Supreme Court of India Judgements

37260 Judgements hosted as on 04/06/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Top Tags

Latest Post

Service Law — Promotion — Entitlement to promotion to Chief Medical Director (Higher Administrative Grade) in Indian Railway Medical Service — Appellant was denied promotion despite being eligible, with a junior officer being promoted instead — Appellant’s case was rejected by the Tribunal and High Court based on her grading in Annual Confidential Reports Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 29A — Mandate of Arbitrator — Extension of mandate — In the absence of specific statutory provisions, party autonomy and minimal judicial intervention are guiding principles — If a party participates in proceedings and does not object to the extension of mandate, they may be estopped from challenging the award on that ground after it is passed. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the Act) — Section 33 and Section 34(3) — Limitation for filing application to set aside arbitral award — Exclusion of time spent in disposal of applications under Section 33 — Court held that period spent in disposal of Section 33 applications by Arbitral Tribunal must be excluded for computing limitation under Section 34(3) of the Act, regardless of whether the Section 33 applications were ultimately allowed or dismissed. Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 14, 15(1), 16, 39(a) & 39(c) — Uttar Pradesh Essential Commodities (Regulation of Sale and Distribution Control) Order, 2016 (2016 Order) — Clause 2(p) — Government Order (G.O.) No — 6 of 2019 — Paragraph IV(10) — Exclusion of married daughter from definition of ‘family’ for compassionate appointment as fair price shop dealer — Held, exclusion is based on gender stereotypes and lacks rational nexus with the object of the scheme, violating Articles 14 and 15(1) of the Constitution — Marital status cannot be the sole criterion for dependency — Dependency is a question of fact. Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) — Section 37 — Grant of bail — Twin conditions under Section 37(1)(b)(ii) must be considered — High Court ignored twin conditions while granting bail in a case involving commercial quantity of narcotics — Impugned order granting bail cannot be sustained.
Service Law — Promotion — Entitlement to promotion to Chief Medical Director (Higher Administrative Grade) in Indian Railway Medical Service — Appellant was denied promotion despite being eligible, with a junior officer being promoted instead — Appellant’s case was rejected by the Tribunal and High Court based on her grading in Annual Confidential Reports
Service
Service Law — Promotion — Entitlement to promotion to Chief Medical Director (Higher Administrative Grade) in Indian Railway Medical Service — Appellant was denied promotion despite being eligible, with a junior officer being promoted instead — Appellant’s case was rejected by the Tribunal and High Court based on her grading in Annual Confidential Reports
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 29A — Mandate of Arbitrator — Extension of mandate — In the absence of specific statutory provisions, party autonomy and minimal judicial intervention are guiding principles — If a party participates in proceedings and does not object to the extension of mandate, they may be estopped from challenging the award on that ground after it is passed.
Arbitration
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 29A — Mandate of Arbitrator — Extension of mandate — In the absence of specific statutory provisions, party autonomy and minimal judicial intervention are guiding principles — If a party participates in proceedings and does not object to the extension of mandate, they may be estopped from challenging the award on that ground after it is passed.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the Act) — Section 33 and Section 34(3) — Limitation for filing application to set aside arbitral award — Exclusion of time spent in disposal of applications under Section 33 — Court held that period spent in disposal of Section 33 applications by Arbitral Tribunal must be excluded for computing limitation under Section 34(3) of the Act, regardless of whether the Section 33 applications were ultimately allowed or dismissed.
Arbitration
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the Act) — Section 33 and Section 34(3) — Limitation for filing application to set aside arbitral award — Exclusion of time spent in disposal of applications under Section 33 — Court held that period spent in disposal of Section 33 applications by Arbitral Tribunal must be excluded for computing limitation under Section 34(3) of the Act, regardless of whether the Section 33 applications were ultimately allowed or dismissed.
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 14, 15(1), 16, 39(a) & 39(c) — Uttar Pradesh Essential Commodities (Regulation of Sale and Distribution Control) Order, 2016 (2016 Order) — Clause 2(p) — Government Order (G.O.) No — 6 of 2019 — Paragraph IV(10) — Exclusion of married daughter from definition of ‘family’ for compassionate appointment as fair price shop dealer — Held, exclusion is based on gender stereotypes and lacks rational nexus with the object of the scheme, violating Articles 14 and 15(1) of the Constitution — Marital status cannot be the sole criterion for dependency — Dependency is a question of fact.
Constitution
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 14, 15(1), 16, 39(a) & 39(c) — Uttar Pradesh Essential Commodities (Regulation of Sale and Distribution Control) Order, 2016 (2016 Order) — Clause 2(p) — Government Order (G.O.) No — 6 of 2019 — Paragraph IV(10) — Exclusion of married daughter from definition of ‘family’ for compassionate appointment as fair price shop dealer — Held, exclusion is based on gender stereotypes and lacks rational nexus with the object of the scheme, violating Articles 14 and 15(1) of the Constitution — Marital status cannot be the sole criterion for dependency — Dependency is a question of fact.
Accident

Tribunal and the High Court fell in error in construing the income of the claimant at Rs. 3,000/- p.m. instead of Rs. 8,000/- p.m. – In the light of the compensation awarded towards ‘Loss of Future Income’ the sum of Rs. 60,000/- awarded by the Tribunal under the head ‘Permanent Disability’ and ‘Loss of Amenities in Future Life’ would not arise – Compensation enhanced to Rs. 15,94,812 – Appeal allowed.

