Latest Post

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Claim Petition for death of bachelor — Selection of Multiplier — Multiplier to be determined based on age of deceased and not age of dependents/parents — Deceased was 33 years old at the time of accident — Correct multiplier applicable according to standardized matrix in Sarla Verma and Pranay Sethi is 16 — Argument of insurer that multiplier should correspond to age of parents rejected — MACT and High Court rightly applied multiplier of 16. Legal Representatives Can Claim Motor Accident Compensation Even Without Financial Dependency On Deceased Execution Of Unregistered Agreement To Sell Does Not Terminate Subsisting Landlord-Tenant Relationship Nor Entitle Tenant To Section 53A TP Act Protection A. Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Section 111(e) & (f) — Landlord and Tenant — Determination of lease by express or implied surrender — Execution of agreement to sell by landlord in favour of tenant — Effect on jural relationship — Held, mere execution of an agreement to sell between landlord and tenant does not ipso facto determine the subsisting tenancy — Tenancy is determined only when terms of agreement or unequivocal conduct of parties disclose express or implied surrender — Where agreement to sell contained clause for cancellation and restoration of possession in case loan was not sanctioned, existing possession was referable to tenancy and not to agreement to sell — Landlord-tenant relationship continued to subsist. Appellate Courts Should Not Remand Cases Under Order 41 Rule 23 CPC As A Matter Of Course When Sufficient Evidence Is Available On Record. A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 41 Rules 23 and 24 — Power of Appellate Court to remand — Remand of case to Trial Court for framing of additional issues and fresh evidence — Permissibility — High Court remitted suit regarding one item of property for framing issues on whether sale deed was sham, limitation, and possession — Held, remand is not to be adopted as a matter of ordinary course and reflects incorrect exercise of discretion when sufficient evidence is available on record — Issues already framed by Trial Court were comprehensive enough to cover core disputes — Appellate Court is fully empowered to decide issues on merits or admit additional evidence if warranted, rather than remitting matter to cause unnecessary delay — Remand set aside and appeals restored to High Court for fresh disposal on merits. Extended Period Of Limitation Under Proviso To Section 11A, Central Excise Act Cannot Be Invoked When Facts Are Known To Department Without Wilful Suppression A. Central Excise Act, 1944 — Section 35L — Maintainability of appeal before Supreme Court — Preliminary objection raised by Department that appeal does not come under Section 35L as issue had no relation to rate of duty or valuation — Held, issue raised regarding extended period of limitation on ground of non-inclusion of certain costs in assessable value has an inextricable link with valuation of goods for purposes of assessment — Issue raised in show cause notice fundamentally dealt with valuation of goods — Supreme Court declined to relegate matter to High Court after almost a decade of pendency — Preliminary objection rejected.
Service Matters

Service Law — Disciplinary proceedings post-superannuation — Where service regulations permit continuation of disciplinary proceedings initiated before superannuation, they can be concluded thereafter — Punishment of reduction in pay scale can be implemented by computing pension based on the reduced salary.

2026 INSC 266 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VIRINDER PAL SINGH Vs. PUNJAB AND SIND BANK AND OTHERS ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Manoj Misra, JJ. )…

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Quashing of criminal proceedings — Summoning order based on complaint allegations lacking specific details of copyright infringement and without application of mind by Magistrate — Superior Court’s duty to examine proceedings for being frivolous, vexatious, or malicious — Held, allegations in complaint were bald and unsubstantiated, failing to disclose similarity between film and script.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SUJOY GHOSH Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ANOTHER ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok Aradhe, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No….of 2026…

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) — Section 31(1) — Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) — Resolution Plan — “Clean Slate” Principle — Effect of Approval — Claims not part of resolution plan stand extinguished — No affirmative relief can be granted for such claims — Division Bench judgment set aside.

2026 INSC 268 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UJAAS ENERGY LTD. Vs. WEST BENGAL POWER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. ( Before : Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih, JJ. )…

Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 — Section 2 — Forest land — Deemed forest — Master Plan — Statutory plan prevails over subsequent growth of vegetation — Land earmarked for project under an approved Master Plan, which was not forest land at the time of the plan’s inception, cannot subsequently be declared as forest or deemed forest thereby overriding the Master Plan’s statutory force.

