Supreme Court of India Judgements

46660 Judgements hosted as on 19/11/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Corporate

Corporate

Spectrum Trading – Assessment of Liability – The telecom service providers’ stand is that the proceedings of insolvency under the Code have been triggered bona fide – This Court can examine the limited question in these proceedings whether the proceedings are resorted to as a subterfuge to avoid payment of AGR dues

Sep 3, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH UNION OF INDIA — Appellant Vs. ASSOCIATION OF UNIFIED TELECOM SERVICE PROVIDERS OF INDIA ETC.ETC. — Respondent ( Before : Arun Mishra, S.…

Corporate

Finance Act, 1994 – Section 65(105)(zzzzj) – Payment of service tax – Business of distributing natural gas – Supply of pipes and measuring equipment – HELD SKID equipment fulfils the description in Section 65(105)(zzzzj) of a taxable service: service in relation “tangible goods” where the recipient of the service has use (without possession or effective control) of the goods – Appeal allowed.

Aug 29, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX, AHMEDABAD — Appellant Vs. M/S ADANI GAS LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, Indu Malhotra…

Corporate

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – Section 7 – A personal Loan to a Promoter or a Director of a company cannot trigger the Corporate Resolution Process under the IBC. Disputes as to whether the signatures of the Respondents are forged or whether records have been fabricated can be adjudicated upon evidence including forensic evidence in a regular suit and not in proceedings under Section 7 of the IBC.

Aug 28, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S RADHA EXPORTS (INDIA) PVT. LIMITED. — Appellant Vs. K.P. JAYARAM AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Arun Mishra and Indira Banerjee,…

Corporate

Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 – Sections 3(2) and 9A – Imposition of quantitative restrictions – Central Government has no right and power to impose ‘quantitative restrictions’ except under Section 9A of the FTDR Act – Section 9A of the FTDR Act does not elide or negate the power of the Central Government to impose restrictions on imports under sub-section (2) to Section 3 of the FTDR Act.

Aug 26, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. AGRICAS LLP AND OTHERS ETC. — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar, Dinesh Maheshwari and…

Corporate

AGR Case] ‘Why Shouldn’t Jio Pay Dues Of Reliance Communications For Using Its Spectrum?’ SCOI Asks Reliance Jio HELD directed them (telcos) to place on record the information relating to Agreement entered into with respect to using of spectrum by the respective parties.

Aug 16, 2020 sclaw

AGR Case] ‘Why Shouldn’t Jio Pay Dues Of Reliance Communications For Using Its Spectrum?’ SC Asks Reliance Jio Justice Mishra: Jio is using since 2016(spectrum). Why should we not ask Jio…

Corporate

HELD limitation period for application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is three years as provided by Article 137 of the Limitation Act, which commences from the date of default and is extendable only by application of Section 5 of Limitation Act if any case for condonation of delay is made out.

Aug 14, 2020 sclaw

Limitation period for application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is three years as provided by Article 137 of the Limitation Act, which commences from the date…

Corporate

Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 – Section 21(5) – Permission to resume regular mining operations – Delay in payment of the compensation along with interest is condoned – Applicant permitted to resume mining operations subject to all necessary clearances required in accordance with law being obtained

Aug 11, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH COMMON CAUSE — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : S.A. Bobde, CJI., A.S. Bopanna and V. Ramasubramanian,…

Corporate

HELD “sample being sent and tested 8 months beyond the shelf life of the product in this case. It is thus clear that the valuable right granted by Section 25 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act kicks in on the facts of this case, which would necessarily render any penalty based upon the said analysis of the sample as void.”

Aug 10, 2020 sclaw

A valuable right is granted to a person who is sought to be penalized under these Acts to have a sample tested by the Government Analyst that is found against…

Corporate

“The owner is liable to pay charges after the goods have been taken charge by port and receipt issued to vessel owner. when the Port Trust takes charge of the good ” The point of time at which title to the goods passes to the consignee is not relevant to determine the liability of the consignee or steamer agent in respect of charges of the Port Trust” ” it would be the duty of the Port Trust to destuff every container that is entrusted to it, and return destuffed containers to any such person within as short a period as is feasible in cases where the owner/person entitled to the goods does not come forward to take delivery of the goods and destuff such containers. 