Jul 19, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SRI LAKSHMANA GOWDA B.N. — Appellant Vs. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Surya Kant and…

Land Acquisition National Highways Authority Act

National Highways Authority Act, 1956 – Section 3H – When it comes to resolving the dispute relating to apportionment of the amount determined towards compensation, it is only the Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction which can do so – Principal Civil Court means the Court of the District Judge.

Jul 19, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VINOD KUMAR AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE MAU AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and J.B. Pardiwala, JJ. )…

Electricity Act

Revised agreement – Reduction to 10000 KVA from 23000 KVA – Appellant neither sought for nor consumed the electricity more than the maximum demand of 10000 KVA – This Court directs the Respondent to return the amount as may be calculated and verified, paid by the Appellant to it for 13000 KVA, in excess to its request of maximum sanctioned demand of 10000 KVA (23000-10000 = 13000 KVA)

Jul 19, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH THE MADRAS ALUMINIUM CO. LTD. — Appellant Vs. THE TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai, Sanjay Karol…

Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 141 – where no reason was assigned by the Court while dismissing the matter and where leave was not granted in the said Special Leave Petition, the said dismissal would not be considered as laying down law within the ambit of Article 141 – such dismissal of Special Leave Petition by way of a non-speaking order does not attract the doctrine of merger.

Jul 19, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH S. NARAHARI AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. S.R. KUMAR AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Krishna Murari and Sanjay Karol, JJ. ) Civil…

I P C

(IPC) – Sections 308 and 338 – The appellant, as a conductor, had a duty to take care of the passengers on the overcrowded bus – However, he failed to verify if all passengers had safely boarded the bus before signaling the driver to start – Despite knowing that many students were waiting at the bus stop, he neglected his duty and acted recklessly – As a result, PW-1 suffered a fractured pelvis, putting human life in danger

Jul 19, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ABDUL ANSAR — Appellant Vs. STATE OF KERALA — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Rajesh Bindal, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No.…

Service Matters
Service

Re-instatement – Back wages – The appellant established unemployment at least until August 1997 – Based on the salary figures provided, the appellant’s gross salary on the date of reinstatement was Rs. 18,830, while it was approximately Rs. 4,000 per month at the time of removal – An amount of Rs.3 lakhs is ordered to be paid to the appellant in lieu of back wages.

Jul 19, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAMESH CHAND — Appellant Vs. MANAGEMENT OF DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Rajesh Bindal, JJ. ) Civil…

Evidence Act

Evidence Act, 1872 – Ss 4 and 18 – Testimony of a child witness – Before taking the testimony of a minor, it is the responsibility of the Judicial Officer to ask preliminary questions to ensure that the minor can comprehend and respond rationally & record the preliminary questions and answers for review by the Appellate Court to assess the Trial Court’s opinion accurately.

Jul 19, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PRADEEP — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF HARYANA — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Rajesh Bindal, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No.…

Constitution

The right to enjoy possession of any land notified under Section 4 is not only limited to Adivasi communities and other forest dwelling communities, but is also based on proof of residence, date of original possession, etc – If the right to inhabit the said lands is not restricted only to certain communities, how can the right to be heard on such claims be restricted to the same.

Jul 19, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HARI PRAKASH SHUKLA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Krishna Murari and Ahsanuddin…

You missed

Service

Service Law — Promotion — Entitlement to promotion to Chief Medical Director (Higher Administrative Grade) in Indian Railway Medical Service — Appellant was denied promotion despite being eligible, with a junior officer being promoted instead — Appellant’s case was rejected by the Tribunal and High Court based on her grading in Annual Confidential Reports

Jun 4, 2026 sclaw
Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 29A — Mandate of Arbitrator — Extension of mandate — In the absence of specific statutory provisions, party autonomy and minimal judicial intervention are guiding principles — If a party participates in proceedings and does not object to the extension of mandate, they may be estopped from challenging the award on that ground after it is passed.

Jun 4, 2026 sclaw
Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the Act) — Section 33 and Section 34(3) — Limitation for filing application to set aside arbitral award — Exclusion of time spent in disposal of applications under Section 33 — Court held that period spent in disposal of Section 33 applications by Arbitral Tribunal must be excluded for computing limitation under Section 34(3) of the Act, regardless of whether the Section 33 applications were ultimately allowed or dismissed.

Jun 4, 2026 sclaw
Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 14, 15(1), 16, 39(a) & 39(c) — Uttar Pradesh Essential Commodities (Regulation of Sale and Distribution Control) Order, 2016 (2016 Order) — Clause 2(p) — Government Order (G.O.) No — 6 of 2019 — Paragraph IV(10) — Exclusion of married daughter from definition of ‘family’ for compassionate appointment as fair price shop dealer — Held, exclusion is based on gender stereotypes and lacks rational nexus with the object of the scheme, violating Articles 14 and 15(1) of the Constitution — Marital status cannot be the sole criterion for dependency — Dependency is a question of fact.

Jun 4, 2026 sclaw