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.
Property Matters

Agreement to Sell–Mere fixation of time within which contract is to be performed does not make the stipulation as to the time as essence of contract. Agreement to Sell–Alternate plea of refund–In all suits for specific performance, plaintiff is entitled to seek alternative relief in the event the decree of specific performance cannot be granted for any reason.

Mar 3, 2018 sclaw

2008(1) LAW HERALD (SC) 675 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dr. Arijit Pasayat The Hon’ble Mr. Justice P. Sathasivam Civil Appeal No. 647 of 2008…

Property Matters

Jurisdiction of Tribunal-The main question involved in the suit was whether the suit land is a Wakf property or not- Plaintiff says that it is a Wakf property whereas the defendants say that it is not the Wakf property but it is their self- property–This question, can be decided only by the Tribunal and not by the Civil Court.

Mar 2, 2018 sclaw

  (2017) 175 AIC 125 : (2017) AIR(SCW) 2155 : (2017) AIR(SC) 2155 : (2017) 123 ALR 784 : (2017) 4 AndhLD 106 : (2017) 2 ARC 226 : (2017)…

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