Supreme Court of India Judgements

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

Category: I B C

I B C

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — Section 60(5)(c) — Jurisdiction of Adjudicating Authority — Declaration of title to trademark — NCLT exceeded its jurisdiction by declaring title to trademark “Gloster” in favour of the Successful Resolution Applicant (SRA) while adjudicating an application under Section 60(5) of the IBC, as the issue of trademark title was a highly contentious dispute beyond the scope of insolvency proceedings and not directly related to the CIRP.

Jan 22, 2026 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH GLOSTER LIMITED Vs. GLOSTER CABLES LIMITED AND OTHERS ( Before : J.B. Pardiwala and K. V. Viswanathan, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No. 2996 of…

I B C

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — Section 7 — Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) — Admission of CIRP — Adjudicating Authority’s power and duty — Legal position is well-settled that once the Adjudicating Authority is satisfied that a financial debt exists and a default has occurred, it must admit the application — Inquiry under Section 7(5)(a) is confined strictly to determination of debt and default, leaving no scope for equitable or discretionary considerations — Reliance on Vidarbha Industries is misconceived; it is a narrow exception confined to its peculiar facts — Admission under Section 7 remains mandatory once debt and default are established — Any alleged non-cooperation by the financial creditor occurred subsequent to the default and cannot absolve the corporate debtor of its admitted failure to comply with its payment obligations. (Paras 12.3, 12.6, 12.9, 12.10)

Jan 17, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 58 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ELEGNA CO-OP. HOUSING AND COMMERCIAL SOCIETY LTD. Vs. EDELWEISS ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED AND ANOTHER ( Before : J.B. Pardiwala and…

I B C

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — Section 9 — Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) — Application by Operational Creditor — Pre-existing Dispute — Adjudicating authority must determine if operational debt exists, if non-payment has occurred, and if a dispute existed prior to the demand notice (Section 8) — Dispute must be genuine, substantial, and not spurious, hypothetical, or illusory (mere ‘moonshine’ or ‘bluster’) — Court is not required to examine the merits of the dispute or satisfy itself that the defence is likely to succeed. (Paras 15, 16, 19)

Dec 13, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1410 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S. SARASWATI WIRE AND CABLE INDUSTRIES Vs. MOHAMMAD MOINUDDIN KHAN AND OTHERS ( Before : Sanjay Kumar and Alok Aradhe, JJ.…

I B C

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) — Section 62 — Liquidation Process — Sale of Assets — Appeals against NCLAT majority decision confirming forfeiture of amount paid by bidder — Private sale requiring Adjudicating Authority’s prior approval — Regulation 33(2)(d) of IBBI (Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2016 — Where liquidator seeks NCLT approval for private sale after failed auctions and decision to sell at scrap value, the sale falls under Regulation 33(2)(d) and not Regulation 33(2)(c) (sale at price higher than reserve price of failed auction) — Contention that sale was purely a contract governed by Indian Contract Act, 1872, rejected. (Paras 12, 16, 19)

Dec 13, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1411 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S. SHRI KARSHNI ALLOYS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. RAMAKRISHNAN SADASIVAN ( Before : Sanjay Kumar and Alok Aradhe, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

I B C

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) — Section 7 — Application by Financial Creditor — Rejection for technical defects — Affidavit Verification — Whether an application under Section 7 of the IBC, verified later than the date of the supporting affidavit, is liable to be rejected at the threshold — Mere filing of a ‘defective’ affidavit (e.g., dated before application verification) does not render the Section 7 application non est and liable to be rejected; such a defect is curable and not fundamental. (Paras 1, 17)

Nov 30, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1349 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH LIVEIN AQUA SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. HDFC BANK LIMITED ( Before : Sanjay Kumar and Alok Aradhe, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

I B C

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) — Section 14 — Moratorium — Applicability to terminated Development Agreements — Development Agreement constitutes ‘asset’ or ‘property’ of Corporate Debtor only if it creates subsisting proprietary, possessory or legally enforceable right — Termination of Development Agreement based on Corporate Debtor’s persistent and prolonged non-performance, occurring prior to initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP), is valid and lawful — Moratorium under Section 14 does not revive contracts validly terminated before insolvency or protect mere inchoate or forfeited contractual rights — Where developer never obtained possession and failed to perform core obligations, its development rights do not constitute ‘assets’ or ‘property’ of the Corporate Debtor, and the moratorium does not apply. (Paras 15.5, 15.6, 16.4, 16.7, 16.12, 20, 21(i), 21(ii))

