Supreme Court of India Judgements

47000 Judgements hosted as on 19/12/2025 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Consumer

Consumer

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Section Section 2(1)(g) – Deficiency of Service and unfair trade practice – The case involves a consumer dispute regarding a promotional trailer for a film produced by Yash Raj Films Private Limited – The complainant, a teacher, felt deceived when the song from the trailer was not in the movie and sought damages for mental agony – The court considered whether a promotional trailer creates a contractual obligation or amounts to an unfair trade practice if its content is not in the movie – The Supreme Court held that promotional trailers are unilateral and do not qualify as offers eliciting acceptance, thus not forming agreements enforceable by law – It also ruled that the facts do not indicate an unfair trade practice under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – The court reasoned that a promotional trailer is not an offer but an invitation to treat, meant to encourage viewers to watch the movie. It does not create a contractual relationship or promise regarding the movie’s content – The appeal was allowed, setting aside the findings of deficiency of service and unfair trade practice by the lower courts. The court emphasized the creative freedom in services involving art and the need for a different standard in judging representations followed by such services.

Apr 28, 2024 sclaw

2024 INSC 328 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH YASH RAJ FILMS PRIVATE LIMITED — Appellant Vs. AFREEN FATIMA ZAIDI AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha…

Consumer

Consumer Law – Insurance Act, 1938 – Section 45 – Policy not to be called in question on ground of mis-statement after two years – The Court found no suppression of material facts and criticized the NCDRC for not requiring proper evidence from the respondent – The judgment discusses the principles of ‘uberrimae fidei’ (utmost good faith) and the burden of proof in insurance contracts – The Court concluded that the insurance company failed to prove the alleged suppression of facts, thus the repudiation was unjustified.

Apr 14, 2024 sclaw

2024 INSC 296 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MAHAKALI SUJATHA — Appellant Vs. THE BRANCH MANAGER, FUTURE GENERALI INDIA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before…

Consumer

Consumer Law – Housing – Delay in deleivery of Flat – The appellants, homebuyers, paid 90% of the total sale consideration for a flat, but the respondent-developer failed to deliver possession by the scheduled date, leading to a consumer dispute – The Supreme Court found that the Commission erred in allowing the respondent-developer to charge the said interest and quashed that part of the order – The Court directed the respondent-developer to convey the outstanding amount to the appellants within two months, and upon payment, to hand over possession of the flat immediately.

Apr 14, 2024 sclaw

2024 INSC 300 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SANJAY CHAUDHARY AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. PIONEER URBAN LAND AND INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : B.R.…

Consumer

Consumer Law – Whether respondent file a complaint under the CPA considering the investment was made in a partnership firm attracts Consumer Protection Act – The court finds the complaint not maintainable, as the investment was a commercial transaction and the appellants did not inherit the firm’s liabilities – The Supreme Court sets aside the orders of the lower forums and dismisses the complaint, allowing the respondent to seek other legal remedies.

Apr 7, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ANNAPURNA B. UPPIN AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. MALSIDDAPPA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ )…

Consumer

“Fire Insurance Claim Revived: Manufacturer Gets Chance to Challenge Reports After Rejection” – The Court analyzed the definition of ‘person’ under the Consumer Protection Act and concluded that a company can be considered a consumer – The Supreme Court set aside the order of the National Commission and remanded the matter for reconsideration, allowing Appellant to file a rebuttal.

Mar 25, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S. KOZYFLEX MATTRESSES PRIVATE LIMITED — Appellant Vs. SBI GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Sandeep…

Consumer

Consumer Protection Act, 2019 – Sections 47, 49(2) and 59 – Court observed that the appellant was not an illiterate person and had signed the agreement after being aware of the adjustable interest rate option – The Court also noted that the appellant had not produced any evidence to show that he had a better option of securing loan from another institution – The Court held that the email could not override the policy decisions of HDFC and that the appellant could not seek refund of the interest paid after having received the loan amount and repaid it as per the agreement.

Mar 8, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAJESH MONGA — Appellant Vs. HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LIMITED AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : A.S. Bopanna and M.M. Sundresh, JJ. )…

Consumer

Consumer Law – they neither have the skills nor the expertise to do so. However, they are liable to pay the monetary compensation as directed by the consumer forums from the estate of the deceased developer – The court applied the principles of contract law, consumer protection law, and succession law to arrive at its decision – It distinguished between proprietary rights and personal rights, and between inheritable rights and uninheritable rights – It also discussed the nature and status of a proprietary concern and its legal representatives.

