Supreme Court of India Judgements

37260 Judgements hosted as on 31/05/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Rent

Rent

Landlord and Tenant — Eviction Suit — Pleading and Proof Satisfied — In this case, the plaint contained material facts of co-landlord status and eviction grounds — Evidence, including affidavits and documents like share certificates, was provided to support these pleaded facts, fulfilling both pleading and proof requirements.

May 17, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 496 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MARIETTA D’ SILVA Vs. RUDOLF CLOTHAN LACERDA AND OTHERS ( Before : Manoj Misra and Manmohan, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No…..of…

Constitution Rent

Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 vs. Government Grants Act, 1895 — Relationship Governed by Grant — A lease originating from a Government grant, as governed by the Government Grants Act, 1895, is not subject to the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 — The incidence and enforceability of such a grant are governed solely by its tenor — The legal character of the grant does not derive from conventional landlord — tenant relationships but from the sovereign grant and its embedded conditions — Therefore, eviction proceedings under the Delhi Rent Control Act are not maintainable for holdings originating from a Government grant.

Apr 28, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 406 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UNION OF INDIA Vs. SIR SOBHA SINGH AND SONS PVT. LTD ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ.…

C P C Rent

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 6 Rule 17 — Amendment of pleadings — Permissibility while considering grant of leave to amend a plaint — Court can examine the merits/demerits of the case — Landlord filed suit for eviction based on bonafide need and other grounds — During appeal, landlord died — Legal heirs sought to amend plaint to incorporate their bonafide need, including that of appellant’s wife and son — Trial Court dismissed the suit — Appellate Bench allowed amendment, directing issue of bonafide requirement to be sent back to Trial Court for evidence — High Court, in writ petition, set aside amendment allowing fresh suit — Supreme Court held that High Court erred in interfering with the discretion of Appellate Bench under Article 227, as amendment was permissible.

Apr 27, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 416 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VINAY RAGHUNATH DESHMUKH Vs. NATWARLAL SHAMJI GADA AND ANOTHER ( Before : J. K. Maheshwari and Atul S. Chandurkar, JJ. )…

C P C Rent

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Subsequent events in litigation — Consideration by courts — Principle for considering subsequent events requires them to be brought promptly, consistently with procedure, with opportunity to oppose, and must have material bearing on relief — Landlord-tenant disputes require pragmatic approach, assessing bonafide need as of the date of filing suit, unless subsequent events materially change the ground of relief and overshadow the need altogether.

Apr 17, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 376 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MARIA MARTINS Vs. NOEL ZUZARTE AND OTHERS ( Before : J.K.Maheshwari and Atul S. Chandurkar, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No. ….of…

Rent

Karnataka Rent Act, 1999 — Section 46 — Revisional jurisdiction of High Court — Scope — High Court cannot re-appreciate evidence or substitute its own findings for those of the trial court — Revisional power is supervisory and limited to examining legality, correctness, or propriety of an order, not to act as a court of first appeal — Interference is warranted only for perversity, lack of evidence, or manifest illegality

Apr 12, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 348 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SRI M.V. RAMACHANDRASA SINCE DECEASED REPRESENTED BY LEGAL HEIRS Vs. M/S. MAHENDRA WATCH COMPANY REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNERS AND OTHERS (…

Rent State Laws

U.P. Urban Premises Rent Control Ordinance, 2021 — Section 21(2) — Eviction proceedings — Landlord-tenant relationship established and affirmed up to Supreme Court — Tenant’s subsequent restoration application before Rent Authority, challenging sale deed validity, was an abuse of process and overreaching court orders — Rent Authority’s order setting aside eviction was void for lack of jurisdiction, as title dispute is purview of Civil Court, not Rent Authority — Judicial discipline and adherence to law require subordinate authorities to follow higher court orders

Mar 29, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 299 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAJESH GOYAL Vs. M/S LAXMI CONSTRUCTIONS AND OTHERS ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

