Supreme Court of India Judgements

47295 Judgements hosted as on 02/08/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe @ Rs 99/- for 6 months, sclaw@sclaw.in, WA +91 9417245693.

Top Tags

Latest Post

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Claim Petition for death of bachelor — Selection of Multiplier — Multiplier to be determined based on age of deceased and not age of dependents/parents — Deceased was 33 years old at the time of accident — Correct multiplier applicable according to standardized matrix in Sarla Verma and Pranay Sethi is 16 — Argument of insurer that multiplier should correspond to age of parents rejected — MACT and High Court rightly applied multiplier of 16. Legal Representatives Can Claim Motor Accident Compensation Even Without Financial Dependency On Deceased Execution Of Unregistered Agreement To Sell Does Not Terminate Subsisting Landlord-Tenant Relationship Nor Entitle Tenant To Section 53A TP Act Protection A. Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Section 111(e) & (f) — Landlord and Tenant — Determination of lease by express or implied surrender — Execution of agreement to sell by landlord in favour of tenant — Effect on jural relationship — Held, mere execution of an agreement to sell between landlord and tenant does not ipso facto determine the subsisting tenancy — Tenancy is determined only when terms of agreement or unequivocal conduct of parties disclose express or implied surrender — Where agreement to sell contained clause for cancellation and restoration of possession in case loan was not sanctioned, existing possession was referable to tenancy and not to agreement to sell — Landlord-tenant relationship continued to subsist. Appellate Courts Should Not Remand Cases Under Order 41 Rule 23 CPC As A Matter Of Course When Sufficient Evidence Is Available On Record. A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 41 Rules 23 and 24 — Power of Appellate Court to remand — Remand of case to Trial Court for framing of additional issues and fresh evidence — Permissibility — High Court remitted suit regarding one item of property for framing issues on whether sale deed was sham, limitation, and possession — Held, remand is not to be adopted as a matter of ordinary course and reflects incorrect exercise of discretion when sufficient evidence is available on record — Issues already framed by Trial Court were comprehensive enough to cover core disputes — Appellate Court is fully empowered to decide issues on merits or admit additional evidence if warranted, rather than remitting matter to cause unnecessary delay — Remand set aside and appeals restored to High Court for fresh disposal on merits. Extended Period Of Limitation Under Proviso To Section 11A, Central Excise Act Cannot Be Invoked When Facts Are Known To Department Without Wilful Suppression A. Central Excise Act, 1944 — Section 35L — Maintainability of appeal before Supreme Court — Preliminary objection raised by Department that appeal does not come under Section 35L as issue had no relation to rate of duty or valuation — Held, issue raised regarding extended period of limitation on ground of non-inclusion of certain costs in assessable value has an inextricable link with valuation of goods for purposes of assessment — Issue raised in show cause notice fundamentally dealt with valuation of goods — Supreme Court declined to relegate matter to High Court after almost a decade of pendency — Preliminary objection rejected.
Accident

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Claim Petition for death of bachelor — Selection of Multiplier — Multiplier to be determined based on age of deceased and not age of dependents/parents — Deceased was 33 years old at the time of accident — Correct multiplier applicable according to standardized matrix in Sarla Verma and Pranay Sethi is 16 — Argument of insurer that multiplier should correspond to age of parents rejected — MACT and High Court rightly applied multiplier of 16.