Mar 8, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VINAYAK PURSHOTTAM DUBE (DECEASED), THROUGH LRS — Appellant Vs. JAYASHREE PADAMKAR BHAT AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : B.V. Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan,…

Consumer

Supreme Court held that the respondent-company had breached the agreement by not offering possession of the apartment for fit outs by the stipulated date and the appellants had the right to terminate the agreement and claim unconditional refund with interest at 12% p.a. as per the agreement – The Supreme Court also held that the NCDRC had overstepped its jurisdiction by rewriting the terms and conditions of the contract and applying its own subjective criteria.

Mar 3, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VENKATARAMAN KRISHNAMURTHY AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. LODHA CROWN BUILDMART PVT. LTD. — Respondent ( Before : Aniruddha Bose and Sanjay Kumar, JJ. )…

Consumer

Consumer Law – Medical Negligence – – the respondent filed a review petition with the NCDRC, which granted it ex parte, reducing the compensation to Rs. 2 lakhs and stating that the respondent had already paid the amount – The appellant then filed a review petition with the Supreme Court, which reinstated the original order of Rs. 2 lakhs with interest at 12% – The Supreme Court also imposed a cost of Rs. 50,000 on the respondent for making a false representation

Feb 4, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH P.C. JAIN — Appellant Vs. DR. R.P. SINGH — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Sandeep Mehta, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No(S). …of…

Consumer

Consumer Law – Policy – Supreme Court held that the date of issuance of the policy would be the relevant date for all the purposes and not the date of proposal or the date of issuance of the receipt – The appeals were accordingly allowed and the orders passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission were set aside.

Jan 14, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RELIANCE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. JAYA WADHWANI — Respondent ( Before : Vikram Nath and Rajesh Bindal, JJ. )…

You missed

Service

Cochin University of Science and Technology Act, 1986 — Section 31(10) and 31(11) — Selection and Appointment — Validity of Rank List and Communal Rotation — Harmonious Construction — Section 31(10) stipulates that the Rank List remains valid for two years, and vacancies arising during this period “shall be filled up from the list so published” — Section 31(11) mandates that “Communal rotation shall be followed category-wise” — These sub-sections operate in distinct spheres but are not mutually exclusive; the Rank List’s validity period (Sub-sec 10) co-exists with the mandatory application of communal rotation (Sub-sec 11) for every appointment made therefrom — Interpreting Sub-section (11) as becoming operative only after the Rank List expires would render the reservation/rotation requirement otiose during the list’s validity, defeating legislative intent and violating the doctrine of harmonious construction. (Paras 5, 5.2, 5.4, 5.5, 5.5.1, 5.5.2

Dec 19, 2025 sclaw
Acquittal I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) —Section 302 read with Sections 149 and 148 — Murder —Conviction affirmed by High Court — Appeal to Supreme Court — Sufficiency of evidence — Role of interested/related witnesses — Deposition of PW-4 (mother of deceased and alleged eyewitness) scrutinized closely — Material contradictions found in PW-4’s evidence regarding the manner of assault and who informed her — Failure of prosecution to examine key witness (deceased’s granddaughter, who initially informed PW-4) — Independent witnesses (PW-1, PW-2, PW-3 and PW-9) turned hostile — Recovery of weapons based on accused’s memorandum/statement rendered unreliable when supporting witnesses hostile. (Paras 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15)

Dec 19, 2025 sclaw
Constitution

Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 — Section 45A — Determination of contributions in certain cases — Preconditions for invoking Section 45A — Section 45A is a special provision for best-judgment assessment applicable only when an employer fails to submit, furnish, or maintain returns, particulars, registers, or records as required by Section 44, OR obstructs an Inspector or official in discharging duties under Section 45 — It is not an alternative mode of assessment available at the option of the Corporation — When records (ledgers, cash books, vouchers, etc.) are produced and the employer cooperates by attending multiple personal hearings, the mere allegation of inadequacy or deficiency of supporting documents does not satisfy the statutory threshold of “non-production” or “obstruction” to invoke Section 45A — Mere inadequacy of records does not confer jurisdiction under Section 45A. (Paras 14.6, 14.7, 24, 25, 27, 30)

Dec 19, 2025 sclaw
Tenders & Contracts

Tender and Contract — Eligibility Criteria — Interpretation of “prime contractor” and “in the same name and style” — Requirement of work experience — Where an NIT’s pre-qualification document requires “each prime contractor in the same name and style (tenderer)” to have completed previous work, and the term “prime contractor” is undefined, its meaning must be derived from common parlance as the tenderer primarily responsible for the contract offer; however, the requirement must be construed from the standpoint of a prudent businessman, considering the credentials and capacity to execute the work, not merely the name. (Paras 17, 20, 21.3)

Dec 19, 2025 sclaw