Aug 6, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH THE CHAIRMAN, BOARD OF TRUSTEES, COCHIN PORT TRUST — Appellant Vs. M/S AREBEE STAR MARITIME AGENCIES PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS — Respondent (…

Corporate

Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 – Sections 8(3), 8(4) and 68 – Imposition of penalty – Plea of the appellant that he was part-time, non-executive Director not in charge of the conduct of business of the Company at the relevant time was erroneously discarded by the authorities and the High Court HELD present is a case where the liability has been fastened on the appellant without there being necessary basis for any such conclusion.

Jul 27, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHAILENDRA SWARUP — Appellant Vs. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE — Respondent ( Before : Ashok Bhushan and R. Subhash Reddy, JJ. )…

You missed

Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 376 and 313 — Rape — False promise of marriage — Physical relationship with the complainant under the false promise of marriage, leading to her pregnancy and subsequent abortions — Whether the FIR should be quashed based on the allegations and the delay in filing the complaint — The petitioner argued that the relationship was consensual and the delay in filing the FIR undermines the credibility of the allegations — The respondent claimed that the petitioner deceived her with a false promise of marriage, leading to non-consensual physical relations — The Supreme Court quashed the FIR, noting the long-term consensual relationship and the lack of prima facie evidence for rape under Section 376 IPC —The Court emphasized the delay in filing the FIR and the nature of the relationship, which appeared consensual —The Court referred to previous judgments, highlighting the importance of prima facie evidence and the misuse of legal provisions —The FIR and all proceedings based on it were quashed, preventing abuse of the legal process.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 420, 468, 471 and 120-B —Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 13(2) and 13(1)(d) — Financial misconduct and conspiracy — Whether the High Court was correct in discharging the respondent from the charges of conspiracy and financial misconduct — The CBI argued that the High Court conducted a mini-trial at the charge-framing stage and that there was sufficient suspicion to frame charges against the respondent — The respondent’s counsel argued that the material in the charge sheet did not make out a case against the respondent and that the High Court rightly discharged him —The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision to discharge the respondent, stating that mere suspicion was not enough to frame charges – The Court found that the respondent’s role was limited to signing the memorandum prepared by senior officers and participating in the Management Committee meeting, which approved the proposal — The Court emphasized that the proposal had passed through various committees and that the respondent’s actions did not amount to criminal misconduct — The appeal was dismissed, and the respondent was discharged from the charges — The trial against other accused persons will continue.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Municipal Laws

Patna Municipal Corporation Act, 1951 — Sections 146, 423 and 488(1) — The Patna Municipal Corporation imposed a royalty on advertisements, which was later increased — The respondents challenged this imposition, arguing it was a tax without legislative backing — Whether the royalty imposed by the Corporation was a tax and if it was legally enforceable without legislative sanction — The Corporation argued that the royalty was agreed upon by the parties and was not a tax — They contended that the enhancement of the rate was within their rights — The respondents argued that the imposition was a tax, which required legislative sanction, and the Corporation had no authority to levy it — The Division Bench quashed the enhancement, ruling that the Corporation had no power to impose the tax without legislative backing — The Court found that the royalty was not a tax but a fee agreed upon by the parties — It held that the Corporation’s actions were within the scope of the agreement — The Court distinguished between royalty and tax, emphasizing that royalty is based on an agreement, not statutory provision — The Court upheld the imposition of royalty as per the agreement but noted that the enhancement in rates was not challenged effectively — The judgment of the Division Bench was set aside.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Constitution

Citizenship Act, 1955 — Section 6A — Special provisions as to citizenship of persons covered by the Assam Accord — The case involves the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act 1955, which grants citizenship to certain migrants from Bangladesh to Assam —The main issues include whether Parliament had the legislative competence to enact Section 6A, and if Section 6A violates Articles 6, 7, 14, 29, and 355 of the Constitution — Petitioners argue that Section 6A is unconstitutional as it conflicts with Articles 6 and 7, adopts unreasonable cut-off dates, and violates Articles 14, 29, and 355 — Respondents contend that Section 6A is within Parliament’s legislative competence under Article 11 and does not violate the Constitution — The judgment addresses the legislative competence of Parliament, the reasonableness of cut-off dates, and the impact on Assamese cultural identity — The court examines the historical context of citizenship provisions, the legislative intent behind Section 6A, and the scope of judicial review under Article 14 — The court analyzes the constitutional provisions on citizenship, the legislative objective of Section 6A, and the balance between legislative intent and constitutional mandates —The court concludes that Section 6A of the Citizenship Act is constitutional and does not violate the cited Articles of the Constitution.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw