court held that it could not interfere with the arbitral award unless there was a patent illegality or a violation of the terms of the contract — Since the arbitral tribunal had correctly applied Clause 49.5 and the appellant had accepted its terms, there was no ground for interference.

Feb 4, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 138 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S. C & C CONSTRUCTIONS LTD. Vs. IRCON INTERNATIONAL LTD. ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ. )…

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 37 — Contractual clauses — Enforceability of Clause 49.5 of the General Conditions of Contract (GCC) — The Court upheld the validity and enforceability of Clause 49.5 of the GCC, which states that in the event of any failure or delay by the employer (respondent) in fulfilling its obligations under the contract, the contractor (appellant) is not entitled to claim damages or compensation — Instead, the contractor is only entitled to an extension of time to complete the work — The Court found that the appellant had repeatedly invoked Clause 49.5 to seek extensions of time and had accepted the terms of the clause by submitting undertakings not to make any claims other than escalation for the delays caused by the respondent — Therefore, the appellant was estopped from challenging the validity of Clause 49.5.

Feb 2, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 138 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S. C & C CONSTRUCTIONS LTD. Vs. IRCON INTERNATIONAL LTD. ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ. )…

You missed

Service

Cochin University of Science and Technology Act, 1986 — Section 31(10) and 31(11) — Selection and Appointment — Validity of Rank List and Communal Rotation — Harmonious Construction — Section 31(10) stipulates that the Rank List remains valid for two years, and vacancies arising during this period “shall be filled up from the list so published” — Section 31(11) mandates that “Communal rotation shall be followed category-wise” — These sub-sections operate in distinct spheres but are not mutually exclusive; the Rank List’s validity period (Sub-sec 10) co-exists with the mandatory application of communal rotation (Sub-sec 11) for every appointment made therefrom — Interpreting Sub-section (11) as becoming operative only after the Rank List expires would render the reservation/rotation requirement otiose during the list’s validity, defeating legislative intent and violating the doctrine of harmonious construction. (Paras 5, 5.2, 5.4, 5.5, 5.5.1, 5.5.2

Dec 19, 2025 sclaw
Acquittal I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) —Section 302 read with Sections 149 and 148 — Murder —Conviction affirmed by High Court — Appeal to Supreme Court — Sufficiency of evidence — Role of interested/related witnesses — Deposition of PW-4 (mother of deceased and alleged eyewitness) scrutinized closely — Material contradictions found in PW-4’s evidence regarding the manner of assault and who informed her — Failure of prosecution to examine key witness (deceased’s granddaughter, who initially informed PW-4) — Independent witnesses (PW-1, PW-2, PW-3 and PW-9) turned hostile — Recovery of weapons based on accused’s memorandum/statement rendered unreliable when supporting witnesses hostile. (Paras 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15)

Dec 19, 2025 sclaw
Constitution

Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 — Section 45A — Determination of contributions in certain cases — Preconditions for invoking Section 45A — Section 45A is a special provision for best-judgment assessment applicable only when an employer fails to submit, furnish, or maintain returns, particulars, registers, or records as required by Section 44, OR obstructs an Inspector or official in discharging duties under Section 45 — It is not an alternative mode of assessment available at the option of the Corporation — When records (ledgers, cash books, vouchers, etc.) are produced and the employer cooperates by attending multiple personal hearings, the mere allegation of inadequacy or deficiency of supporting documents does not satisfy the statutory threshold of “non-production” or “obstruction” to invoke Section 45A — Mere inadequacy of records does not confer jurisdiction under Section 45A. (Paras 14.6, 14.7, 24, 25, 27, 30)

Dec 19, 2025 sclaw
Tenders & Contracts

Tender and Contract — Eligibility Criteria — Interpretation of “prime contractor” and “in the same name and style” — Requirement of work experience — Where an NIT’s pre-qualification document requires “each prime contractor in the same name and style (tenderer)” to have completed previous work, and the term “prime contractor” is undefined, its meaning must be derived from common parlance as the tenderer primarily responsible for the contract offer; however, the requirement must be construed from the standpoint of a prudent businessman, considering the credentials and capacity to execute the work, not merely the name. (Paras 17, 20, 21.3)

Dec 19, 2025 sclaw