2026 INSC 270 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NAVEEN SOLANKI AND ANOTHER Vs. RAIL LAND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND OTHERS ( Before : Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih, JJ.…

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 read with Bihar Special Courts Act, 2009 (BSCA) — Confiscation proceedings against family members of a deceased public servant — Death of the public servant during pendency of appeal — Whether confiscation proceedings can continue against the family members — Held, the BSCA provides for specific circumstances for return of confiscated property, namely, modification/annulment by High Court or acquittal by Special Court — The Act does not provide for abatement of proceedings upon death of the public servant, especially when family members were also put to notice — proceedings against family members cannot be automatically set aside due to the death of the public servant, and appeals should be decided on merits.

2026 INSC 272 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH VIGILANCE Vs. SUDHA SINGH ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, JJ. ) Criminal…

Service Matters

Gratuity — Withholding of gratuity due to non-vacation of company-allotted accommodation — SAIL Gratuity Rules, 1978, Rule 3.2.1(c) expressly empowers management to withhold gratuity for non-compliance with company rules, including non-vacation of accommodation — No interest payable on gratuity withheld for period of unauthorized occupation — Management is entitled to adjust penal rent accrued for retention beyond permissible period from gratuity amount — Order of March 31, 2017 in Ram Naresh Singh’s case was a concession based on specific facts and not binding precedent, unlike the order of December 15, 2020 in S.L.P — (C) No — 11025 of 2020 which clarified principles of penal rent adjustment

2026 INSC 263 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE MANAGEMENT OF STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs. SHAMBHU PRASAD SINGH AND OTHERS ( Before : Pankaj Mithal and…

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT) — Assessment of compensation — Functional disability vs — Physical disability — High Court reduced functional disability from 63% assessed by Medical Board to 30% without providing cogent reasons, constituting an erroneous appreciation of evidence and misapplication of legal principles — Such reduction, without convincing evidence impeaching medical certificates and without assigning adequate reasons, was unjustified — Supreme Court, to do complete justice and avoid further delay, examined functional disability on merits, considering medical and neuropsychological reports indicating severe cognitive impairment, partial blindness, and orthopedic limitations — Held, functional disability for calculating loss of earning capacity should be assessed at 100% given the claimant’s managerial role and the profound impact of injuries on his cognitive and functional abilities — Compensation recalculated accordingly, enhancing the award from Rs — 35,61,000/- to Rs — 97,73,011/-.

2026 INSC 260 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH R. HALLE Vs. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED ( Before : Prashant Kumar Mishra and Sandeep Mehta, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 221 and 222 — Conviction for offence not charged — High Court rightly reversed the conviction under Section 364 of IPC when the charge was for Section 302 of IPC, as Section 364 is not a minor or cognate offence to Section 302, making conviction without specific charge or notice prejudicial to fair trial

2026 INSC 256 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Vs. RAM SWAROOP @ BARKAT ( Before : Aravind Kumar and Augustine George Masih, JJ. )…

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 2(1)(d) — Definition of “consumer” — Commercial purpose — Deposit of surplus funds by a company in a bank for earning interest does not automatically make it a commercial purpose, but if the deposit is made to leverage credit facilities for augmenting business, it would have a direct nexus with revenue generation/profits — The identity of the purchaser or the value of the transaction is not conclusive, but the dominant intention or purpose behind the transaction is determining.

2026 INSC 264 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SANT ROHIDAS LEATHER INDUSTRIES AND CHARMAKAR DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. Vs. VIJAYA BANK ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Manoj Misra,…

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 406 and 420 — Criminal breach of trust and cheating — For an offence of cheating under Section 415 IPC, a fraudulent or dishonest intention must exist at the time of making the promise or representation — Mere failure to keep a promise subsequently does not automatically prove dishonest intention from the beginning — Every breach of contract does not amount to cheating, unless there was deception at the inception.

2026 INSC 265 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH V. GANESAN Vs. STATE REP BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE AND ANOTHER ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Manoj…

You missed