Supreme Court of India Judgements

47060 Judgements hosted as on 01/02/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Corporate

Corporate

IBC – – Held, Exclusion under the first proviso to Section 21(2) is related not to the debt itself but to the relationship existing between a related party financial creditor and the corporate debtor – As such, the financial creditor who in praesenti is not a related party, would not be debarred from being a member of the Committee of Creditors

Feb 14, 2021 sclaw

1/37 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH PHOENIX ARC PRIVATE LIMITED — Appellant Vs. SPADE FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Indu…

Corporate

Companies Act, 1956 – Ss 397 & 398 – Oppression and Mismanagement – On Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016, coming in force, the proceedings which are pending before the CLB, now stand transferred to the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) – It would be appropriate for the parties to invoke the jurisdiction of NCLT for seeking such orders as deemed fit in the facts and circumstances in accordance with law.

Jan 19, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAMA NARANG — Appellant Vs. RAMESH NARANG AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar and B. R. Gavai, JJ. ) Contempt Petition…

Corporate

Appellant the importer of goods & cleared them for home consumption, the natural consequence of raising of such debit notes on the end-buyers situated in different States and movement of goods to such end-buyers would be to take these transactions in the category of inter-State sales in terms of Section 3(a) of the CST Act – Appellant was not entitled to the exemption of Section 5(2) of the CST Act

Jan 17, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S VELLANKI FRAME WORKS — Appellant Vs. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, VISAKHAPATNAM — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar and Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ )…

Corporate

Competition Act, 2002 – Section 3 – Anti-competitive agreements – Ola and Uber do not facilitate cartelization or anti-competitive practices between drivers, who are independent individuals, who act independently of each other, so as to attract the application of section 3 of the Act, as has been held by both the CCI and the NCLAT.

Dec 17, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH SAMIR AGRAWAL — Appellant Vs. COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Rohinton Fali Nariman, K.M. Joseph and Krishna Murari,…

Corporate

Winding up proceeding pending – Transfer of – High court to NCLT -Words “party or parties” appearing in the 5th proviso to Clause (c) of Sub-section (1) of Section 434 would take within its fold any creditor of the company in liquidation – If any creditor is aggrieved by any decision of the official liquidator, he is entitled under the 1956 Act to challenge the same before the Company Court

Dec 17, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH ACTION ISPAT AND POWER PRIVATE LIMITED — Appellant Vs. SHYAM METALICS AND ENERGY LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : Rohinton Fali Nariman, K.M. Joseph…

Corporate

Construction of Elevated Corridor (Flyover) – Rejection of bid on ground that bidder suppressed information required under paragraph 13 of Appendix IA – State of Madhya Pradesh is directed to issue a LOI as soon as is practically possible to “R” insofar as the present tender is concerned at the same financial bid as that of UPSBC.

Dec 13, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. U.P. STATE BRIDGE CORPORATION LIMITED AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Rohinton Fali…

Corporate

E P F M P Act, 1952 – Ss 1(3)(B) and 7A – Private Security Agencies (Regulation) Act, 2005 – Section 2(g) – Provisions of the EPF Act are applicable to a private security agency engaged in the expert service of providing personnel to its client, if it meets the requirement of the EPF Act – Merely because the client pays money does not become employer of guard

Dec 4, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S. PANTHER SECURITY SERVICE PRIVATE LIMITED — Appellant Vs. THE EMPLOYEES’ PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Navin Sinha and…

You missed

C P C

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 7 Rule 11 — Rejection of plaint — Abuse of process — Family arrangement (KBPP) and Conciliation Award — Allegations of undue influence, coercion, misrepresentation, and fabrication — Grounds for challenge were distinct for KBPP and Award — Lower courts erred in rejecting plaint by treating documents as one Conciliation Award and dismissing allegations of fraud due to admitted execution of KBPP — Allegations of coercion need not be limited to life threat and can arise from subservience — Rejection of plaint was erroneous as prima facie cause of action disclosed, suit not vexatious or abuse of process.

Feb 10, 2026 sclaw
Bail Granted

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Section 108, 80, 103, 85 — Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — Sections 3, 4 — Offences — Abetment to suicide, Dowry death, Murder — Allegations of extra-marital relationship, demand of money/dowry — Deceased died of poisoning/injection — Autopsy findings — Prosecution case not strong at bail stage.

Feb 1, 2026 sclaw
Labour Cases

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 — Section 33(1) — Requirement for employer to seek permission before altering service conditions or stopping work of workmen during pendency of dispute — Failure to do so constitutes a breach of the Act.

Feb 1, 2026 sclaw
Labour Cases

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 — Sections 10(1), 12 — Reference of industrial dispute — Apprehended dispute — Appropriate Government’s power to refer — The appropriate Government has the power to refer an industrial dispute for adjudication if it is of the opinion that such dispute exists or is apprehended. The initiation of conciliation proceedings under Section 12 does not statutorily require a prior demand notice to the employer as a pre-condition to approaching the Conciliation Officer. The management’s argument that a prior demand notice is essential, based on certain previous judgments, fails as it ignores the provision for referring an apprehended dispute, which can be invoked to prevent industrial unrest

Feb 1, 2026 sclaw