Supreme Court of India Judgements

46448 Judgements hosted as on 05/05/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Constitution

Constitution

Rupa Ashok Hurra vs. Ashok Hurra & Anr (2002) 4 SCC 388 – This landmark case established the concept of curative petitions and the requirements for filing them – We do not think any case has been made out by the appellant for invoking the curative jurisdiction to take relook into the appellants case. Hence, we refrain from entertaining the curative petitions. We do not think any purpose would be served in sending the matter back to the Chamber Judge for instructions in the given circumstances.

Mar 8, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S BRAHMAPUTRA CONCRETE PIPE INDUSTRIES ETC. ETC. — Appellant Vs. THE ASSAM STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Aniruddha Bose…

Constitution

Refund of excess price paid over the notified price in e-auction – The Supreme Court allowed the appeal of the appellant and directed the respondent to pay the refund amount with interest @ 12% per annum for the relevant periods, within two months, failing which the officers concerned would be personally liable.

Mar 3, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S. DOMCO SMOKELESS FUELS PVT. LTD — Appellant Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Sandeep Mehta,…

Constitution

Implement Community Kitchens to combat hunger, malnutrition and starvation in the country – Court has also reiterated that the scope of judicial review in examining policy matters is very limited, and the Courts cannot direct the States to implement a particular policy or scheme on the ground that a better, fairer or wiser alternative is available – The Court has disposed of the writ petition with these observations.

Mar 3, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ANUN DHAWAN AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Bela M. Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal, JJ.…

Constitution Election Laws

Chandigarh Mayor Election: Supreme Court quashed the election result and declared the appellant as the validly elected candidate for the post of Mayor – It also issued a notice to the presiding officer to show cause why criminal proceedings should not be initiated against him under Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973.

Mar 3, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH KULDEEP KUMAR — Appellant Vs. — Respondent U.T. CHANDIGARH AND OTHERS ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI., J B Pardiwala and Manoj…

Constitution

Electoral Bond Scheme, the proviso to Section 29C(1) of the Representation of the People Act 1951 (as amended by Section 137 of Finance Act 2017), Section 182(3) of the Companies Act (as amended by Section 154 of the Finance Act 2017), and Section 13A(b) (as amended by Section 11 of Finance Act 2017) are violative of Article 19(1)(a) and unconstitutional

Feb 25, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CONSTITUTION BENCH ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMS AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI.,…

Constitution Land Acquisition

In the facts and circumstances noted and more particularly the fact that the appellant still claims to be in possession of the land under acquisition, writ petition preferred by the appellant should have been heard and decided on merits – Matter is remitted to the High Court of Uttarakhand

Feb 4, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH J.N. PURI — Appellant Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH (NOW STATE OF UTTARAKHAND) AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Sandeep…

Constitution Matrimonial

Irretrievable breakdown of marriage – Exercise of jurisdiction under Article 142(1) of the Constitution of India is clearly permissible to do ‘complete justice’ to a ’cause or matter’ and this Court can pass an order or decree which a family court, trial court or High Court can pass and when such power is exercised, the question or issue of lack of subject-matter jurisdiction does not arise

Feb 4, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PRAKASHCHANDRA JOSHI — Appellant Vs. KUNTAL PRAKASHCHANDRA JOSHI @ KUNTAL VISANJI SHAH — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ.…

Constitution Cr P C

Mandatorily mention in a application for grant of bail: 1. Details and copies of order(s) passed in the earlier bail application(s) filed by the petitioner which have been already decided. 2. Details of any bail application(s) filed by the petitioner, which is pending either in any court, below the court in question or the higher court, and if none is pending, a clear statement to that effect has to be made 3. The registry of the court should also annex a pending bail application(s) in the crime case in question -4. It should be the duty of the Investigating Officer/any officer assisting the State Counsel in court to apprise him of the order(s), if any, passed by the court with reference to different bail applications or other proceedings in the same crime case

Jan 21, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KUSHA DURUKA — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF ODISHA — Respondent ( Before : Vikram Nath and Rajesh Bindal, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No.…

You missed

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 120-B read with Section 420 – Cheating – The case involves fraudulent transactions by accused in connivance with Indian Bank officials resulting in interest-free advances to the petitioners – The main issue is whether the petitioners were involved in cheating the bank and if they availed any undue benefit from the fraudulent transactions – The petitioners argued that they were not involved in the cheating, had not availed any undue benefit, and that the transactions were normal business dealings – The court dismissed the Special Leave Petitions, upholding the Trial Court’s conviction of the petitioners for cheating the bank through unauthorized transactions.

May 5, 2024 sclaw
Limitation

Limitation Act, 1963 – Section 5 – Condonation of Delay – Delay of 1663 days – The State of U.P. filed a SLP against an order dated 13.11.2009 by the Allahabad High Court, with a delay of 1,633 days – The main issue was the condonation of the significant delay in filing the SLP – The State argued that the delay was due to the time taken for obtaining legal opinion and permissions, and later, the realization that the appeal was not filed initially – The application for condonation of delay was dismissed, and consequently, the SLP was also dismissed – The court found the explanation for the delay unsatisfactory, especially since the State was aware of the High Court’s order when it was passed – The court did not find sufficient cause to condone the delay, leading to the dismissal of the SLP.

May 5, 2024 sclaw
Property Matters

Partition Suit – The dispute involves partition of properties left by Late ‘R’ with the main contention over roof rights of a property in Kota and another in Jaipur – The primary issue is the valuation of roof rights for further construction and the equal distribution of property among co-sharers – The appellants argue that the valuation report failed to assess the value of roof rights, which would affect the overall property valuation and entitlement of co-sharers – The respondents maintain that the property valuation and shares were appropriately determined by the approved Valuer and upheld by both the Trial Court and High Court – The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, finding no merit in revaluating the property or altering the determined shares of the parties – The Court emphasized the importance of family ties over property disputes and suggested alternative dispute resolution methods for amicable settlements – The Court referenced the case of Afcons Infrastructure Limited vs. Cherian Varkey Construction Company Private Limited, advocating for ADR in family-related property disputes – The Supreme Court concluded that revisiting the valuation and partition would only prolong litigation and upheld the decisions of the lower courts.

May 5, 2024 sclaw
Constitution Municipal Laws

West Bengal Municipal(Building) Rules, 2007 – Rule 50 – Open spaces for building in areas other than municipalities in hill areas – The appellants challenge the High Court of Calcutta’s order regarding a contempt petition related to their residential property construction and its compliance with Rule 50 of Rules, 2007 – The appellants argue that the writ petition was a private matter and should not have been entertained by the High Court – They also claim that municipal authorities are unfairly pressuring them due to the contempt proceedings – The respondent claims that the appellants violated the sanctioned building plan, justifying the High Court’s direction for an enquiry – The Supreme Court allowed the appellants to challenge the enquiry report and show cause notice, ensuring their objections would be considered objectively without prejudice from the contempt or writ proceedings – The court expressed reservations about the High Court’s exercise of writ jurisdiction in a private dispute and suggested the civil court as the appropriate forum for grievances – The appeal was disposed of with the appellants given the liberty to challenge the enquiry report and show cause notice, without cost order.

May 5, 2024 sclaw