Sep 4, 2026 sclaw
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Claim Petition for death of bachelor — Selection of Multiplier — Multiplier to be determined based on age of deceased and not age of dependents/parents — Deceased was 33 years old at the time of accident — Correct multiplier applicable according to standardized matrix in Sarla Verma and Pranay Sethi is 16 — Argument of insurer that multiplier should correspond to age of parents rejected — MACT and High Court rightly applied multiplier of 16.
Accident
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Claim Petition for death of bachelor — Selection of Multiplier — Multiplier to be determined based on age of deceased and not age of dependents/parents — Deceased was 33 years old at the time of accident — Correct multiplier applicable according to standardized matrix in Sarla Verma and Pranay Sethi is 16 — Argument of insurer that multiplier should correspond to age of parents rejected — MACT and High Court rightly applied multiplier of 16.
Legal Representatives Can Claim Motor Accident Compensation Even Without Financial Dependency On Deceased
Accident
Legal Representatives Can Claim Motor Accident Compensation Even Without Financial Dependency On Deceased
Execution Of Unregistered Agreement To Sell Does Not Terminate Subsisting Landlord-Tenant Relationship Nor Entitle Tenant To Section 53A TP Act Protection A. Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Section 111(e) & (f) — Landlord and Tenant — Determination of lease by express or implied surrender — Execution of agreement to sell by landlord in favour of tenant — Effect on jural relationship — Held, mere execution of an agreement to sell between landlord and tenant does not ipso facto determine the subsisting tenancy — Tenancy is determined only when terms of agreement or unequivocal conduct of parties disclose express or implied surrender — Where agreement to sell contained clause for cancellation and restoration of possession in case loan was not sanctioned, existing possession was referable to tenancy and not to agreement to sell — Landlord-tenant relationship continued to subsist.
Property Matters Transfer Of Property Act
Execution Of Unregistered Agreement To Sell Does Not Terminate Subsisting Landlord-Tenant Relationship Nor Entitle Tenant To Section 53A TP Act Protection A. Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Section 111(e) & (f) — Landlord and Tenant — Determination of lease by express or implied surrender — Execution of agreement to sell by landlord in favour of tenant — Effect on jural relationship — Held, mere execution of an agreement to sell between landlord and tenant does not ipso facto determine the subsisting tenancy — Tenancy is determined only when terms of agreement or unequivocal conduct of parties disclose express or implied surrender — Where agreement to sell contained clause for cancellation and restoration of possession in case loan was not sanctioned, existing possession was referable to tenancy and not to agreement to sell — Landlord-tenant relationship continued to subsist.
Appellate Courts Should Not Remand Cases Under Order 41 Rule 23 CPC As A Matter Of Course When Sufficient Evidence Is Available On Record. A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 41 Rules 23 and 24 — Power of Appellate Court to remand — Remand of case to Trial Court for framing of additional issues and fresh evidence — Permissibility — High Court remitted suit regarding one item of property for framing issues on whether sale deed was sham, limitation, and possession — Held, remand is not to be adopted as a matter of ordinary course and reflects incorrect exercise of discretion when sufficient evidence is available on record — Issues already framed by Trial Court were comprehensive enough to cover core disputes — Appellate Court is fully empowered to decide issues on merits or admit additional evidence if warranted, rather than remitting matter to cause unnecessary delay — Remand set aside and appeals restored to High Court for fresh disposal on merits.
C P C
Appellate Courts Should Not Remand Cases Under Order 41 Rule 23 CPC As A Matter Of Course When Sufficient Evidence Is Available On Record. A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 41 Rules 23 and 24 — Power of Appellate Court to remand — Remand of case to Trial Court for framing of additional issues and fresh evidence — Permissibility — High Court remitted suit regarding one item of property for framing issues on whether sale deed was sham, limitation, and possession — Held, remand is not to be adopted as a matter of ordinary course and reflects incorrect exercise of discretion when sufficient evidence is available on record — Issues already framed by Trial Court were comprehensive enough to cover core disputes — Appellate Court is fully empowered to decide issues on merits or admit additional evidence if warranted, rather than remitting matter to cause unnecessary delay — Remand set aside and appeals restored to High Court for fresh disposal on merits.
Land Acquisition

Land Acquisition Act, 1894, S. 4 and S.3(c)–Issuance of Notification-­Delegation of authority—State is empowered to appoint any officer other than a Collector or Deputy Commissioner to act as Collector—Such officer is empowered to extent of purpose mentioned in notification designating him as Collector—But relying upon same notification the designated officer cannot act as Collector in respect of other acquisition proceedings-Impugned notification u/s 4 issued by designated officer without being empowered for that is set aside.

Dec 16, 2018 sclaw

2018(4) Law Herald (SC) 2767 : 2018 LawHerald.Org 1610 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before           Hon’ble Mr. Justice Madan B. Lokur Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta Civil Appeal…

Bail Granted

In present case, investigation was not conducted by rank of police officer as directed by High Court-On this ground charge  sheet was returned—Since, on 90th day there was no charge sheet before Magistrate to assess the situation and subsequent filing of charge sheet even after two days would be of no consequence-­Accused held entitled to default bail—Bail granted.

Dec 16, 2018 sclaw

2018(4) Law Herald (SC) 2758 : 2018 LawHerald.Org 1609 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before Hon’ble Mr. Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre                            Hon’ble Mr. Justice Uday Umesh Lalit Criminal Appeal…

Cheque Dishonour

Dishonour of cheque–Vicarious liability–Offences by companies–Liability arises from being in-charge of and responsible for the conduct of the business of the company at the relevant time when the offence was committed and not on the basis of merely holding a designation or office in a company– Responsibility is on the complainant to make specific averments as are required under the law in the complaint so as to make the accused vicariously liable . Dishonour of cheque–Vicarious liability on the part of a person must be pleaded and proved and not inferred.

