C P C Archives - Page 7 of 51 - Supreme Court of India Judgements

May 13, 2025 9:47 pm

Power of Attorney – After the death of the original plaintiff, the Power of Attorney executed by him in favour of “V” ceased to have any effect – Though another Power of Attorney was executed in favour of said “V”, it was executed only by the appellant”L” – As such, “V” had no right to file appeal on behalf of the other legal heirs

Apr 30, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH YOGESH NAVINCHANDRA RAVANI — Appellant Vs. NANJIBHAI SAGRAMBHAI CHAUDHARY AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Vikram Nath, JJ. ) Civil…

C P C Constitution

HELD appellants specifically sought liberty to file a case afresh if the need arose. The mere absence of the mention of such liberty in the dismissal order cannot be taken to be a refusal of such prayer by the High Court upon application of mind. There is no indication to that effect in the order itself. Set aside

Apr 30, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ALI HUSSAIN ISHAQ ALI VOHRA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Krishna Murari and Sanjay…

C P C

Execution of Compromise decree – Compromise decree could not have been executed unless the Decree Holders were to lose their right of possession, which fact was not a possibility unless such rights stood conclusively determined by the Civil Court.

Apr 28, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHAIFUDDIN (DEAD) THR. LRS. — Appellant Vs. KANHAIYA LAL (DEAD) THR. LRS. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Krishna Murari and Sanjay Karol,…

C P C

Limitation Act, 1963 (36 of 1963), Article 136 — Execution of decree – Limitation of 12 years – Cause of action — the limitation period would commence only with the decree becoming enforceable and thus is capable of being executed.

Apr 26, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before: Krishna Murari & Sanjay Karol, JJ. Civil Appeal No.11040 of 2013 Decided on: 17.04.2023 Shaifuddin (Dead) thr. Lrs. – Appellant Versus Kanhaiya Lal (Dead) thr.…

C P C

CPC – Order VII R 11 -Merely because there were some inconsistent averments in the plaint, that was not sufficient to come to a conclusion that the cause of action was not disclosed in the plaint. The question was whether the plaint discloses cause of action.

Apr 17, 2023 sclaw

“For dealing with an application under Rule 11 of Order VII of CPC, only the averments made in the plaint and the documents produced along with the plaint are required…

C P C

Appellants have been admitted to be owner of the property being Khasra No. 4833 the findings recorded by the lower Appellate Court as well as the High Court are perverse if considered in the light of two material documents which are in the form of admission of respondents themselves regarding the identity of the property in their possession High court set aside

Apr 14, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MURTI SHRI DURGA BHAWANI (HETUWALI) TRUST AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. SH. DIWAN CHAND (DEAD) THROUGH LRS AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before :…

C P C

CPC – S 11- Res Judiciata – to apply, the matter directly and substantially in issue in the subsequent suit must be the same matter which was directly and substantially in issue in the former suit & the suit should have been decided on merits and the decision should have attained finality

Apr 4, 2023 sclaw

Code of Civil Procedure – Section 11 – Res judicata- An order closing the proceedings is not final decision of the suit within the meaning of Order 9 Rule 8…

C P C

(CPC) – Or 23 R 3 – Compromise of suit – must be in writing and signed by the parties and there must be a completed agreement between them – To constitute an adjustment, the agreement or compromise must itself be capable of being embodied in a decree.

Apr 4, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PRASANTA KUMAR SAHOO AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. CHARULATA SAHU AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : A.S. Bopanna and J.B. Pardiwala, JJ. )…

C P C

Rule 3 of Order 17 of the CPC, also known as Or 17 R 3, gives courts the authority to proceed with a case even if one of the parties fails to provide evidence. This power can significantly limit the options for the losing party to seek justice, and is considered a drastic measure. Therefore, courts should exercise this power only in rare and exceptional situations.

Apr 2, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PREM KISHORE AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. BRAHM PRAKASH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Sudhanshu Dhulia and J.B. Pardiwala, JJ. ) Civil…

C P C

It is well settled that even if the decision on a question of law has been reversed or modified by subsequent decision of a superior court in any other case it shall not be a ground for review of such judgment merely because a subsequent judgment of the Single Judge has taken contrary view.

Mar 24, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHRAMJEEVI COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED — Appellant Vs. DINESH JOSHI AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : S. Ravindra Bhat and Dipankar Datta, JJ.…

You missed

Acquittal

Hostile witnesses — Effect — When a large number of witnesses, including eyewitnesses, turn hostile, prosecution case often collapses for want of evidence — While reasons for hostility can be varied (coercion, fear, monetary consideration, etc.), it cannot automatically lead to conviction based on prior S. 161 statements or IO’s testimony about such statements, as these are not substantive evidence — Court’s consternation at collapse of a serious case due to witness hostility cannot be a reason to convict on insufficient or inadmissible evidence, amounting to a moral conviction anathema to criminal jurisprudence.

May 13, 2025 sclaw

State Laws

Sales Tax — Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (Kerala Act) — Section 5A — Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (Tamil Nadu Act) — Section 7A — Purchase Tax — Liability of assessee purchasing goods from dealers exempt from sales tax — Where goods are purchased from dealers who are exempt from payment of sales tax by virtue of notifications or exemptions under the Kerala Act or Tamil Nadu Act, such a purchase is considered a purchase of “goods, the sale or purchase of which is liable to tax” within the meaning of Section 5A of the Kerala Act or Section 7A of the Tamil Nadu Act

May 13, 2025 sclaw

Acquittal Corruption

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Sections 7, 13(1)(d) r/w S. 13(2) a— Illegal gratification — Demand and Acceptance — Proof beyond reasonable doubt — Where prosecution case regarding demand and acceptance of bribe by public servant (Revenue Inspector) suffered from material contradictions and inconsistencies in evidence of complainant (PW1) and other prosecution witnesses (PW7) Minor discrepancies may not be fatal, but serious contradictions going to root of matter, rendering evidence untrustworthy, are grounds for acquittal.

May 13, 2025 sclaw

Service

Under Rule 17, CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, prior contractual service counts towards pension upon subsequent regularisation, subject to the employee opting to refund/forgo specified monetary benefits.

May 6, 2025 sclaw

Category: C P C

You missed