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.…
Where an advertisement was issued subsequent to the notification of the 2020 Rules providing 33% horizontal reservation for women, and specified certain posts (like DSP ‘SC Sports’) as reserved for women (‘SC Sports (Women)’), this reservation specification within the advertisement, implementing the mandate of the 2020 Rules, is valid for that recruitment process, unless the advertisement itself is successfully challenged or withdrawn.
2025 INSC 479 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PRABHJOT KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS ( Before : Sudhanshu Dhulia and K. Vinod Chandran, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…
For an offence under Section 3(1)(r) (intentional insult/intimidation) or Section 3(1)(s) (abuse by caste name) of the SC/ST Act, the act must occur “within public view”
2025 INSC 459 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HUTU ANSARI @ FUTU ANSAR AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND ( Before : Sudhanshu Dhulia and K. Vinod Chandran,…
Preliminary enquiry is not mandatory for registering a disproportionate assets FIR under the PC Act if the Superintendent of Police’s order under S.17 relies on sufficient material (like a source report) demonstrating application of mind.
2025 INSC 471 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. SRI CHANNAKESHAVA.H.D. AND ANOTHER ( Before : Sudhanshu Dhulia and K. Vinod Chandran, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…








