Supreme Court of India Judgements

47020 Judgements hosted as on 04/01/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Top Tags

Latest Post

Meritorious reserved category candidates must be considered against unreserved vacancies at the screening stage without availing any concession, prioritizing merit over category bias. The Commission under the WBCE Act has jurisdiction to adjudicate deficiencies in patient care services and qualifications of personnel, distinct from medical negligence handled by State Medical Councils. Income Tax Act, 1961 — Section 37(1) — Revenue Expenditure vs. Capital Expenditure — Non-compete fee — Whether payment of non-compete fee constitutes allowable revenue expenditure or capital expenditure — Non-compete fee is paid to restrain a competitor, which protects or enhances the business profitability and facilitates carrying on the business more efficiently — Such payment neither creates a new asset nor increases the profit-earning apparatus for the payer, meaning the enduring advantage, if any, is not in the capital field — The length of time of the advantage is not determinative if the advantage merely facilitates business operations, leaving fixed assets untouched — Payment of non-compete fee made by the appellant (formed as a joint venture) to L&T (previous partner) to restrain L&T from competing for 7 years was essentially to keep a potential competitor out and ensure the appellant operated more efficiently and profitably, without creating a new capital asset or monopoly — Held: Payment of non-compete fee is an allowable revenue expenditure under Section 37(1) of the Act. (Paras 16, 25-29) Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 118 — Competency of child witness — Effect of delay and tutoring — Although a minor child is competent to testify, the reliability and evidentiary value of testimony given many years after the event, especially when the child has been residing with the complainant’s family (maternal grandparents), is significantly affected by the high possibility of memory distortion and tutoring. (Paras 5, 7, 10.2) Service Law — High Court Staff — Regularization — Discrimination — Appellants (Operator-cum-Data Entry Assistants/Routine Grade Clerks) appointed by Chief Justice under Rules 8(a)(i), 41, and 45 of Allahabad High Court Officers and Staff (Conditions of Service and Conduct) Rules, 1976 — High Court refused regularization of Appellants while regularizing numerous similarly situated employees appointed through the same channel — Justification based on whether initial appointment was labelled ‘ad-hoc’ or whether appointment letter stipulated an examination — Held, distinction based solely on stipulations in appointment letters, when the channel of appointment and nature of work are identical, is arbitrary, unreasonable, and superficial — Such differential treatment violates Articles 14, 16, and 21 of the Constitution, as equals must be treated equally without rational differentia. (Paras 3, 4, 17, 23-28)
Meritorious reserved category candidates must be considered against unreserved vacancies at the screening stage without availing any concession, prioritizing merit over category bias.
Education
Meritorious reserved category candidates must be considered against unreserved vacancies at the screening stage without availing any concession, prioritizing merit over category bias.
The Commission under the WBCE Act has jurisdiction to adjudicate deficiencies in patient care services and qualifications of personnel, distinct from medical negligence handled by State Medical Councils.
State Laws
The Commission under the WBCE Act has jurisdiction to adjudicate deficiencies in patient care services and qualifications of personnel, distinct from medical negligence handled by State Medical Councils.
Income Tax Act, 1961 — Section 37(1) — Revenue Expenditure vs. Capital Expenditure — Non-compete fee — Whether payment of non-compete fee constitutes allowable revenue expenditure or capital expenditure — Non-compete fee is paid to restrain a competitor, which protects or enhances the business profitability and facilitates carrying on the business more efficiently — Such payment neither creates a new asset nor increases the profit-earning apparatus for the payer, meaning the enduring advantage, if any, is not in the capital field — The length of time of the advantage is not determinative if the advantage merely facilitates business operations, leaving fixed assets untouched — Payment of non-compete fee made by the appellant (formed as a joint venture) to L&T (previous partner) to restrain L&T from competing for 7 years was essentially to keep a potential competitor out and ensure the appellant operated more efficiently and profitably, without creating a new capital asset or monopoly — Held: Payment of non-compete fee is an allowable revenue expenditure under Section 37(1) of the Act. (Paras 16, 25-29)
Direct Taxation Income Tax Act
Income Tax Act, 1961 — Section 37(1) — Revenue Expenditure vs. Capital Expenditure — Non-compete fee — Whether payment of non-compete fee constitutes allowable revenue expenditure or capital expenditure — Non-compete fee is paid to restrain a competitor, which protects or enhances the business profitability and facilitates carrying on the business more efficiently — Such payment neither creates a new asset nor increases the profit-earning apparatus for the payer, meaning the enduring advantage, if any, is not in the capital field — The length of time of the advantage is not determinative if the advantage merely facilitates business operations, leaving fixed assets untouched — Payment of non-compete fee made by the appellant (formed as a joint venture) to L&T (previous partner) to restrain L&T from competing for 7 years was essentially to keep a potential competitor out and ensure the appellant operated more efficiently and profitably, without creating a new capital asset or monopoly — Held: Payment of non-compete fee is an allowable revenue expenditure under Section 37(1) of the Act. (Paras 16, 25-29)
Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 118 — Competency of child witness — Effect of delay and tutoring — Although a minor child is competent to testify, the reliability and evidentiary value of testimony given many years after the event, especially when the child has been residing with the complainant’s family (maternal grandparents), is significantly affected by the high possibility of memory distortion and tutoring. (Paras 5, 7, 10.2)
Evidence Act
Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 118 — Competency of child witness — Effect of delay and tutoring — Although a minor child is competent to testify, the reliability and evidentiary value of testimony given many years after the event, especially when the child has been residing with the complainant’s family (maternal grandparents), is significantly affected by the high possibility of memory distortion and tutoring. (Paras 5, 7, 10.2)
Education