Dec 14, 2018 sclaw

2010(2) LAW HERALD (SC) 737 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice P. Sathasivam The Hon’ble Mr. Justice H.L. Dattu Criminal Appeal Nos. 320-336 of 2010…

Evidence Act

Evidence Act, 1872, S. 35–Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2000, S. 68–Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Rules 2001, R. 22–Age of Juvenile–Determination of age–An entry in a school register may not be a public document and, thus, must be proved in accordance with law–Medical opinion rendered in this case corroborates the entry made in the Admission register of the school ,having been proved in accordance with law, no reason as to why the same should not be taken into consideration–No infirmity in the order passed by the High Court.                                                    

Dec 14, 2018 sclaw

2010(1) LAW HERALD (SC) 732 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.B. Sinha The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Cyriac Joseph Criminal Appeal No. 909 of 2009…

Service Matters
Service

Appeal for enhancement of compensation–No submission made against the order of the High Court denying liberalised pension, hence not interfered with–Earnings of the deceased were a source of sustenance for the family–Besides, loss of a son at such a young age creates a void in the family, which cannot be filed up by making payment of any compensation–SC enhanced  the amount to Rs. 2 lakhs.  

Dec 14, 2018 sclaw

2010(1) LAW HERALD (SC) 729 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.S. Sirpurkar The Hon’ble Dr. Justice Mukundakam Sharma Civil Appeal No. 140 of 2010…

Murder

Kidnapping for ransom and murder–All three accused-appellant committed offence of murder in a pre-planned manner by using scientific methods–Soon after kidnapping, deceased was reduced to a corpus with the help of chemicals and he was done to death in inhuman, diabolical and dastardly manner–Sentence  converted from death sentence to life imprisonment

Dec 13, 2018 sclaw

2010(1) LAW HERALD (SC) 713 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Harjit Singh Bedi The Hon’ble Mr. Justice J.M. Panchal Criminal Appeal Nos. 1396-1397 of…

Service Matters
Service

Suspension–If the revision takes effect from a date prior to the date of suspension of a Government servant then he would be entitled to benefit of increment  pay and in the subsistence allowance for the period of suspension, if the revision scale of pay takes effect from a date falling within the period of suspension then the benefit of revision of pay and the subsistence allowances will accrue to him, only after reinstatement.

Dec 13, 2018 sclaw

2010(1) LAW HERALD (SC) 706 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.V. Raveendran The Hon’ble Mr. Justice K.S. Radhakrishnan Civil Appeal No. 1096 of 2010…

You missed

Accident

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Claim Petition for death of bachelor — Selection of Multiplier — Multiplier to be determined based on age of deceased and not age of dependents/parents — Deceased was 33 years old at the time of accident — Correct multiplier applicable according to standardized matrix in Sarla Verma and Pranay Sethi is 16 — Argument of insurer that multiplier should correspond to age of parents rejected — MACT and High Court rightly applied multiplier of 16.

Sep 4, 2026 sclaw
Accident

Legal Representatives Can Claim Motor Accident Compensation Even Without Financial Dependency On Deceased

Aug 16, 2026 sclaw
Property Matters Transfer Of Property Act

Execution Of Unregistered Agreement To Sell Does Not Terminate Subsisting Landlord-Tenant Relationship Nor Entitle Tenant To Section 53A TP Act Protection A. Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Section 111(e) & (f) — Landlord and Tenant — Determination of lease by express or implied surrender — Execution of agreement to sell by landlord in favour of tenant — Effect on jural relationship — Held, mere execution of an agreement to sell between landlord and tenant does not ipso facto determine the subsisting tenancy — Tenancy is determined only when terms of agreement or unequivocal conduct of parties disclose express or implied surrender — Where agreement to sell contained clause for cancellation and restoration of possession in case loan was not sanctioned, existing possession was referable to tenancy and not to agreement to sell — Landlord-tenant relationship continued to subsist.

Aug 16, 2026 sclaw
C P C

Appellate Courts Should Not Remand Cases Under Order 41 Rule 23 CPC As A Matter Of Course When Sufficient Evidence Is Available On Record. A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 41 Rules 23 and 24 — Power of Appellate Court to remand — Remand of case to Trial Court for framing of additional issues and fresh evidence — Permissibility — High Court remitted suit regarding one item of property for framing issues on whether sale deed was sham, limitation, and possession — Held, remand is not to be adopted as a matter of ordinary course and reflects incorrect exercise of discretion when sufficient evidence is available on record — Issues already framed by Trial Court were comprehensive enough to cover core disputes — Appellate Court is fully empowered to decide issues on merits or admit additional evidence if warranted, rather than remitting matter to cause unnecessary delay — Remand set aside and appeals restored to High Court for fresh disposal on merits.

Aug 16, 2026 sclaw