Property Matters Rent

Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 — Scope and Applicability — Overriding Effect over State Rent Control Legislations — Whether PP Act 1971 prevails over State Rent Control Acts (such as Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 or Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958) regarding eviction from ‘Public Premises’ defined under Section 2(e) — Both PP Act 1971 and State Rent Control Acts are special laws; conflict resolved by legislative purpose and policy, which dictates that PP Act 1971 must prevail — A person in unauthorised occupation of public premises cannot invoke the protection of the Rent Control Act. (Paras 2, 5.6.3, 5.7.1, 5.8.2, 13(i), 13(ii), 13(iv))

Dec 12, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1419 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER Vs. VITA ( Before : Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and N.V. Anjaria, JJ. )…

Rent

Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 (Act, 1965) — Sections 12 and 18 — Eviction for non-payment of rent — Procedure under Section 12 in Appeal against Section 12(3) eviction order — Whether the entire summary procedure under Section 12 must be repeated before the Rent Control Appellate Authority when challenging an eviction order passed under Section 12(3) — Held: A fresh application under Section 12(1) of the Act is not mandatory when challenging an eviction order under Section 12(3) before the Appellate Authority — Rent Control Appellate Authority is not the Court of first instance and only tests the exercise of jurisdiction and power by the Rent Control Court; it is not required to re-determine the issue of default or outstanding amount of rent — Insisting on repeating the entire Section 12 procedure would be superfluous, unnecessary, contrary to the statute’s spirit, and lead to an absurd/unjust result, akin to turning the summary procedure on its head.

Nov 23, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1340 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH P.U. SIDHIQUE AND OTHERS Vs. ZAKARIYA ( Before : Rajesh Bindal and Manmohan, JJ. ) Civil Appeal Nos.13901-13902 of 2025 (Arising…

You missed

Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950 — List II, Entry 34 — “Betting and gambling” — Whether confined to games of chance — The expression “betting and gambling” in Entry 34 cannot be split to mean that the staking angle alone constitutes “betting” and the chance element alone constitutes “gambling” — Both betting and gambling involve the aspect of staking money on an uncertain outcome — Merely because the risk element is commonly perceived as “taking a chance”, it cannot mean the expression covers only games of chance — The expression is a set composite expression and cannot be rewritten by Courts to read as “betting on gambling” — Such a judicial rewriting would constitute a clear constitutional aberration — State of Bombay v. R.M.D. Chamarbaugwala, AIR 1957 SC 699 (RMDC-I) and R.M.D. Chamarbaugwala v. Union of India, AIR 1957 SC 628 (RMDC-II), explained and distinguished.

May 31, 2026 sclaw
Constitution

Constitution of India — Articles 246A, 366(12), 366(12A), 265 — Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act) — Sections 2(1), 2(31), 2(52), 7, 9, 15 — Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 — Rules 31A, 31B, 31C — Schedule III, Entry 6 — Actionable claims arising from betting and gambling — Constitutional validity of levy of GST — Legislative competence of Parliament — Whether online gaming, fantasy sports and casino transactions involve betting and gambling — Whether actionable claims arise therefrom — Valuation of taxable supply.

May 31, 2026 sclaw
Constitution

Betting and Gambling — Essential ingredients — The essential element of “betting and gambling” lies in staking money or money’s worth upon uncertain outcomes — The character of betting and gambling does not depend exclusively upon whether the underlying activity is a game of skill or a game of chance, but upon the existence of stakes placed upon uncertain future contingencies — Consequently, even where the underlying activity involves substantial elements of skill, once participation is conditioned upon staking money or money’s worth upon uncertain outcomes, the resulting transaction acquires the character of betting and gambling within the framework of the GST legislation — Accordingly, online gaming activities, including fantasy sports and other games played on digital platforms involving staking upon uncertain outcomes, constitute betting and gambling for purposes of the GST framework.

May 31, 2026 sclaw
Anticipatory Bail Bail Declined

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 438 — Grant of Anticipatory Bail — Abuse of Authority by Law Enforcers — Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s order granting anticipatory bail to police officers accused of misusing their authority, extorting money, and causing stress to a citizen and his minor daughter — The Court emphasized that in cases where there is a clear abuse of authority by law enforcement officials, the normal presumptions applicable to ordinary accused persons may not apply, and greater caution is warranted — Observations made by the Supreme Court were held to be prima facie and not to govern the trial

May 31, 2026 sclaw