Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Pleading and Evidence — Rejoinder — A respondent/complainant cannot introduce new factual evidence, such as a surveyor’s report assessing quantum of loss, for the first time in a rejoinder
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S. PARK LEATHER INDUSTRIES LTD. ( Before : Sanjay Kumar and Augustine George Masih, JJ. )…
Insurance Law — Condition Precedent — Absurd Consequences — A term in an insurance policy will not be construed as a condition precedent to liability if doing so leads to absurd results, rendering the insurance cover ineffective under foreseeable circumstances (requiring voyage completion before monsoon, which might be prevented by an insured peril itself) — Such conditions may be disregarded if they vitiate the fundamental purpose of the insurance contract
2025 INSC 453 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SOHOM SHIPPING PVT. LTD. Vs. M/S. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER ( Before : B. V. Nagarathna and…
Res Judicata / Constructive Res Judicata — Applicability to SEBI Proceedings — The principles of res judicata and constructive res judicata, based on public policy ensuring finality, apply to proceedings before the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) and its Whole-Time Members (WTMs)
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Vs. RAM KISHORI GUPTA AND ANOTHER ( Before : Sanjay Kumar and K.V. Viswanathan, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…
Rejoinder — A respondent/complainant cannot introduce new factual evidence, such as a surveyor’s report assessing quantum of loss, for the first time in a rejoinder and expect the opposing party (appellant/opposite party) to have denied it in their earlier written statement/reply
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S. PARK LEATHER INDUSTRIES LTD. ( Before : Sanjay Kumar and Augustine George Masih, JJ. )…
Financial assistance equivalent to ‘pay/allowances’ under Haryana Compassionate Assistance Rules must be deducted from MV Act compensation for loss of income to prevent double recovery.
2025 INSC 469 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. SMT. SUNITA SHARMA AND OTHERS ( Before : Sudhanshu Dhulia and K. Vinod Chandran, JJ.…
An exclusive jurisdiction clause in a private employment contract, designating a competent court, is valid and enforceable, ousting jurisdiction of other courts, despite potential unequal bargaining power.
2025 INSC 473 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAKESH KUMAR VERMA Vs. HDFC BANK LTD. ( Before : Dipankar Datta and Manmohan, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No. 2282 of…
An Additional Collector empowered under the M.P. Land Revenue Code can validly permit tribal land transfer under S.165(6)(ii) (outside notified areas) after due consideration, rendering subsequent suo motu revision setting aside such permission erroneous.
2025 INSC 470 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs. DINESH KUMAR AND OTHERS ( Before : Sudhanshu Dhulia and K. Vinod Chandran, JJ. )…
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 438 — Anticipatory Bail — Nature and Scope — Power to grant anticipatory bail under S. 438 is an extraordinary power to be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional cases, not as a matter of routine — Its object is to protect individuals from harassment or humiliation, but this must be balanced against the larger societal interest in maintaining law and order and ensuring the proper course of justice.
2025 INSC 477 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SERIOUS FRAUD INVESTIGATION OFFICE Vs. ADITYA SARDA ( Before : Bela M. Trivedi and Prasanna B. Varale, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…
Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2008 — Sections 7(c), 13(1) & 13(7) — Input Tax Credit (ITC) — Entitlement — Sales exempt under S. 7(c) — Where a dealer makes sales to manufacturer-exporters against Form-E, which are exempt from tax under S. 7(c) pursuant to notifications (dated 24.02.2010 and 25.03.2010), the dealer is not entitled to claim ITC on the purchase tax paid on such goods
2025 INSC 476 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NEHA ENTERPRISES Vs. COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAX, LUCKNOW, UTTAR PRADESH ( Before : Pankaj Mithal and S.V.N Bhatti, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 100 & Order 41, Rules 23, 23A and 25 — Remand by High Court in Second Appeal — Justification — Remand in second appeal should only be ordered when specific conditions under Order 41 are met or when absolutely necessary
2025 INSC 478 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH R. NAGARAJ (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. AND ANOTHER Vs. RAJMANI AND OTHERS ( Before : J. B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, JJ.…





