Supreme Court of India Judgements

47020 Judgements hosted as on 04/01/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Environment

Environment

Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 – Sections 25 and 26 – Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 – Section 21 – Grant of Consent to Establish (CTE) – An appeal could have been preferred by the appellant for challenging condition no. 4 by taking recourse to Section 28 of the Water Act and Section 31 of the Air Act – In fact, the judgment of the Appellate Authority shows that the attention of the Appellate Authority was invited to the aforesaid condition no.4 – After having acted upon the ex-post facto CTE dated 18th October 2017, the appellant cannot be allowed to approbate and reprobate.

Nov 25, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S SWETA ESTATE PVT. LTD. GURGAON — Appellant Vs. HARYANA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka…

Environment

Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 19(6) – Environment Protection Act, 1986 – Section 5 – Plastic Waste Management Rules, 2016 – Order of ban on ‘reinforced’ paper cups is upheld and in the matter of ban non-woven plastic bags, back to Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board (TNPCB) for consideration – However, given that there is scientific basis for the ban, and it is the State Government’s policy decision to ban numerous categories of single use plastic products, in public interest, there is little room or reason, for this court to interfere on the ground of merits of the ban

Oct 28, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH TAMIL NADU AND PUDUCHERRY PAPER CUP MANUFACTURES ASSOCIATION — Appellant Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : S. Ravindra…

Environment

Corrigendum to Environment Clearance on additional conditions -An aggrieved person may always challenge the corrigendum to the EC, however, the appeal will be restricted to the corrigendum to the EC on additional conditions only, if the original EC is not under challenge and/or the original EC has been confirmed by the NGT earlier on certain conditions which have not been challenged

Feb 19, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S IL&FS TAMIL NADU POWER COMPANY LIMITED — Appellant Vs. T. MURUGANANDAM AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and C.T. Ravikumar,…

Environment

Environment – Establishment of new wood-based industries – Appeals challenges the order passed by NGT HELD Forest Survey of India (FSI), undisputedly an expert body, arrived at its estimation based on the scientific method – NGT could not have sat in appeal over the opinion of the expert. NGT order set aside

Oct 22, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS ETC. ETC. — Appellant Vs. UDAY EDUCATION AND WELFARE TRUST AND ANOTHER ETC. ETC. — Respondent (…

Environment

HELD constrained to point out that out of 1689 units in the country, the applicant has chosen the Project Proponent as it appears to be a motivated petition to target the Project Proponent though the Cold Steel Rolling Mills in the country were operating under the same regime. Not only the Project Proponent, but the country also has suffered immensely on account of closure of the unit which was export oriented unit

Aug 16, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH GAJUBHA JADEJA JESAR — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Hemant Gupta and Vikram Nath, JJ. ) Civil…

You missed

Education

Meritorious reserved category candidates must be considered against unreserved vacancies at the screening stage without availing any concession, prioritizing merit over category bias.

Jan 4, 2026 sclaw
State Laws

The Commission under the WBCE Act has jurisdiction to adjudicate deficiencies in patient care services and qualifications of personnel, distinct from medical negligence handled by State Medical Councils.

Jan 4, 2026 sclaw
Direct Taxation Income Tax Act

Income Tax Act, 1961 — Section 37(1) — Revenue Expenditure vs. Capital Expenditure — Non-compete fee — Whether payment of non-compete fee constitutes allowable revenue expenditure or capital expenditure — Non-compete fee is paid to restrain a competitor, which protects or enhances the business profitability and facilitates carrying on the business more efficiently — Such payment neither creates a new asset nor increases the profit-earning apparatus for the payer, meaning the enduring advantage, if any, is not in the capital field — The length of time of the advantage is not determinative if the advantage merely facilitates business operations, leaving fixed assets untouched — Payment of non-compete fee made by the appellant (formed as a joint venture) to L&T (previous partner) to restrain L&T from competing for 7 years was essentially to keep a potential competitor out and ensure the appellant operated more efficiently and profitably, without creating a new capital asset or monopoly — Held: Payment of non-compete fee is an allowable revenue expenditure under Section 37(1) of the Act. (Paras 16, 25-29)

Jan 4, 2026 sclaw
Evidence Act

Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 118 — Competency of child witness — Effect of delay and tutoring — Although a minor child is competent to testify, the reliability and evidentiary value of testimony given many years after the event, especially when the child has been residing with the complainant’s family (maternal grandparents), is significantly affected by the high possibility of memory distortion and tutoring. (Paras 5, 7, 10.2)

Jan 4, 2026 sclaw