Supreme Court of India Judgements

46400 Judgements hosted as on 14/04/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: State Laws

State Laws

Himachal Land Revenue Act, 1954 – Sections 32, 32(2)(a), 34, 45 and 46 – Evidence Act, 1872 – Sections 35 and 109 – Presumption of truth attached to the revenue record can be rebutted if such entry was made fraudulently or surreptitiously – Presumption of truth attached to the record-of-rights can be rebutted only if there is a fraud in the entry or the entry was surreptitiously made or that prescribed procedure was not followed

Feb 20, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHRI PARTAP SINGH (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. VERSUS SHIV RAM (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara…

State Laws

Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 – Sections 3, 6(19), 34 and 108 – Specific endowment – Deed of Settlement does create a “specific endowment” HELD In view of Section 108, no suit or legal proceedings in respect of the administration or management of a religious institution or any other matter for determining or deciding which provision is made in the Act shall be instituted in a civil court

Feb 20, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE IDOL OF SRI RENGANATHASWAMY REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER, JOINT COMMISSIONER — Appellant Vs. P K THOPPULAN CHETTIAR, RAMANUJA KOODAM ANANDHANA TRUST, REP.…

State Laws

Rajasthan Pre-emption Act 1966 – Sections 5(1)(c), 6, 6(1)(ii) and 6(3) – Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) – Section 100 – Right of pre-emption – Whether a right of pre-emption was available to plaintiff who is alleged to be a joint owner in possession of the disputed courtyard. HELD plaintiff had a superior right of pre-emption by virtue of the provisions of Section 6(3) since he was the brother of the second defendant – First defendant has an inferior right of pre-emption as compared to plaintiff – Hence his claim cannot prevail over the superior right of pre-emption of plaintiff

Feb 19, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SURESH CHAND AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. SURESH CHANDER (DEAD) THROUGH LRS AND OTHER — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and…

State Laws

Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 – Section 37(1) and 154 – Demand of premium – Letter of Intent – In this case it is to be noted that the Letter of Intent was valid for a period of three months only – If, for any reason, delay is occurred in obtaining clearance from the Coastal Zone Management Authority, nothing prevented the appellants to make appropriate representation so as to keep the Letter of Intent alive. Appeal dismissed

Feb 1, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UTTAR BHARTIYA RAJAK SAMAJ PANCHAYAT BANGANGA RAJAK SAMAJ CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY (PROPOSED) AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SECRETARY AND OTHERS…

State Laws

Haryana Ceiling of Land Holdings Act, 1972 – Section 8(3), 9 and 12(3) – Determination of surplus land – Appellants were not bonafide purchasers, they have purchased the land from “M” vide Sale deed dated 14.06.1989 i.e. much after land stood vested in the State Government and after the Orders were passed by the Commissioner and Financial Commissioner HELD Appeal dismissed

Jan 28, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KIRPAL SINGH AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. KAMLA DEVI AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Ashok Bhushan and Navin Sinha, JJ. ) Civil…

State Laws

Orissa Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act 1972 – Section 4(1) – Conversion of the leasehold plot to freehold – Recomputation – There was no justification for the High Court to direct that the rate for the computation of conversion charges should be that which was applicable on the submission of an application

Dec 23, 2019 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF ODISHA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. BICHITRANANDA DAS — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ. )…

You missed

Arbitration Constitution

Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 – Sections 34 and 37 – Curative petition – The Court found that the arbitral tribunal’s decision was not perverse or irrational and that the CMRS certificate did not conclusively prove that defects were cured within the cure period – The Court emphasized the tribunal’s domain to interpret the contract and the limited scope of judicial interference in arbitral awards – The Supreme Court concluded that the curative petition was maintainable and that there was no miscarriage of justice in restoring the arbitral award.

Apr 14, 2024 sclaw
Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 302, read with 34 – Murder – The Supreme Court found that the High Court did not properly address whether the Trial Court’s acquittal was a plausible conclusion from the evidence – The Supreme Court emphasized that the burden of proof lies with the prosecution and that the accused do not have to prove their innocence unless there is a statutory reverse onus – The Supreme Court concluded that the evidence did not warrant overturning the acquittal, as the Trial Court’s view was possible and not perverse.

Apr 14, 2024 sclaw
I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 302 – Murder – Dispute over a blocked pathway – The Court found no evidence of provocation by the deceased that would justify the appellants’ brutal attack, nor any exercise of the right to private defence – The Court applied principles from previous judgments to determine the lack of private defence and the presence of intention to cause harm – The Supreme Court concluded that the appellants’ actions were not in self-defence and that their intention was to inflict harm, affirming the lower courts’ decisions.

Apr 14, 2024 sclaw
Consumer

Consumer Law – Insurance Act, 1938 – Section 45 – Policy not to be called in question on ground of mis-statement after two years – The Court found no suppression of material facts and criticized the NCDRC for not requiring proper evidence from the respondent – The judgment discusses the principles of ‘uberrimae fidei’ (utmost good faith) and the burden of proof in insurance contracts – The Court concluded that the insurance company failed to prove the alleged suppression of facts, thus the repudiation was unjustified.

Apr 14, 2024 sclaw