Supreme Court of India Judgements

46690 Judgements hosted as on 11/01/2025 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Top Tags

Latest Post

The Supreme Court held that for the purposes of calculating the limitation period for filing objections to an arbitral award, formal notice of the award is not required; awareness or knowledge of the award’s existence is sufficient Supreme Court found that the High Court should not have interfered with the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) as the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) provides a complete mechanism for resolution Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013— Finality of Determinations— The Court established a precedent that once determinations regarding compensation and entitlements have been adjudicated and approved by the Court, they cannot be reopened by the Claims Commission based on changes in policy— This applies specifically to the ten villages for which reports were previously finalised— This means that the Commission should not re-evaluate or re-adjudicate cases that have already been settled. Judicial courts should exercise restraint in interfering with arbitration proceedings, allowing arbitral tribunals discretion in managing proceedings unless there is clear perversity or bad faith. Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 415 and 420 — Cheating — The court found that the elements of cheating under Section 415 were not met — The appellant did not deceive the 4th respondent, nor did the sale deeds cause harm or damage to the 4th respondent — The appellant did not claim to be or represent the 4th respondent, nor did the appellant try to transfer the rights of the 4th respondent — The court cited a previous case, Mohd. Ibrahim vs. State of Bihar, (2009) 8 SCC 751 , stating that while a seller can be accused of defrauding a purchaser if they sell property that does not belong to them, a third party who is not the purchaser may not be able to make such a complaint
The Supreme Court held that for the purposes of calculating the limitation period for filing objections to an arbitral award, formal notice of the award is not required; awareness or knowledge of the award’s existence is sufficient
Arbitration
The Supreme Court held that for the purposes of calculating the limitation period for filing objections to an arbitral award, formal notice of the award is not required; awareness or knowledge of the award’s existence is sufficient
Supreme Court found that the High Court should not have interfered with the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) as the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) provides a complete mechanism for resolution
I B C
Supreme Court found that the High Court should not have interfered with the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) as the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) provides a complete mechanism for resolution
Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013— Finality of Determinations— The Court established a precedent that once determinations regarding compensation and entitlements have been adjudicated and approved by the Court, they cannot be reopened by the Claims Commission based on changes in policy— This applies specifically to the ten villages for which reports were previously finalised— This means that the Commission should not re-evaluate or re-adjudicate cases that have already been settled.
Land Acquisition
Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013— Finality of Determinations— The Court established a precedent that once determinations regarding compensation and entitlements have been adjudicated and approved by the Court, they cannot be reopened by the Claims Commission based on changes in policy— This applies specifically to the ten villages for which reports were previously finalised— This means that the Commission should not re-evaluate or re-adjudicate cases that have already been settled.
Judicial courts should exercise restraint in interfering with arbitration proceedings, allowing arbitral tribunals discretion in managing proceedings unless there is clear perversity or bad faith.
Arbitration
Judicial courts should exercise restraint in interfering with arbitration proceedings, allowing arbitral tribunals discretion in managing proceedings unless there is clear perversity or bad faith.
C P C

Civil Procedure Code, 1908, S.4(1)–Special or Local Law-Applicability of CPC– Held; whenever there is a special, local, or other law which deals with any matter specified in the Code, those laws will continue to have full force and effect notwithstanding that they deal with the same matter as is contained in the Code of Civil Procedure

Mar 10, 2018 sclaw

(2016) 161 AIC 157 : (2016) AIR(SCW) 1213 : (2016) AIR(SC) 1213 : (2016) AllSCR 1820 : (2016) 1 BBCJ 516 : (2016) 3 CalHCN 126 : (2016) 3 CalHCN…

Service Matters
Service

Service Law-Postal Delay-Delay in receipt of application by appointing authority-­Unexplained delay often days by portal department in dispatch of application sent by speed post-Application received one day after prescribed day—Direction issued that application of petitioner not to be rejected on ground of delay of one day in receipt of application.

Mar 8, 2018 sclaw

  (2017) 2 LawHerald(SC) 1701 : (2017) 4 SCT 539 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ASHUTOSH AGNIHOTRI — Appellant Vs. HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH — Respondent ( Before : Madan B. Lokur…

You missed

Arbitration

The Supreme Court held that for the purposes of calculating the limitation period for filing objections to an arbitral award, formal notice of the award is not required; awareness or knowledge of the award’s existence is sufficient

Jan 11, 2025 sclaw
I B C

Supreme Court found that the High Court should not have interfered with the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) as the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) provides a complete mechanism for resolution

Jan 11, 2025 sclaw
Land Acquisition

Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013— Finality of Determinations— The Court established a precedent that once determinations regarding compensation and entitlements have been adjudicated and approved by the Court, they cannot be reopened by the Claims Commission based on changes in policy— This applies specifically to the ten villages for which reports were previously finalised— This means that the Commission should not re-evaluate or re-adjudicate cases that have already been settled.

Jan 11, 2025 sclaw
Arbitration

Judicial courts should exercise restraint in interfering with arbitration proceedings, allowing arbitral tribunals discretion in managing proceedings unless there is clear perversity or bad faith.

Jan 11, 2025 sclaw