Supreme Court of India Judgements

47200 Judgements hosted as on 30/04/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: State Laws

State Laws

Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002 — Section 103 — Cooperative societies functioning immediately before reorganisation of States — Object and scope of ‘deemed conversion’ — Section 103 does not automatically convert a cooperative society registered under a State Act into a multi-State cooperative society merely due to State reorganisation (e.g., bifurcation of Uttar Pradesh into Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand) — The conversion under Section 103 depends on whether the ‘objects’ of the society extend to more than one State, not merely on the statutory restructuring of the territory — Where the objects of a society remain confined to only one State after reorganisation, it continues to be governed by the applicable State Cooperative Societies Act. (Paras 9, 11, 15A, 15B, 15C, 12.18, 12.19, 14)

Dec 17, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1427 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND OTHERS Vs. MILKIYAT SINGH AND OTHERS ETC. ( Before : Vikram Nath…

State Laws

Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 — Section 30 — Maintenance of Map and Field Book — Correction of Revenue Map — Scope of Section 30 — Section 30 allows the Collector to record annual changes in boundaries or correct errors or omissions detected in the map or field book (khasra) — It does not permit reopening an issue settled previously between parties regarding the location or extent of plots, especially when the earlier decision attained finality and was based on determined possession and ownership — Efforts to change the location of a purchased plot, which has already been subject to final determination under the predecessor law (Uttar Pradesh Land Revenue Act, 1901), do not fall within the scope of “correction of errors or omissions” under Section 30. (Paras 5.1, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15)

Dec 10, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1405 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SUVEJ SINGH Vs. RAM NARESH AND OTHERS ( Before : Rajesh Bindal and Manmohan, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No…of 2025 (Arising…

Constitution State Laws

Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021 — Section 4 (unamended) — Person competent to lodge FIR — Essential Nature — Prohibition Act is a special legislation and its procedure must be followed, overriding general CrPC provisions for FIR registration by police — Prior to 2024 Amendment, Section 4 restricted FIR lodging to aggrieved persons or their relatives by blood, marriage, or adoption — This restriction is not a mere procedural nicety but a deliberate legislative choice to protect individual autonomy and prevent frivolous litigation in matters of personal religious faith — FIR lodged by complainant not falling within these categories is ab initio void and liable for quashing.

Oct 26, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1249 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAJENDRA BIHARI LAL AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS ( Before : J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, JJ.…

State Laws

Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961, as amended by Haryana Act No. 9 of 1992 — Section 2(g)(6) — Validity — Land reserved for common purposes under East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948, vesting with Gram Panchayat — Held valid — Amendment did not suffer from constitutional infirmity — Land reserved for common purposes cannot be re-partitioned amongst proprietors.

Sep 21, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1122 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH THE STATE OF HARYANA Vs. JAI SINGH AND OTHERS ( Before : B.R. Gavai, CJI, Prashant Kumar Mishra and K.V. Viswanathan,…

State Laws

Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 — Chapter I-A — Slum Rehabilitation Schemes — Preferential right of landowner to redevelop — Section 3B(4)(e) and Section 13(1) confer a preferential right on the landowner to redevelop a Slum Rehabilitation Area (SR Area) — SRA can undertake redevelopment only if the landowner fails to come forward with a scheme within a reasonable time

Sep 2, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1015 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH TARABAI NAGAR CO-OP. HOG. SOCIETY (PROPOSED) Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ( Before : Surya Kant and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar…

State Laws

Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 — Sections 3C, 13, 14 — Waiver of preferential right — Waiver of landowner’s preferential right to redevelop requires clear and overt communication by the owner of intention not to exercise the right — Mere inaction or delay, particularly when the owner has consistently shown intent to redevelop, does not constitute waiver, especially if no invitation for redevelopment was issued.

Sep 2, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1016 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SALDANHA REAL ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED AND OTHERS Vs. BISHOP JOHN RODRIGUES AND OTHERS ( Before : Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan,…

State Laws

Appellant Trust’s contentions regarding non-demarcation, encroachment, and non-delivery of possession are baseless; demarcation was done and acknowledged, alleged encroachment is not proven by evidence, and delivery of possession was contingent on execution of lease deed, a condition appellant failed to meet — Respondent Corporation’s actions were in accordance with prescribed procedures and allotment terms

Jun 3, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 791 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KAMLA NEHRU MEMORIAL TRUST AND ANOTHER Vs. U.P. STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED AND OTHERS ( Before : Surya Kant and…

State Laws

Nagaland Village and Area Councils Act, 1978 — Section 3 — Recognition of villages — State’s duty to consider objections fairly — Failure appears to have occurred in present case — Objections by appellant regarding ancestral land ownership not adequately considered by State authorities before recommending recognition — Court cannot definitively decide complex factual disputes regarding land ownership and customary practices — Appropriate for State authorities to resolve such issues.

Jun 1, 2025 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH OLD JALUKAI VILLAGE COUNCIL Vs. KAKIHO VILLAGE AND OTHERS ( Before : J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No. ….of 2025…

You missed

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 498A — Cruelty by husband or relatives of husband — For the conviction under Section 498A, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused caused mental or physical cruelty to the woman. In this case, the evidence presented by the prosecution regarding dowry demands and cruelty was found to be contradictory and uncorroborated by independent witnesses. Therefore, the conviction of the appellant under Section 498A IPC was set aside.

May 1, 2026 sclaw
C P C

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 89 — Compromise Decree — Interpretation of — Memorandum of Settlement (MOS) forming basis of decree — Clause (xiii) specifying conditional obligations for exchange of immovable properties or payment of guideline value upon failure to transfer — Held, obligation to pay monetary compensation triggered by failure to transfer agreed ‘B Schedule’ land, not discretionary option.

May 1, 2026 sclaw
Education

Right to Education Act, 2009 — Section 12 — Uttar Pradesh Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Rules, 2011 — Rule 8 — Neighbourhood School Obligation — A neighbourhood school has a constitutional and statutory duty to admit students forwarded by the State Government without delay, as mandated by Article 21A of the Constitution and relevant provisions of the RTE Act and UP RTE Rules — The school cannot question the eligibility of a student once the government has completed the admission process and forwarded the list.

Apr 30, 2026 sclaw
I B C

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — Section 5(8) — Financial Debt — Corporate Guarantees — A liability arising from corporate guarantee for money borrowed against interest qualifies as financial debt — The execution of corporate guarantees, even if challenged on grounds of timing or non-disclosure, are considered valid and enforceable if their execution is admitted or demonstrably proven, making the appellants entitled to recognition as financial creditors.

Apr 30, 2026 sclaw