(1) SUNIL KUMAR KHUSHWAHA Vs. KATRAGADDA SATYANARAYANA AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-05-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Compensation — Assessment of Functional Disability — Amputation of Leg — Impact on Vocation (Fruit Seller with Shop) — In determining compensation for permanent disability due to amputation of the right leg from the knee, the functional disability must be assessed in relation to the claimant’s vocation and its impact on earning capacity — Where a claimant, a fruit seller operating from a shop and filing income tax returns, suffers such amputation (physical disability 5 India Law Library Docid # 2425484
(2) KANUBHAI GOKALBHAI BARIYA Vs. JAYDIPSINH GOPALSINH PAREKHIYA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-05-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Compensation — Functional Disability vs. Physical Disability — Amputation and Deformity — In determining compensation for permanent disability, the assessment should focus on functional disability rather than merely physical disability — Where a claimant suffers amputation of the right leg below the knee (assessed physical disability 80%) and deformity of the right hand (assessed physical disability 10%), and medical evidence indicates the leg stump is deformed with no India Law Library Docid # 2425485
(3) P. NALLAMMAL Vs. STATE BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VIGILANCE AND ANTICORRUPTION POLICE, DINDIGUL, TAMIL NADU[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-05-2025 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 13(1)(e) read with Section 109 IPC — Abetment of Offence of Disproportionate Assets by Non-Public Servant (Spouse) — Intentional Aiding — A non-public servant, such as the spouse of a public servant, can be convicted for abetment of the offence of possessing disproportionate assets under Section 13(1)(e) of the PC Act read with Section 109 IPC, if evidence demonstrates intentional aiding — Such aiding can be inferred from the surrounding circumstances India Law Library Docid # 2425486
(4) M/S JINDAL STEEL AND POWER LTD. AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S BANSAL INFRA PROJECTS PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-05-2025 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Sections 9 & 37(1)(b) — Constitution of India — Article 227 — Appealability of Order Refusing Ex Parte Interim Relief in Section 9 Petition — Jurisdictional Issue Left Open — The Supreme Court, while hearing a challenge to a High Court order passed under Article 227 which granted interim relief against bank guarantee encashment after the Commercial Court had merely issued notice on the Section 9 petition (thereby implicitly refusing ex parte relief), decl India Law Library Docid # 2425487
(5) TATA STEEL LTD. Vs. RAJ KUMAR BANERJEE AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-05-2025 Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — Section 61(2) — Limitation for Appeal to NCLAT — Strict Interpretation — Section 61(2) of the IBC prescribes a mandatory limitation period of 30 days for filing an appeal before the NCLAT — The proviso allows the NCLAT to condone a delay for a further period not exceeding 15 days, provided sufficient cause is shown — The total permissible period for filing an appeal is thus strictly limited to 45 days ( India Law Library Docid # 2425488
(6) KRISHAN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-05-2025 Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — Compensation — Parity between Adjacent Villages — Lands situated in adjacent villages, acquired under a common notification for a common public purpose, possessing similar potential and advantages (like proximity to highways NH-8 and KMP Expressway), must be compensated equitably — Overturning the uniform compensation awarded by the LAC and Reference Court and creating a significant disparity based on isolated sale deeds from different villages, without cogent eviden India Law Library Docid # 2425489
(7) HARJINDER SINGH Vs. THE STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-05-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 319 — Power to proceed against other persons appearing to be guilty of offence — Nature of “Evidence” — The power vested in a Court under Section 319 CrPC to summon an additional accused is triggered by “evidence” that emerges during the course of an inquiry or trial, not by mere conjecture or suspicion — A statement rendered under oath and duly recorded in Court, such as the deposition of a prosecution witness (PW-1 in this instance), constitutes substant India Law Library Docid # 2425400
(8) RAJENDRA ANANT VARIK Vs. GOVIND B. PRABHUGAONKAR[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-05-2025 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 — Reversal of Acquittal by High Court — Failure to Consider a Valid Defence — Where a High Court, in an appeal against acquittal in a Section 138 NI Act prosecution, reverses the acquittal without adverting to a significant legal issue and valid defence (such as the applicability of a State-specific Money-Lenders Act which formed the basis of the acquittal by the First Appellate Court India Law Library Docid # 2425401
(9) SAROJ SALKAN Vs. HUMA SINGH AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-05-2025 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — Order 12 Rule 6 — Power to Dismiss Suit — Scope and Discretion — The Court possesses wide discretion under Order XII Rule 6 CPC to pass a judgment at any stage of the suit, either on the application of a party or suo motu, based on admissions in pleadings or otherwise — This power is not confined to decreeing a claim but extends to the dismissal of the suit itself if admissions by the plaintiff, including in a rejoinder, warrant such dismissal. India Law Library Docid # 2425402
(10) KUMARI REKHA Vs. SHAMBHU SARAN PASWAN[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-05-2025 Constitution of India — Article 142 — Power to Grant Divorce on Ground of Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage — The Supreme Court, in exercise of its extraordinary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, can dissolve a marriage on the ground of irretrievable breakdown, even if such a ground is not explicitly available under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and even if one party vehemently opposes the dissolution — This power is exercised when the Court is satisfied, India Law Library Docid # 2425403
