Supreme Court of India Judgements

46400 Judgements hosted as on 14/04/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: C P C

C P C

Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 227 – Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) – Order 9 Rule 13 – Setting aside of exparte decree – Power under Article 227 is exercised sparingly in appropriate cases, like when there is no evidence at all to justify, or the finding is so perverse that no reasonable person can possibly come to such a conclusion that the court or tribunal has come to – It is axiomatic that such discretionary relief must be exercised to ensure there is no miscarriage of justice.

Jan 16, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S GARMENT CRAFT — Appellant Vs. PRAKASH CHAND GOEL — Respondent ( Before : Sanjiv Khanna and Bela M. Trivedi, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

C P C

(CPC) – Section 96, Order 41 Rule 31 – Appeal from original decree – Without framing points for determination and considering both facts and law; without proper discussion and assigning the reasons – First Appellate Court cannot dispose of the first appeal under Section 96 CPC and that too without raising the points for determination as provided under Order XLI Rule 31 CPC. – Impleadment of party in appeal – There cannot be an automatic allowing of the appeal and quashing and setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the trial court

Jan 2, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH  IL AND FS ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTIONS COMPANY LIMITED — Appellant Vs. M/S. BHARGAVARAMA CONSTRUCTIONS AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and…

C P C

Suit for recovery – Impleadment of party in appeal – There cannot be an automatic allowing of the appeal and quashing and setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the trial court without any further entering into the merits of the appeal and/or expressing anything on merits in the appeal on an impleadment of a party in an appeal

Dec 19, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH  IL AND FS ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTIONS COMPANY LIMITED — Appellant Vs. M/S. BHARGAVARAMA CONSTRUCTIONS AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and…

C P C

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) – Section 96, Order 41 Rule 31 – Appeal from original decree – Without framing points for determination and considering both facts and law; without proper discussion and assigning the reasons – First Appellate Court cannot dispose of the first appeal under Section 96 CPC and that too without raising the points for determination as provided under Order XLI Rule 31 CPC.

Dec 19, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH IL AND FS ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTIONS COMPANY LIMITED — Appellant Vs. M/S. BHARGAVARAMA CONSTRUCTIONS AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and…

C P C Limitation

Application for condonation of delay, that as such no explanation much less a sufficient or a satisfactory explanation had been offered by respondents – High Court has not exercised the discretion judiciously – Reasoning given by the High Court while condoning huge delay of 1011 days is not germane – Court cannot enquire into belated and stale claims on the ground of equity – Delay defeats equity – Courts help those who are vigilant and “do not slumber over their rights”

Dec 19, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MAJJI SANNEMMA @ SANYASIRAO — Appellant Vs. REDDY SRIDEVI AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. ) Civil…

C P C

Civil suit – Declaration of ownership – Sale deed – Registration of document is always subject to adjudication of rights of the parties by the competent civil court – HELD parties with regard to the land in question will be governed by the judgment in pending suit in O.S. No.142 of 2008 on the file of the IIIrd Additional Subordinate Court, Coimbatore – Civil suit shall be decided on its own merits.

Dec 12, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH AMUDHAVALI AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. P. RUKUMANI AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : R. Subhash Reddy and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ. ) Civil…

C P C

Impleadment in execution proceedings – Order XXI Rule 97 is with respect to resistance/obstruction to possession of immovable property – Order passed by the Executing Court dismissing the applications filed by the BDA for impleadment in the execution proceedings and/or dismissing the obstruction application, and the impugned order passed by the High Court, are unsustainable and the same deserve to be quashed and set aside – Appeal allowed.

Dec 11, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY — Appellant Vs. N. NANJAPPA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

C P C

(CPC)- S 100 – Dismissal of second appeal without assigning any reasons for conclusion – Court must display its conscious application of mind even while dismissing the appeal at the admission stage – Giving reasons for the conclusion is necessary as it helps the adversely affected party to understand why his submissions were not accepted – High Court cannot dismiss the second appeal in limine without assigning any reasons for its conclusion HELD An appeal under Section 100 of the CPC could be filed both against the ‘concurrent findings’ or ‘divergent findings’ of the courts below.

Nov 30, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HASMAT ALI — Appellant Vs. AMINA BIBI AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : S. Abdul Nazeer and Krishna Murari, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

C P C

Jurisdiction of civil courts – Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 is a self-contained Code – Various provisions of the Act make it clear that if any orders are passed by the competent authority, there is provision for appeal, revision before the designated appellate and revisional authorities – In view of such remedies available for aggrieved parties, the jurisdiction of the civil courts to try suit relating to land which is subject-matter of ceiling proceedings, stands excluded by implication

Nov 27, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF M.P. — Appellant Vs. GHISILAL — Respondent ( Before : R. Subhash Reddy and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No. 2153…

C P C

Civil Law – Injunction – No injunction could have been granted without impleading and without giving an opportunity of being heard – High Court granting injunction with respect to 1/7th share in the total plaint schedule properties which has been passed without giving an opportunity of being heard to the appellants and without impleading them as party-defendants in the suit by learned trial Court, is unsustainable and deserves to be quashed and set aside – Appeal allowed

Nov 21, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ACQUA BOREWELL PRIVATE LIMITED — Appellant Vs. SWAYAM PRABHA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. ) Civil…

You missed

Arbitration Constitution

Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 – Sections 34 and 37 – Curative petition – The Court found that the arbitral tribunal’s decision was not perverse or irrational and that the CMRS certificate did not conclusively prove that defects were cured within the cure period – The Court emphasized the tribunal’s domain to interpret the contract and the limited scope of judicial interference in arbitral awards – The Supreme Court concluded that the curative petition was maintainable and that there was no miscarriage of justice in restoring the arbitral award.

Apr 14, 2024 sclaw
Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 302, read with 34 – Murder – The Supreme Court found that the High Court did not properly address whether the Trial Court’s acquittal was a plausible conclusion from the evidence – The Supreme Court emphasized that the burden of proof lies with the prosecution and that the accused do not have to prove their innocence unless there is a statutory reverse onus – The Supreme Court concluded that the evidence did not warrant overturning the acquittal, as the Trial Court’s view was possible and not perverse.

Apr 14, 2024 sclaw
I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 302 – Murder – Dispute over a blocked pathway – The Court found no evidence of provocation by the deceased that would justify the appellants’ brutal attack, nor any exercise of the right to private defence – The Court applied principles from previous judgments to determine the lack of private defence and the presence of intention to cause harm – The Supreme Court concluded that the appellants’ actions were not in self-defence and that their intention was to inflict harm, affirming the lower courts’ decisions.

Apr 14, 2024 sclaw
Consumer

Consumer Law – Insurance Act, 1938 – Section 45 – Policy not to be called in question on ground of mis-statement after two years – The Court found no suppression of material facts and criticized the NCDRC for not requiring proper evidence from the respondent – The judgment discusses the principles of ‘uberrimae fidei’ (utmost good faith) and the burden of proof in insurance contracts – The Court concluded that the insurance company failed to prove the alleged suppression of facts, thus the repudiation was unjustified.

Apr 14, 2024 sclaw