Supreme Court of India Judgements

46950 Judgements hosted as on 04/12/2025 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: C P C

C P C

A plea of non est factum can be taken by an executor or signatory of the deed to plead that the said document is invalid as its executor/signatory was mistaken about its character at the time of executing/signing it. It is a latin maxim which literally means “it is not the deed.” A plea of non est factum is a defence available in Contract Law allowing a person to escape the effect of a document which she/he may have executed/signed.

Aug 23, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAMATHAL AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. K. RAJAMANI (DEAD) THROUGH LRS AND ANOTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Vikram Nath and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ.…

C P C

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) – Order 17 Rule 2 – Procedure if parties fail to appear on day fixed – Where the evidence or a substantial portion of the evidence of any party has already been recorded and such party fails to appear on any day to which the hearing of the suit is adjourned, the Court would be at liberty to proceed with the case as if such party were present

Aug 17, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH Y.P. LELE — Appellant Vs. MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LTD. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Vikram Nath and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ.…

C P C

Only determinations which are fundamental would result in the application of the doctrine of res judicata – Any determination, despite being deliberate or formal, cannot give rise to application of the doctrine of res judicata if they are not fundamental in nature – Term ‘resumption’ not be conflated with the term ‘acquisition’ as employed within the meaning of Article 300A of the Constitution so as to create a right to compensation.

Aug 6, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH YADAIAH AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Surya Kant and J.K Maheshwari, JJ. ) Civil…

C P C

Valuation for the purpose of jurisdiction of suit – Once the plaintiff exercises his option and values his claim for the purpose of court fees, that determines the value for jurisdiction – Value for court fees and the value for jurisdiction must no doubt be the same in such cases; but it is the value for court fees stated by the plaintiff that is of primary importance.

Jul 31, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH B.P. NAAGAR AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. RAJ PAL SHARMA — Respondent ( Before : C.T. Ravikumar and Sudhanshu Dhulia, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

You missed

Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950 — Articles 14, 21 — Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (RPwD Act) — Substantive Equality and Inclusion — Scope and Spirit — The measure of a just society demands the removal of barriers for all citizens to realize their potential, transforming formal equality into substantive inclusion — Constitutional vision requires every person, regardless of physical or sensory limitation, to participate with dignity — Rights guaranteed to persons with disabilities are expressions of the constitutional promise of equality, dignity, and non-discrimination, not acts of benevolence. (Paras 1, 12, 13)

Dec 4, 2025 sclaw
Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 321 — Withdrawal from prosecution — Requirement of High Court permission for withdrawal of cases against sitting or former MPs/MLAs — Following Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India — High Court must exercise judicial mind and give a reasoned order when considering an application for permission to withdraw prosecution against sitting/former legislators — Application must disclose reasons for withdrawal and records of the case must be before the High Court — Absence of requisite permission from the High Court means that the withdrawal application cannot be granted and the criminal proceedings cannot be quashed on this ground — High Court’s rejection of quashing petition confirmed. (Paras 2, 7, 9, 10)

Dec 4, 2025 sclaw
Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 313 — Examination of Accused — Object and Scope — Non-compliance with mandatory requirement — Fair Trial — The object of Section 313 CrPC is to ensure a fair trial by providing the accused with an opportunity to explain all incriminating circumstances appearing in the prosecution evidence against them personally — It is a mandatory, non-negotiable obligation upon the Court and is not a mere formality; it is based on the cardinal principle of natural justice (audi alterum partem) — The statement cannot be the sole basis for conviction and is neither substantive nor a substitute piece of evidence. (Paras 6, 7.1, 7.2)

Dec 3, 2025 sclaw
Property Matters

Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 — Section 14(1) — Mandamus to acquire land — Power of State Government to acquire land for Slum Rehabilitation Scheme — Preferential Right of Owner — The power of the State Government to acquire land under Section 14 read with Section 3D(c)(i) of the Slum Act is subject to the preferential right of the owner to redevelop the area — Acquisition is not warranted when the owner is willing to undertake development in exercise of their preferential right, and the process must be kept in abeyance until such right is extinguished — No mandamus can be issued to the State Government to acquire the subject property under Section 14 of the Slum Act where the subsequent purchaser from the original owner (Respondent No. 4) has a subsisting preferential right to develop the property. (Paras 63, 64, 71, 72, 77(1))

Dec 3, 2025 sclaw