Supreme Court of India Judgements

47295 Judgements hosted as on 19/10/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe @ Rs 99/- for 6 months, sclaw@sclaw.in, WA +91 9417245693.

Category: I B C

I B C

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — Section 14, Section 238 — Telecom laws — Spectrum — Nature of — Can spectrum, even if treated as an asset in corporate debtor’s books, be subjected to proceedings under IBC? — Held, No. Spectrum is a natural resource, the right to use which is granted by the Government under a licence, not ownership. The IBC cannot override the specific statutory regime governing telecommunications law.

Feb 22, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 153 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Atul S. Chandurkar, JJ.…

I B C

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — Section 7 — Admission of application for Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) — Rejection of settlement proposal — Court must ascertain existence of default in financial debt when a financial creditor triggers insolvency under Section 7 — No scope for inquiry into disputes regarding existence of debt or inability to pay at admission stage — Rejects arguments based on financial viability and settlement proposals.

Feb 22, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 166 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH POWER TRUST (PROMOTER OF HIRANMAYE ENERGY LTD.) Vs. BHUVAN MADAN (INTERIM RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL OF HIRANMAYE ENERGY LTD.) AND OTHERS ( Before…

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…

You missed

I P C

Mere Proximity In Time & Sameness Of Accused Can’t Justify Joint Trial When Places Of Occurrence & Victims Are Different

Oct 19, 2026 sclaw
Tenders & Contracts

Can’t Insist Compliance With Impossible Tender Conditions

Oct 19, 2026 sclaw
Education

Students’ Fees Cannot Be Hiked Midway Through Professional Courses Except In Exceptional Circumstances

Oct 17, 2026 sclaw
Waqf

Supreme Court Sets Aside Orders Rejecting Waqf Trust’s Objection To Execution Of Property Decree, Orders Fresh Inquiry

Oct 16, 2026 sclaw