Supreme Court of India Judgements

47195 Judgements hosted as on 27/04/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Top Tags

Latest Post

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Anticipatory Bail — Power of Court to Direct Surrender — When an anticipatory bail application is rejected, the court does not have the jurisdiction to direct the petitioner to surrender — The rejection of anticipatory bail means that an application for pre-arrest bail has been denied, and the subsequent steps regarding arrest and regular bail should follow the normal procedure as per law. Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) — Sections 7, 3(10), 5(7), 5(8) — Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) — Admission of petition — Appeal against NCLAT order setting aside NCLT order and directing admission of Section 7 petition — Held, IBC is not a debt recovery legislation but for reorganisation and insolvency resolution — Initiation of CIRP as a substitute for execution of a civil court decree is an abuse of process. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 9 — Petition under Section 9 at post-award stage by unsuccessful party — Maintainability — Bombay, Delhi, Madras and Karnataka High Courts held such petitions not maintainable — Telangana, Gujarat and Punjab & Haryana High Courts held such petitions maintainable — Supreme Court held that any party to an arbitration agreement, including an unsuccessful party, can invoke Section 9 at the post-award stage, overruling the former judgments. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 6 Rule 17 — Amendment of pleadings — Permissibility while considering grant of leave to amend a plaint — Court can examine the merits/demerits of the case — Landlord filed suit for eviction based on bonafide need and other grounds — During appeal, landlord died — Legal heirs sought to amend plaint to incorporate their bonafide need, including that of appellant’s wife and son — Trial Court dismissed the suit — Appellate Bench allowed amendment, directing issue of bonafide requirement to be sent back to Trial Court for evidence — High Court, in writ petition, set aside amendment allowing fresh suit — Supreme Court held that High Court erred in interfering with the discretion of Appellate Bench under Article 227, as amendment was permissible. Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Section 37(1)(b)(ii) — Grant of bail in commercial quantity cases — Twin Conditions — Mandatory nature — High Court must record satisfaction on reasonable grounds for believing accused is not guilty and not likely to commit offence while on bail — Failure to record satisfaction vitiates bail order — Speedy trial under Article 21 to be harmoniously read with Section 37, not to override it — Bail granted without recorded satisfaction is unsustainable.
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Anticipatory Bail — Power of Court to Direct Surrender — When an anticipatory bail application is rejected, the court does not have the jurisdiction to direct the petitioner to surrender — The rejection of anticipatory bail means that an application for pre-arrest bail has been denied, and the subsequent steps regarding arrest and regular bail should follow the normal procedure as per law.
Anticipatory Bail Cr P C
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Anticipatory Bail — Power of Court to Direct Surrender — When an anticipatory bail application is rejected, the court does not have the jurisdiction to direct the petitioner to surrender — The rejection of anticipatory bail means that an application for pre-arrest bail has been denied, and the subsequent steps regarding arrest and regular bail should follow the normal procedure as per law.
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) — Sections 7, 3(10), 5(7), 5(8) — Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) — Admission of petition — Appeal against NCLAT order setting aside NCLT order and directing admission of Section 7 petition — Held, IBC is not a debt recovery legislation but for reorganisation and insolvency resolution — Initiation of CIRP as a substitute for execution of a civil court decree is an abuse of process.
I B C
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) — Sections 7, 3(10), 5(7), 5(8) — Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) — Admission of petition — Appeal against NCLAT order setting aside NCLT order and directing admission of Section 7 petition — Held, IBC is not a debt recovery legislation but for reorganisation and insolvency resolution — Initiation of CIRP as a substitute for execution of a civil court decree is an abuse of process.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 9 — Petition under Section 9 at post-award stage by unsuccessful party — Maintainability — Bombay, Delhi, Madras and Karnataka High Courts held such petitions not maintainable — Telangana, Gujarat and Punjab & Haryana High Courts held such petitions maintainable — Supreme Court held that any party to an arbitration agreement, including an unsuccessful party, can invoke Section 9 at the post-award stage, overruling the former judgments.
Arbitration
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 9 — Petition under Section 9 at post-award stage by unsuccessful party — Maintainability — Bombay, Delhi, Madras and Karnataka High Courts held such petitions not maintainable — Telangana, Gujarat and Punjab & Haryana High Courts held such petitions maintainable — Supreme Court held that any party to an arbitration agreement, including an unsuccessful party, can invoke Section 9 at the post-award stage, overruling the former judgments.
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 6 Rule 17 — Amendment of pleadings — Permissibility while considering grant of leave to amend a plaint — Court can examine the merits/demerits of the case — Landlord filed suit for eviction based on bonafide need and other grounds — During appeal, landlord died — Legal heirs sought to amend plaint to incorporate their bonafide need, including that of appellant’s wife and son — Trial Court dismissed the suit — Appellate Bench allowed amendment, directing issue of bonafide requirement to be sent back to Trial Court for evidence — High Court, in writ petition, set aside amendment allowing fresh suit — Supreme Court held that High Court erred in interfering with the discretion of Appellate Bench under Article 227, as amendment was permissible.
C P C Rent
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 6 Rule 17 — Amendment of pleadings — Permissibility while considering grant of leave to amend a plaint — Court can examine the merits/demerits of the case — Landlord filed suit for eviction based on bonafide need and other grounds — During appeal, landlord died — Legal heirs sought to amend plaint to incorporate their bonafide need, including that of appellant’s wife and son — Trial Court dismissed the suit — Appellate Bench allowed amendment, directing issue of bonafide requirement to be sent back to Trial Court for evidence — High Court, in writ petition, set aside amendment allowing fresh suit — Supreme Court held that High Court erred in interfering with the discretion of Appellate Bench under Article 227, as amendment was permissible.
Service Matters
Service