Admission in Medical Courses – Benefit of ‘First Priority’ Policy – Candidates whose parents were domiciles of the UT of Dadra and Nagar Haveli or Daman and Diu and had studied the same place(s) mentioned above for at least the classes of 8th to 12th standards, their children are eligibile for the same

Dec 26, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MUSKAN SAMIR MODASIA — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Indira Banerjee and Hemant Gupta, JJ. ) Petition(s)…

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Section 34 – HELD – this is a case where the inferences drawn are a non-sequitur to the plain and simple words of the e-mails/communications read in evidence, which were before the Tribunal and which do not support the inferences drawn. In this view of the matter, clearly the approach of the majority of arbitrators is arbitrary and capricious; and therefore cannot pass judicial muster. (See : Associate Builders v. DDA, (2015) 3 SCC 49)

Dec 20, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ANGLO AMERICAN METALLURGICAL COAL PTY LIMITED — Appellant Vs. MMTC LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : Rohinton Fali Nariman and K.M. Joseph, JJ. )…

Constitution

FARMERS AGITATION : We clarify that this Court will not interfere with the protest in question. Indeed the right to protest is part of a fundamental right and can as a matter of fact, be exercised subject to public order. There can certainly be no impediment in the exercise of such rights as long as   it is non-violent and does not result in damage to the life and properties of other citizens and is in accordance with law. We are of the view at this stage that the farmers’ protest should be allowed to continue without impediment

Dec 17, 2020 sclaw

1 ITEM NO.28 TO 32 Court 1 (Video Conferencing) SECTION X/PIL-W S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A…

Bail Declined

Dowry death – Cancellation of Anticipatory Bail of in-laws of the deceased- Grant of anticipatory bail in such a serious offence would operate to obstruct the investigation – It is a well settled principle of law that the setting aside of an “unjustified, illegal or perverse order” granting bail is distinct from the cancellation of bail – Investigation transferred to CBI

Dec 17, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH DR. NARESH KUMAR MANGLA — Appellant Vs. SMT. ANITA AGARWAL AND OTHERS ETC. — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, Indu Malhotra…

Service Matters
Service

CAS promotion, the incumbent teacher must have holding a substantive sanctioned post, as much as CAS promotion being a personal promotion to the incumbent teacher – promotion under the scheme, is to be given benefit only from the entry of service of such incumbent into the University – Action of university upheld writ dismissed

Dec 17, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH REGISTRAR, KARNATAKA UNIVERSITY AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. DR. PRABHUGOUDA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Ashok Bhushan, R. Subhash Reddy and M.R.…

Corporate

Competition Act, 2002 – Section 3 – Anti-competitive agreements – Ola and Uber do not facilitate cartelization or anti-competitive practices between drivers, who are independent individuals, who act independently of each other, so as to attract the application of section 3 of the Act, as has been held by both the CCI and the NCLAT.

Dec 17, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH SAMIR AGRAWAL — Appellant Vs. COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Rohinton Fali Nariman, K.M. Joseph and Krishna Murari,…

Corporate

Winding up proceeding pending – Transfer of – High court to NCLT -Words “party or parties” appearing in the 5th proviso to Clause (c) of Sub-section (1) of Section 434 would take within its fold any creditor of the company in liquidation – If any creditor is aggrieved by any decision of the official liquidator, he is entitled under the 1956 Act to challenge the same before the Company Court

Dec 17, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH ACTION ISPAT AND POWER PRIVATE LIMITED — Appellant Vs. SHYAM METALICS AND ENERGY LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : Rohinton Fali Nariman, K.M. Joseph…

You missed

Education

Meritorious reserved category candidates must be considered against unreserved vacancies at the screening stage without availing any concession, prioritizing merit over category bias.

Jan 4, 2026 sclaw
State Laws

The Commission under the WBCE Act has jurisdiction to adjudicate deficiencies in patient care services and qualifications of personnel, distinct from medical negligence handled by State Medical Councils.

Jan 4, 2026 sclaw
Direct Taxation Income Tax Act

Income Tax Act, 1961 — Section 37(1) — Revenue Expenditure vs. Capital Expenditure — Non-compete fee — Whether payment of non-compete fee constitutes allowable revenue expenditure or capital expenditure — Non-compete fee is paid to restrain a competitor, which protects or enhances the business profitability and facilitates carrying on the business more efficiently — Such payment neither creates a new asset nor increases the profit-earning apparatus for the payer, meaning the enduring advantage, if any, is not in the capital field — The length of time of the advantage is not determinative if the advantage merely facilitates business operations, leaving fixed assets untouched — Payment of non-compete fee made by the appellant (formed as a joint venture) to L&T (previous partner) to restrain L&T from competing for 7 years was essentially to keep a potential competitor out and ensure the appellant operated more efficiently and profitably, without creating a new capital asset or monopoly — Held: Payment of non-compete fee is an allowable revenue expenditure under Section 37(1) of the Act. (Paras 16, 25-29)

Jan 4, 2026 sclaw
Evidence Act

Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 118 — Competency of child witness — Effect of delay and tutoring — Although a minor child is competent to testify, the reliability and evidentiary value of testimony given many years after the event, especially when the child has been residing with the complainant’s family (maternal grandparents), is significantly affected by the high possibility of memory distortion and tutoring. (Paras 5, 7, 10.2)

Jan 4, 2026 sclaw