Nov 30, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1366 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH A A ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH ITS RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL HARSHAD SHAMKANT DESHPANDE AND ANOTHER Vs. KHER NAGAR SUKHSADAN CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY…

Constitution I B C

Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 32 — Writ Petition (Criminal) — Seeking registration of FIR and investigation into attempt to influence judicial outcome — Relief for criminal investigation based on disclosure in a judicial order of NCLAT, Chennai Bench — Issues raised are of vital public importance but deemed capable of administrative resolution by Chief Justice of India — Writ Petition treated as a representation to bring material information for consideration of Hon’ble Chief Justice of India, allowing law to take its course — Petition disposed of on administrative treatment of investigation request.

Nov 23, 2025 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S A.S. MET CORP PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. THE REGISTRAR AND OTHERS ( Before : Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi, JJ. ) Writ Petition(s)(Criminal) No(s).440/2025…

I B C

. Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — Section 62 — Appeal to Supreme Court — Limited to questions of law — Concurrent findings of fact by NCLT and NCLAT ordinarily not to be interfered with — Unless view taken in ignorance of statutory provisions, based on extraneous consideration or ex-facie arbitrary/illegal.

Sep 28, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1165 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH KALYANI TRANSCO Vs. M/S BHUSHAN POWER AND STEEL LIMITED AND OTHERS ( Before : B.R. Gavai, CJI, Satish Chandra Sharma and…

I B C

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — Section 62; Section 14(1)(d) — Appeal against NCLAT order setting aside NCLT order directing return of property — NCLT had directed return of property based on CoC decision that property not required by corporate debtor — NCLAT set aside NCLT order invoking Section 14(1)(d) barring recovery of property during CIRP — Supreme Court held that Section 14(1)(d) not applicable as CoC and Resolution Professional initiated the process for returning property due to financial burden of rentals, and not a simple recovery by owner — Commercial wisdom of CoC regarding non-retention of property given primacy — NCLAT order set aside, NCLT order restored.

Aug 9, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 931 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SINCERE SECURITIES PRIVATE LIMITED AND OTHERS Vs. CHANDRAKANT KHEMKA AND OTHERS ( Before : Sanjay Kumar and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ.…

You missed

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 29A(4) — Application for extension of time to make arbitral award — Where an arbitral tribunal is constituted by the High Court under Section 11(6), any application for extension of time under Section 29A(4) would lie with the High Court. Where an arbitral tribunal is constituted by the parties themselves under Section 11(2), the application under Section 29A(4) would lie before the Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction in a district, which also includes the High Court in its ordinary original jurisdiction.

Feb 1, 2026 sclaw
Advocates Act Corporate

Advocates Act, 1961 — Section 38 — Appeal against Bar Council of India judgment — Professional misconduct — Failure to act with reasonable diligence and absence from Court hearing leading to dismissal of quashing petition — High Court ordered quashing of FIR subject to deposit of costs — Costs not deposited in time, FIR quashing order recalled and petition dismissed — Application to recall dismissal order allowed, quashing restored subject to enhanced costs — Compromise reached between advocate and complainant, misunderstanding about costs resolved — High Court waived enhanced costs — FIR quashed — Complainant filed affidavit withdrawing complaint due to misunderstanding about costs and expressing satisfaction with advocate’s services — Disciplinary Committee of Bar Council of India held advocate guilty of professional misconduct despite withdrawal affidavit — Supreme Court held that disciplinary committee ignored vital aspect of withdrawal affidavit and satisfaction of complainant — Substratum of complaint ceased to exist once dispute was resolved and withdrawn — Finding of professional misconduct unsustainable.

Feb 1, 2026 sclaw
C P C

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 114A, Rules 17, 27, 28 of West Bengal Panchayat (Gram Panchayat Administration) Rules, 2004 — Competency of Gram Panchayat to grant building permission — Not competent if area governed by Act of 1979 and development plan exists — Panchayat Samiti is the competent authority.

Feb 1, 2026 sclaw
Service

University Grants Commission (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026 — Clause 3(c) defining “Caste-based Discrimination” — Incorporation argued as restrictive and exclusionary — Claim that it renders individuals from non-reserved/general classes remediless against caste-based discrimination or institutional bias — Allegation that regulations proceed on unfounded presumption that caste-based discrimination only affects reserved categories.

Feb 1, 2026 sclaw