Punjab Civil Services Rules – Rules 4.22 and 4.23 – Grant of pension by adding interruption of service – It is clear that the case of the appellant was not covered by Rule 4.23 and further the request for granting relaxation by the Government from Rule 4.23 was not acceded to – When the State has refused to grant relaxation in the rule, the refusal by the respondent for adding the period of interruption for pensionary benefit cannot be faulted

Jan 6, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SURINDER NATH KESAR — Appellant Vs. BOARD OF SCHOOL EDUCATION AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Ashok Bhushan and M.R. Shah, JJ. )…

Narcotics

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 – Sections 18 and 50 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Section 313 – Possession of 1kg 750 grams of opium – Conviction and sentence – Appeal against – Merely because prosecution has not examined any independent witness, same would not necessarily lead to the conclusion that the appellant has been falsely implicated.

Jan 6, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH SURINDER KUMAR — Appellant Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB — Respondent ( Before : N.V. Ramana, R. Subhash Reddy and B.R. Gavai, JJ. ) Criminal…

Consumer

H E L D – The respondents had paid 85% of the agreed consideration, together with the agreement to sell, and even the balance at the time when the sale deed was executed on 11 February 2013. Having paid the consideration, it was evidently not in their interest to delay the receipt of possession. Though the sale deed records that possession was handed over, it is clear from the contemporaneous record that it was only on 28 August 2014 that all the sets of keys of the apartment were handed over to the respondents. Consequently, the appellant would be liable to pay reasonable compensation to the respondents for the period between 9 February 2013 and 28 August 2014, in addition to the contractual payment due for the period between 8 August 2012 and 8 February 2013.

Dec 25, 2019 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S LANCO HILLS TECHNOLOGY PARK PRIVATE LIMITED — Appellant Vs. MANISHA BALKRISHNA KULKARNI AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud…

C P C

INJUNCTION – The division bench held that there is no documentary evidence to prima facie show that the Appellant – Developer is in physical possession of the suit property. Furthermore, the issue whether the Appellant – Developer has paid part consideration for the entire suit property was required to be determined in the trial. The division bench took the view that the Appellant – Developer had not made out a prima facie case for grant of Temporary Injunction. The Respondents being the lawful owners of the suit property, granting such an injunction would cause irreparable loss and hardship to them.

