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.

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 45 — Reference to arbitration — Existence of arbitration agreement — Contract not signed by one party — Parties acted upon the contract, including lifting goods and issuing Letters of Credit — Emails confirming terms and modifications — Held, agreement to arbitrate is inferred from conduct and electronic communications, even without signatures — Mere failure to sign does not invalidate the arbitration agreement if parties’ conduct demonstrates acceptance of terms.

2025 INSC 1036 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH GLENCORE INTERNATIONAL AG Vs. M/S. SHREE GANESH METALS AND ANOTHER ( Before : Sanjay Kumar and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ. )…

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Sections 47 and 49 — Enforcement of Foreign Award — High Court found no grounds to refuse recognition of the award and held it enforceable, subject to RBI approval — Supreme Court agreed with this conclusion and directed execution proceedings to proceed.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH GPE (INDIA) LTD AND OTHERS Vs. TWARIT CONSULTANCY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANOTHER ( Before : J.B. Pardiwala and K.V. Viswanathan, JJ. ) Petition(s)…

Goa Children’s Act, 2003 — Section 8(2) and Section 2(m) — Child Abuse — Conviction unsustainable — Accused allegedly casually hit injured child with own son’s school bag — No evidence of deliberate maltreatment, cruelty, exploitation or ill-treatment intended to cause harm — Act exceeded mere incidental quarrel — Medical examination could not rule out possibility of injury from fall — High Court also reduced sentence substantially — Held, conviction for child abuse not made out.

2025 INSC 1041 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SANTOSH SAHADEV KHAJNEKAR Vs. THE STATE OF GOA ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Sandeep Mehta, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No(s).…

Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 302, 376(2)(g), 201 – Conviction and sentence for rape and murder – Appeal against – Circumstantial evidence – Prosecution failed to establish complete chain of incriminating circumstances beyond reasonable doubt – Testimony of prosecution witnesses contained contradictions and improbabilities – Suspicious conduct of accused attributed as improvement – Reliance on DNA reports found unjustified due to failure to establish sanctity and chain of custody of samples – Supplementary DNA report inadmissible as expert was not recalled and report not put to accused.

2025 INSC 1042 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH PUTAI Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH ( Before : Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol and Sandeep Mehta, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No(s).…

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 7 Rule 11 — Rejection of plaint — Cause of action— Amendment of plaint — Substitution of proprietor for proprietorship concern — Held, a proprietorship concern is not a juristic person but a trade name for an individual business. The proprietor is the real party in interest. Substituting the proprietor for the proprietorship concern does not negate the cause of action, especially when the proprietor is the signatory to the lease deed.

2025 INSC 1046 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DOGIPARTHI VENKATA SATISH AND ANOTHER Vs. PILLA DURGA PRASAD AND OTHERS ( Before : Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, JJ. )…

Service Matters

Tripura State Rifles Act, 1983 and Tripura State Rifles (Recruitment) Rules, 1984 — Recruitment of Enrolled Followers — Cancellation of ongoing recruitment process midway due to a new policy decision — Held, executive instructions cannot override statutory rules or the Act — Cancellation of recruitment process under executive instructions without amending the Act and Rules is arbitrary and illegal — New Recruitment Policy (NRP) stating that recommendations would be applicable prospectively cannot be applied to an ongoing process where interviews were already conducted.

2025 INSC 1049 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PARTHA DAS AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF TRIPURA AND OTHERS ( Before : J.K. Maheshwari and Rajesh Bindal, JJ. )…

Service Matters

Boilers Act, 1923 — Sections 2(c), 28, 28A, 29 — Chief Inspector, Deputy Chief Inspector and Inspector (Qualification and Experience) Rules, 2012; Recruitment Rules, 2013 — Recruitment for Inspector of Boilers — Cancellation of ongoing recruitment process due to new recruitment policy framing weightage for interview — Held, new policy, being an executive instruction, cannot override statutory rules governing recruitment — Change of rules mid-game impermissible — Candidate has legitimate expectation of fair completion of recruitment — New policy, in absence of express retrospective application, applied prospectively and not to ongoing recruitment — Cancellation arbitrary and unjust.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF TRIPURA AND OTHERS Vs. ARUNABHA SAHA AND ANOTHER ( Before : J.K. Maheshwari and Rajesh Bindal, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No.…

Service Matters

Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 309 — Tripura Civil Service Rules, 1967 and Tripura Police Service Rules — Recruitment Rules framed under Article 309 have statutory force — Executive instructions (New Recruitment Policy) cannot override statutory rules unless rules are amended — Cancellation of a recruitment process at an advanced stage (after main examination) based on an executive policy change without amending statutory rules is unjustified and arbitrary.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF TRIPURA AND ANOTHER Vs. SAMUDRA DEBBARMA AND OTHER ( Before : J.K. Maheshwari and Rajesh Bindal, JJ. ) Civil Appeal Nos.…

You missed