(11) A. RAJA Vs. D. KUMAR[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-05-2025 Representation of the People Act, 1951 — Section 100(1)(a) & (d)(i) — Challenge to Caste Certificate in Election Petition — Scope of ‘Trial’ under State Caste Certificate Legislation — A duly issued Caste/Community Certificate, particularly one issued under a specific state legislation (like the Kerala (Schedule Castes and Scheduled Tribes) Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Act, 1996) which provides a comprehensive mechanism for its issuance, verification, and cancellation, cannot be India Law Library Docid # 2425404
(12) ARABIAN EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-05-2025 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 11(6) and 11(6A) — Discharge Voucher — Economic Duress — Arbitrability of Dispute — The mere execution of a full and final settlement receipt or a discharge voucher by an insured in favour of an insurer does not automatically bar the insured from raising a dispute and seeking reference to arbitration, especially when the validity of such discharge is challenged on grounds of economic duress, coercion, or undue influence — At the stage of a Section India Law Library Docid # 2425405
(13) DISTRICT APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY Vs. KAUSHIK BABULAL SHAH AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-05-2025 Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 — Section 29 (Proviso) — Preservation of Records/Case Property (Sonography Machine) — Meaning of “Final Disposal of Proceedings” — The mandate under the proviso to Section 29(1) of the PC & PNDT Act to preserve records and documents (including seized property like a sonography machine) till the “final disposal of such proceedings” must be applied reasonably — Where an accused has been acquitted by the Tri India Law Library Docid # 2425490
(14) SHUBHKARAN SINGH Vs. ABHAYRAJ SINGH AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 05-05-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 18 Rule 17 — Recall of witness — Scope and Ambit — The power vested in the Court under Or. 18 R. 17 is primarily for the Court itself to recall a witness suo motu or on application, to put questions for clarifying any ambiguity or doubt arising from the evidence already on record — It is not a provision intended to enable parties to fill up lacunae in their case, conduct further examination-in-chief or cross-examination, or place additional material/evidence wh India Law Library Docid # 2425394
(15) POWERGRID COPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED Vs. CENTRAL ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 05-05-2025 Electricity Act, 2003 — S. 178 — Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms and Conditions of Tariff) Regulations, 2004 — Regulation 53, Note 2 — Additional Capitalization — Replacement of Damaged Assets — Operation and Maintenance — Expenditure incurred on replacing damaged Inter-connecting Transformers (ICTs), which failed due to internal faults/fire shortly after commissioning, cannot be admitted as 'additional capitalization' India Law Library Docid # 2425395
(16) THE ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. SMT. HONNAMMA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 05-05-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — S. 147 — Liability — Tractor-Trailer Accident — Uninsured Trailer — Root Cause — Where an accident involving death occurs due to the overturning of a trailer being pulled by an insured tractor, the liability of the tractor’s insurer extends to cover the accident — The crucial factor is the root cause of the accident being the insured tractor’s action in pulling/driving/moving the trailer, leading to the mishap in an unbroken chain of events — Principles requiring separ India Law Library Docid # 2425396
(17) KALYANI TRANSCO Vs. M/S.BHUSHAN POWER AND STEEL LTD. AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-05-2025 Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – Section 62 – Appeal to Supreme Court – “Person Aggrieved” – Locus Standi – The phrase “any person aggrieved” in Section 62 indicates no rigid locus requirement for appealing an NCLAT order to the Supreme Court — Once CIRP is initiated, proceedings become in rem, making all creditors and other necessary stakeholders (including operational creditors and erstwhile promoters whose appeals were dismissed by NCLAT) potentially “persons aggrieved” entitled to file India Law Library Docid # 2425313
(18) SHANMUGAM @ LAKSHMINARAYANAN Vs. HIGH COURT OF MADRAS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-05-2025 Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 — Sections 2(c)(iii) & 12 — Criminal Contempt — Forgery and Fabrication of Court Orders — Interference with Administration of Justice — Creating fake interim orders of the High Court, purportedly staying execution of a decree, and producing such forged orders before the executing court (Court Amin) to prevent execution constitutes a gross act of criminal contempt under Section 2(c)(iii), being one of the most serious forms of interference with India Law Library Docid # 2425314
(19) P. SAKTHI Vs. THE GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-05-2025 Service Law — Promotion — Right to Consideration — Effect of Set Aside Punishment — An employee possesses a fundamental right to be considered for promotion when eligible as per the rules and when selections are conducted — Denial of such consideration based on a past punishment is legally unsustainable and unjust if that punishment has already been set aside by a competent authority prior to the consideration period. India Law Library Docid # 2425315
(20) AMAN BHATIA Vs. STATE (GNCT OF DELHI)[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-05-2025 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 2(c)(i) — “Public Servant” — Interpretation — Legislative Intent — Public Duty — The definition of “public servant” in Section 2(c) is comprehensive and requires a wide, purposive interpretation to advance the Act’s object of curbing corruption — The legislative intent, shifting from the repealed 1947 Act, emphasizes the performance of ‘public duty’ rather than solely the traditional master-servant or principal-agent relationship or mode of appointmen India Law Library Docid # 2425316