Dec 25, 2019 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH SAKETA VAKSANA LLP AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. KAUKUTLA SARALA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit, Indu Malhotra and Krishna…

Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 143, 147, 148, 302 read with Section 149 – Explosive Substances Act, 1908 – Sections 3 and 5 – Unlawful assembly – Persons were armed with deadly weapons like country­ made bombs etc. HELD the scope of interference in an appeal against acquittal is very limited, the appellate court set aside the judgment of the trial court. It is obvious that the High Court also did not find material evidence to convict the accused and, therefore, set aside the judgment and remitted the matter to the trial court. In a criminal case, remand is not to be ordered as a matter of course. It is only if there is a minis­trial or some technical issues have arisen that such an order may be made but in very rare circumstances. – The trial court was justified in acquitting the accused

Dec 25, 2019 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KOOLI SASEENDRAN AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. STATE OF KERALA ETC. — Respondent ( Before : Deepak Gupta and Aniruddha Bose, JJ. ) Criminal…

Service Matters
Service

Bihar Health Service (Appointment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2013 – Rules 5 and 6(iii) – Grant of weightage on the basis of work experience – Rule 5 and 6(iii) of the Bihar Health Service (Appointment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2013 are construed to include the experience gained by a doctor in any hospital run by the Bihar Government or its instrumentalities, as well as any other non­private hospital (including those run by the Central Government, Municipalities and Panchayati Raj Institutions; or other public authorities) within the territory of Bihar

Dec 25, 2019 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DR. (MAJOR) MEETA SAHAI — Appellant Vs. STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Deepak Gupta and Surya Kant, JJ. )…

Consumer

Chandigarh Housing Board {hereinafter ‘CHB’) invited bids to implement an integrated project with residential, commercial, and other related infrastructure facilities at the Rajiv Gandhi Chandigarh Technological Park in Chandigarh- HELD We also note that the finding in the arbitration award dated 09.01.2015 as to the apportionment of liability between the Developer and CHB to pay the principal sum and general compensation, must be given effect.

Dec 23, 2019 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH CHANDIGARH HOUSING BOARD — Appellant Vs. M/S. PARASVANATH DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Mohan M. Shantanagoudar and R. Subhash…

You missed

Anticipatory Bail Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Anticipatory Bail — Power of Court to Direct Surrender — When an anticipatory bail application is rejected, the court does not have the jurisdiction to direct the petitioner to surrender — The rejection of anticipatory bail means that an application for pre-arrest bail has been denied, and the subsequent steps regarding arrest and regular bail should follow the normal procedure as per law.

Apr 27, 2026 sclaw
I B C

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) — Sections 7, 3(10), 5(7), 5(8) — Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) — Admission of petition — Appeal against NCLAT order setting aside NCLT order and directing admission of Section 7 petition — Held, IBC is not a debt recovery legislation but for reorganisation and insolvency resolution — Initiation of CIRP as a substitute for execution of a civil court decree is an abuse of process.

Apr 27, 2026 sclaw
Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 9 — Petition under Section 9 at post-award stage by unsuccessful party — Maintainability — Bombay, Delhi, Madras and Karnataka High Courts held such petitions not maintainable — Telangana, Gujarat and Punjab & Haryana High Courts held such petitions maintainable — Supreme Court held that any party to an arbitration agreement, including an unsuccessful party, can invoke Section 9 at the post-award stage, overruling the former judgments.

Apr 27, 2026 sclaw
C P C Rent

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 6 Rule 17 — Amendment of pleadings — Permissibility while considering grant of leave to amend a plaint — Court can examine the merits/demerits of the case — Landlord filed suit for eviction based on bonafide need and other grounds — During appeal, landlord died — Legal heirs sought to amend plaint to incorporate their bonafide need, including that of appellant’s wife and son — Trial Court dismissed the suit — Appellate Bench allowed amendment, directing issue of bonafide requirement to be sent back to Trial Court for evidence — High Court, in writ petition, set aside amendment allowing fresh suit — Supreme Court held that High Court erred in interfering with the discretion of Appellate Bench under Article 227, as amendment was permissible.

Apr 27, 2026 sclaw