Supreme Court of India Judgements

47030 Judgements hosted as on 11/01/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Corporate

Corporate

Companies Act, 2013 – Sections 243, 237(b), 433, 433(a), 433(g), 433(h), 433(i) and 439(1)(f) – Winding up – If the conduct of the affairs of the company in a fraudulent manner is a continuing process, the right to apply winding up becomes recurring: – Main departure of the 2013 Act from the statutory regime of the 1956 Act, is the specific inclusion of fraud, directly as one of the circumstances in which a company could be wound up –

Jan 19, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DEVAS MULTIMEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED — Appellant Vs. ANTRIX CORPORATION LIMITED AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Hemant Gupta and V. Ramasubramanian, JJ. )…

Corporate

Companies Act, 1956 – Section 531 – Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 – Section 45-MB – Suit for Interest on delayed payment on Bonds -the plaintiffs, like the Shakespearean character of Shylock, have raised the demand “I’ll have my bond. Speak not against my bond.” – Holder of the Bond has received their ‘pound of flesh’, but they seem to want more – Additional sum is not merited as SIBCO has already received their just entitlement and burdening the defendant with any further amount towards interest would be akin to Shylockian extraction of blood from the defendant.

Jan 3, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT BANK OF INDIA — Appellant Vs. M/S. SIBCO INVESTMENT PRIVATE LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : R. Subhash Reddy and Hrishikesh…

Corporate

Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 – Section 30 – Limitation Act, 1963 – Section 5 – Appeal against the order of Recovery Officer – Limitation – Section 5 of the Limitation Act shall not be applicable to the appeal against the order of Recovery Officer as provided under Section 30 of the Act, 1993.

Nov 28, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH AVNEESH CHANDAN GADGIL AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Sanjiv Khanna,…

Corporate

Held, Merely having an explicit clause may not be sufficient to make time the essence of the contract – As the contract was spread over a long tenure, the intention of the parties to provide for extensions surely reinforces the fact that timely performance was necessary – Contractual clauses having extension procedure and imposition of liquidated damages, are good indicators that ‘time was not the essence of the contract’

Nov 21, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH WELSPUN SPECIALTY SOLUTIONS LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS REMI METALS GUJARAT LIMITED) — Appellant Vs. OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LIMITED — Respondent ( Before…

Corporate

Perusal of clause 17 of the 1992 deed would reveal that the partners have right to expel an erring partner/partners on the grounds specified therein. The 1995 Deed does not have any conflicting provision. The clauses in the 1992 Deed, which are not superseded by the 1995 Deed, would still continue to operate. The trial court has given sound reasons, while upholding the expulsion of the plaintiffs. We see no reason to interfere with the same, the appeal is partly allowed.

Oct 30, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH V. ANANTHA RAJU AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. T.M. NARASIMHAN AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao, Sanjiv Khanna and B.R.…

Corporate

Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board Act, 2006 – Sections 16 and 17 – Deemed authorization -it is held that entities which had received authorization from States, had to seek authorization under the PNGRB Act, in terms of Section 17(2), and in compliance with the conditions spelt out under the CGD Regulations – Role of the State in granting NOC is only supportive or collaborative, in terms of the Central Government’s policy, of 2006, and cannot confer any advantage to any entity, which has to seek and be granted specific authorization in terms of the PNGRB Act on the merits of its application.

Oct 3, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH ADANI GAS LIMITED — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit, S. Ravindra Bhat and Hrishikesh…

Corporate

Copyright Rules, 2013 – Rule 29(4) – An exercise of judicial re-drafting of Rule 29(4) was unwarranted, particularly at the interlocutory stage – High Court was also of the view that the second proviso may be resorted to as a matter of routine, instead of as an exception and that the ex post facto reporting should be enlarged to a period of fifteen days (instead of a period of twenty four hours). Such an exercise was impermissible since it would substitute a statutory rule made in exercise of the power of delegated legislation with a new regime and provision which the High Court considers more practicable

Oct 3, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SAREGAMA INDIA LIMITED — Appellant Vs. NEXT RADIO LIMITED AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and BV Nagarathna, JJ.…

Corporate

Coal Mines (Special Provisions) Act, 2015 – Section 11 – Discharge or adoption of third party contracts with prior allottees – Successful allottee or bidder has complete freedom to decide as to whether he desires to continue or adopt any such existing contracts in relation to coal mining operation – If the successful bidder or allottee elects not to adopt or continue with the existing contracts, all such contracts shall cease to be enforceable against the successful bidder or allottee in relation to Schedule I coal mines.

Sep 25, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH PUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LIMITED AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. EMTA COAL LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao, B.R. Gavai and…

Corporate

Refund of unutilised input tax credit – Refund is a statutory right and the extension of the benefit of refund only to the unutilised credit that accumulates on account of the rate of tax on input goods being higher than the rate of tax on output supplies by excluding unutilised input tax credit that accumulated on account of input services is a valid classification and a valid exercise of legislative power.

Sep 19, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. VKC FOOTSTEPS INDIA PRIVATE LIMTED — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and MR…

You missed

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Sections 5, 34, and 37 — Scope of Judicial Intervention — Minimum intervention of judicial authority in domestic arbitration matters is required under Section 5 — Challenge to an arbitral award under Section 34 is limited to specific grounds, including patent illegality or conflict with the public policy of India — Scope of interference by the Appellate Court under Section 37 is akin to and cannot travel beyond the restrictions laid down under Section 34 — Appellate Court cannot undertake an independent assessment of the merits of the award or re-interpret contractual clauses if the interpretation by the Arbitral Tribunal was a plausible view and upheld under Section 34 — Setting aside an arbitral award under Section 37, which was upheld under Section 34, based on providing a different interpretation of contractual clauses is unsustainable in law. (Paras 24, 25, 30, 31, 36, 37, 39, 50, 51)

Jan 11, 2026 sclaw
Limitation

Limitation Act, 1963 — Article 54 — Suit for specific performance — Commencement of limitation period — Where the defendant subsequently executed an affidavit ratifying the agreement to sell and conveying no-objection to the transfer, the period of limitation commences from the date of the admitted affidavit, as this is the stage at which the executant finally refused to execute the sale deed to the extent of her share — Trial court and High Court erred in dismissing the suit on the ground of limitation calculated from an earlier disputed date. (Paras 13, 35, 36, 37)

Jan 11, 2026 sclaw
Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 9(2) read with Rule 9(4) of 2001 Rules — Setting aside High Court judgment — High Court erroneously treated the date of filing of the Section 11 petition (28.06.2024) as the commencement date, leading to the conclusion that proceedings commenced beyond the statutory period — Where the arbitration notice was served (on 11.04.2024) well within the 90-day period from the ad-interim injunction order (17.02.2024), proceedings commenced in time as per Section 21 — High Court’s finding unsustainable, resulting in the restoration of the Trial Court’s initial ad-interim injunction order. (Paras 28, 31, 32) E. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 9 — Interim injunction — Dispute regarding existence

Jan 11, 2026 sclaw
Corporate

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 2(28) — Definition of “motor vehicle” — Components — Definition has two parts: an inclusive part (mechanically propelled vehicle adapted for use upon roads) and an exclusive part — The second part expressly excludes “a vehicle of a special type adapted for use only in a factory or in any other enclosed premises” — Although Dumpers, Loaders, etc., may fall under the first part of the definition, they are excluded if their nature of use is confined to factory or enclosed premises, being special type vehicles/Construction Equipment Vehicles. (Paras 36, 37, 38, 39)

Jan 11, 2026 sclaw