Supreme Court of India Judgements

47295 Judgements hosted as on 02/08/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe @ Rs 99/- for 6 months, sclaw@sclaw.in, WA +91 9417245693.

Category: Consumer

Consumer

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Section 2(d) – Subsequent Purchaser of Flat – Relief of interest on refund HELD The equities, in the opinion of this court, can properly be moulded by directing refund of the principal amounts, with interest @ 9% per annum from the date the builder acquired knowledge of the transfer, or acknowledged it.

Aug 8, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH M/S LAUREATE BUILDWELL PRIVATE LIMITED — Appellant Vs. CHARANJEET SINGH — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit, Hemant Gupta and S. Ravindra Bhat,…

Consumer

Consumer Protection Act, 2019 – Pecuniary jurisdiction – Proceedings instituted before the commencement of the Act of 2019 on 20 July 2020 would continue before the fora corresponding to those under the Act of 1986 (the National Commission, State Commissions and District Commissions) and not be transferred in terms of the pecuniary jurisdiction set for the fora established under the Act of 2019.

Mar 21, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NEENA ANEJA AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. JAI PRAKASH ASSOCIATES LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud and M.R. Shah, JJ.…

Consumer

Housing – Allotment of plot – Non-Participation of Allotment Process – Availability of the plot does not give any entitlement to a person who has no right to claim allotment – Any allotment has to be made in accordance with the procedure prescribed and the Rules of the Parishad

Feb 14, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH U.P. HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. NAMIT SHARMA — Respondent ( Before : Ashok Bhushan and R. Subhash Reddy, JJ.…

Consumer

Apartment Buyer’s Agreement – Unfair trade practice – Incorporation of such one-sided and unreasonable clauses in the Apartment Buyer’s Agreement constitutes an unfair trade practice under Section 2(1) (r) of the C P A. HELD intent is clear that a choice or discretion is given to the allottee whether he wishes to initiate appropriate proceedings under the CP Act or file an application under the RERA Act.

Jan 17, 2021 sclaw

1/37 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH IREO GRACE REALTECH PVT. LTD — Appellant Vs. ABHISHEK KHANNA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Indu Malhotra…

Consumer

HELD the Financier can take possession of the vehicle if hirer does not pay installments ” However, such repossession cannot be taken by recourse to physical violence, assault and/or criminal intimidation. Nor can such possession be taken by engaging gangsters, goons and muscle men as so called Recovery Agents”

Oct 2, 2020 sclaw

The financier continues to be owner of the goods being the subject of hire purchase, until the option to purchase is exercised by the hirer, upon payment of all amounts…

You missed

Accident

Legal Representatives Can Claim Motor Accident Compensation Even Without Financial Dependency On Deceased

Aug 16, 2026 sclaw
Property Matters Transfer Of Property Act

Execution Of Unregistered Agreement To Sell Does Not Terminate Subsisting Landlord-Tenant Relationship Nor Entitle Tenant To Section 53A TP Act Protection A. Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Section 111(e) & (f) — Landlord and Tenant — Determination of lease by express or implied surrender — Execution of agreement to sell by landlord in favour of tenant — Effect on jural relationship — Held, mere execution of an agreement to sell between landlord and tenant does not ipso facto determine the subsisting tenancy — Tenancy is determined only when terms of agreement or unequivocal conduct of parties disclose express or implied surrender — Where agreement to sell contained clause for cancellation and restoration of possession in case loan was not sanctioned, existing possession was referable to tenancy and not to agreement to sell — Landlord-tenant relationship continued to subsist.

Aug 16, 2026 sclaw
C P C

Appellate Courts Should Not Remand Cases Under Order 41 Rule 23 CPC As A Matter Of Course When Sufficient Evidence Is Available On Record. A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 41 Rules 23 and 24 — Power of Appellate Court to remand — Remand of case to Trial Court for framing of additional issues and fresh evidence — Permissibility — High Court remitted suit regarding one item of property for framing issues on whether sale deed was sham, limitation, and possession — Held, remand is not to be adopted as a matter of ordinary course and reflects incorrect exercise of discretion when sufficient evidence is available on record — Issues already framed by Trial Court were comprehensive enough to cover core disputes — Appellate Court is fully empowered to decide issues on merits or admit additional evidence if warranted, rather than remitting matter to cause unnecessary delay — Remand set aside and appeals restored to High Court for fresh disposal on merits.

Aug 16, 2026 sclaw
Customs & Excise

Extended Period Of Limitation Under Proviso To Section 11A, Central Excise Act Cannot Be Invoked When Facts Are Known To Department Without Wilful Suppression A. Central Excise Act, 1944 — Section 35L — Maintainability of appeal before Supreme Court — Preliminary objection raised by Department that appeal does not come under Section 35L as issue had no relation to rate of duty or valuation — Held, issue raised regarding extended period of limitation on ground of non-inclusion of certain costs in assessable value has an inextricable link with valuation of goods for purposes of assessment — Issue raised in show cause notice fundamentally dealt with valuation of goods — Supreme Court declined to relegate matter to High Court after almost a decade of pendency — Preliminary objection rejected.

Aug 16, 2026 sclaw