Supreme Court of India Judgements

47050 Judgements hosted as on 20/01/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: C P C

C P C

Execution of decree—Objections—Revisionary Court is under legal obligation to decide the legality and correctness of the findings recorded by the executing court on its merits rather than remanding it to executing court Execution of Decree—Objections—Revision—Additional evidence by way of documents not to be placed in revision against dismissal of objections by executing court

Feb 16, 2019 sclaw

2018(4) Law Herald (SC) 3205 : 2018 LawHerald.Org 1930 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before Hon’ble Mr. Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar Civil Appeal…

C P C

Auction Sale—Deposit of Bid amount—An amount of bid in which the decree holder is a purchaser can be set off—In present case, respondent-corporation is not only auction purchaser but also decree holder, there is no question of deposit of the auction amount as there was no other prospective buyer to offence bid.      

Feb 16, 2019 sclaw

2018(4) Law Herald (SC) 3195 : 2018 LawHerald.Org 1928 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before Hon’ble Mrs. Justice R. Banumathi Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Indira Banerjee Civil Appeal No. 9651…

C P C

Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151–Trade Marks Act, 1999–Temporary injunction–Temporary injunction restraining the respondents, their officers, etc. from using ‘Skyline’ as a part of their trademark in relation to their activities in the field of education–No similarity in the name of two parties–Appellant using the name ‘skyline’ as a prefix with the institute of technology and engineering and the respondent using ‘skyline business school’–A student would not get any deception by both names–

Feb 11, 2019 sclaw

2010(1) LAW HERALD (SC) 285 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarun Chatterjee The Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.S. Singhvi The Hon’ble Mr. Justice B.S. Chauhan…

C P C

Decree against dead person–Death of defendant pending appeal–An application made for substitution of legal representatives, but no order passed by Court through inadvertence–Decree drawn against dead defendant–Decree executable against legal representatives–It was essentially a technical error–Held, act of court should do no harm to a litigant– Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Section 47–Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 23 Rule 2.      

Jan 26, 2019 sclaw

2009(1) LAW HERALD (SC) 309 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Altamas Kabir The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Markandey Katju Civil Appeal Nos. 6850-6851 of 2008…

You missed

Service

Government Service — Recruitment — Challenge to Selection Process — A candidate who participates in a selection process without protest cannot challenge the rules or method of selection after being declared unsuccessful.

Jan 20, 2026 sclaw
Service

Service Law — Recruitment and Appointment — Suppression of Criminal Antecedents — Candor and Integrity — Application forms (Attestation and Verification Forms) required disclosure of pending criminal cases — Applicant answered in the negative despite two criminal cases pending against him (Case Crime Nos. 198/2019 and 215/2018) — Non-disclosure was repeated (in both forms) and therefore held to reflect deliberate concealment/mal-intent, striking at the core of trust required for public service — Suppression was a violation of clear stipulations/disclaimers in the forms making concealment a disqualification/render applicant unfit for government service — Subsequent voluntary disclosure (via affidavit) or later acquittal/dropping of proceedings do not nullify the fact that candidate provided incorrect and false information at the time of filling the forms — High Court erred in overlooking the repeated concealment and calling the undisclosed information ‘of trivial nature’ — Cancellation of appointment upheld. (Paras 3, 6, 8, 9)

Jan 18, 2026 sclaw
Consumer

Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 71 — Execution of Order — Judgment Debtor Company — Liability of Directors/Promoters — Execution must strictly conform to the decree; it cannot be employed to shift or enlarge liability to bind persons who were neither parties to the decree nor otherwise legally liable thereunder — Where consumer complaints were consciously proceeded against the Company alone (Corporate Debtor), and directors/promoters were dropped as parties during admission/pre-adjudication stage (order unchallenged), the final order binds the Company exclusively, not the directors/promoters. (Paras 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, 23)

Jan 18, 2026 sclaw
C P C

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 21 Rules 97 to 102 — Resistance and Obstruction to Execution of Decree for Possession — Adjudication of rights of obstructionists — Where transferees pendente lite obstruct execution of a decree for possession, the Executing Court must adjudicate the claim; if the obstructionist is found to be a transferee pendente lite, the scope of adjudication is limited to this fact, and such a transferee has no right to resist execution of the decree — The remedy for removal of obstruction is by application under Order 21 Rule 97 by the decree holder, followed by adjudication under Rule 98-101 (Maharashtra Amendment) which bars a separate suit. (Paras 53, 54, 55, 59, 65)

Jan 18, 2026 sclaw