Supreme Court of India Judgements

46970 Judgements hosted as on 10/12/2025 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Constitution

Constitution

Nature of modification which has been made by the High Court order in the form of an ad-hoc interim arrangement is exceeding its jurisdiction, and not within the realm of power of judicial review to be exercised under Article 226 of the Constitution. It is well settled that by an interim order, even the final relief ordinarily should not be granted.

Mar 14, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PUNE METROPOLITAN REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (PMRDA) — Appellant Vs. PRAKASH HARKACHAND PARAKH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Indu Malhotra and Ajay Rastogi,…

Constitution

Supreme Court had taken suo motu cognizance of the problems faced by migrant labourers “who have been stranded in different parts of the country.” The Court had issued notice to the Centre and all states and union territories, directing them to submit their responses to tackle this “urgent” situation.

Feb 28, 2021 sclaw

[COVID-19 Migrant Crisis] 90% of migrants already transported, argues SG Tushar Mehta; Supreme Court reserves order for June 9 Debayan Roy Jun 5, 2020, 4:01 PM IST The Supreme Court today…

Constitution

Relief has been sought is (i) cancellation of all the agreements; (ii) refund of moneys to purchasers; and in the alternative (iii) ensuring that the construction is carried out and that the premises are handed over within a reasonable period of time -Entertaining a petition of this nature will involve the Court in virtually carrying out a day to day supervision of a building project

Feb 21, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UPENDRA CHOUDHURY — Appellant Vs. BULANDSHAHAR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and M. R. Shah, JJ.…

You missed

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 11(4) — Appointment of Arbitrator — Existence of Arbitration Agreement — Non-Signatory/Third Party — The Referral Court (Appointing Authority) is required to inspect and scrutinize the dealings between the parties to prima facie examine the existence of an arbitration agreement, including whether a non-signatory is a “veritable party” to the agreement. (Paras 24, 25, 27, 28, 35)

Dec 10, 2025 sclaw
Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Quashing of First Information Report (FIR) — Abuse of process of law — When civil dispute is masked as criminal complaint — Allegations in FIR (claiming criminal conspiracy, forcible occupation, and caste abuse) found inconsistent with contemporaneous civil suit filed by the informant regarding the same property and on the same day — Suit’s cause of action traced to earlier dates and did not mention the specific criminal incident alleged in the FIR — Absence of relief to set aside primary sale deeds in the suit suggests the criminal allegations are an afterthought or exaggerated — FIR quashed as a clear abuse of the process of law. (Paras 3, 6, 8, 9, 10)

Dec 10, 2025 sclaw
Service

Service Law — Resignation — Forfeiture of past service — Central Civil Service (Pension) Rules, 1972 — Rule 26(1) — Distinction between Resignation and Voluntary Retirement — An employee who resigns from service forfeits past service as per Rule 26(1) of the 1972 Rules, regardless of the length of service completed (20 years or more) — The act of resignation cannot be re-classified as voluntary retirement to claim pensionary benefits, as this would nullify the distinction between the two concepts and render Rule 26 nugatory — Claim for pension correctly denied where the employee resigned from service. (Paras 3, 4, 6, 9, 9.1, 9.5, 9.6, 12)

Dec 10, 2025 sclaw
State Laws

Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 — Section 30 — Maintenance of Map and Field Book — Correction of Revenue Map — Scope of Section 30 — Section 30 allows the Collector to record annual changes in boundaries or correct errors or omissions detected in the map or field book (khasra) — It does not permit reopening an issue settled previously between parties regarding the location or extent of plots, especially when the earlier decision attained finality and was based on determined possession and ownership — Efforts to change the location of a purchased plot, which has already been subject to final determination under the predecessor law (Uttar Pradesh Land Revenue Act, 1901), do not fall within the scope of “correction of errors or omissions” under Section 30. (Paras 5.1, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15)

Dec 10, 2025 sclaw