Supreme Court of India Judgements

47070 Judgements hosted as on 21/03/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Top Tags

Latest Post

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from gratuity amount — Order of March 31, 2017 in Ram Naresh Singh’s case was a concession based on specific facts and not binding precedent, unlike the order of December 15, 2020 in S.L.P — (C) No — 11025 of 2020 which clarified principles of penal rent adjustment Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section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/-. 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 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. 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.
Service

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

Mar 21, 2026 sclaw
Accident

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/-.

Mar 21, 2026 sclaw
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
Service
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
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/-.
Accident
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/-.
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
Cr P C
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
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.
Consumer
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.
Specific Performance

Limitation Act, 1963 – Section 5 – Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) – Section 115 – Specific Relief Act, 1963 – Section 20 – Decree of possession by way of specific performance of the Agreement of Sale – Where the defendant No.2 (the appellant herein) had contested the suit and had put forth the contention that he was a bonafide purchaser without notice HELD the Courts below have on the contrary concluded that the defendants No.1 and 2 being of the same village, the defendant No.2 would have knowledge of the agreement entered into by the defendant No.1 in favour of the plaintiff – Such conclusion is only an assumption

Jan 28, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SUKHWINDER SINGH — Appellant Vs. JAGROOP SINGH AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : R. Banumathi and A.S. Bopanna, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No.…

Rent

Section 9 of the Madras City Tenants’ Protection Act, 1921 HELD ‘actual physical possession of land and building’ would mean and require the tenant to be in actual physical possession. The provisions would not be applicable if the tenant is not in actual physical possession and has given the premises on lease or licence basis to a third party.

Jan 28, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED — Appellant Vs. R. CHANDRAMOULEESWARAN AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : N.V. Ramana, Sanjiv Khanna and Krishna Murari, JJ.…

Bail Granted

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS) – Sections 36A, 37 and 67 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Section 167 – Illegally transportion of heroin – Bail application – prosecution story is that the brother himself did not know what was loaded on the ship till he was informed by the owner of the vessel. Even when the heroin was loaded in the ship it was supposed to go towards Egypt and that would not have been a crime under the NDPS Act – Bail granted

Jan 28, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SUJIT TIWARI — Appellant Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao and Deepak Gupta, JJ. ) Criminal…

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…

Election Laws

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Section 340 – Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006 – Sections 122 and 140 – Recounting of votes- HELDA declaration is issued under Section 140 of the Act that the election of respondent No. 1 as returned candidate is set aside being invalid, and instead we declare the appellant/election petitioner as having been duly elected having secured highest votes

Jan 28, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH CHANDESHWAR SAW — Appellant Vs. BRIJ BHUSHAN PRASAD AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar and Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

Service Matters
Service

Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 – Sections 2(n), 3, 9 and 11 – University Grants Commission (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal of Sexual Harassment of Women Employees and Students in Higher Educational Institutions) Regulations, 2015 – Regulations 5 and 8 – Sexual harassment at workplace – Termination – Whether the order issued under the signatures of ViceChancellor of the Central University of Kerala is simplicitor termination or exfacie stigmatic? HELD exfacie stigmatic, employee reinstated.  

Jan 28, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH DR. VIJAYAKUMARAN C.P.V. — Appellant Vs. CENTRAL UNIVERSITY OF KERALA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar, Hemant Gupta and Dinesh Maheshwari,…

Consumer

No Obligation On Airlines To Escort Passenger To Boarding Gate After Issuing Boarding Pass: SC HELD “After boarding pass is issued, the passenger is expected to proceed towards security channel area and head towards specified boarding gate on his own. There is no contractual obligation on the airlines to escort every passenger, after the boarding pass is issued to him at the check­in counter, up to the boarding gate

Jan 28, 2020 sclaw

The Supreme Court has observed that there is no obligation on the airlines to escort every passenger after issuing him/her a boarding pass at the check-in counter until he/she reaches…

Corporate

Insurance Act, 1938 – Section 64(VB)(3) – No risk can be assumed by the insurer unless the premium payable is received in advance – HELD Proposal does not conclude the contract – A contract postulates an agreement between the parties – In the present case, the insurer while issuing the new policy at a fresh location specifically excluded STFI perils and refunded the premium – To hold to the contrary would be rewriting the agreement between the parties and creating a fresh contract

Jan 28, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHREE AMBICA MEDICAL STORES AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. THE SURAT PEOPLE’S CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr Dhananjaya…

You missed

Service

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

Mar 21, 2026 sclaw
Accident

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/-.

Mar 21, 2026 sclaw
Cr P C

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

Mar 21, 2026 sclaw
Consumer

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.

Mar 21, 2026 sclaw