ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(41) BARLA RAM REDDY AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-04-2025
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — Section 23(1) — Market Value — Determination Principles — Sale Exemplars — Market value for land acquisition must be determined as on the date of the Section 4 notification, representing the price a willing, informed buyer would pay to a willing, informed seller in an open market transaction, considering the land’s condition and potentiality — Comparable sale instances are the primary guide, provided they satisfy requirements of being genuine, proximate in time and l
India Law Library Docid # 2424924

(42) AEJAZ AHMAD SHEIKH Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-04-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 313 — Examination of Accused — Failure to Put Incriminating Evidence (Dying Declarations) — Prejudice — Curability and Delay — The failure of the trial court to put material incriminating circumstances appearing in the evidence, specifically dying declarations (whether formally recorded or orally made to witnesses), to the accused during their examination under Section 313 CrPC is a serious irregularity This omission denies the accused an opportunity to e
India Law Library Docid # 2424925

(43) THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KAMINENI HOSPITALS Vs. PEDDI NARAYANA SWAMI AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-04-2025
Consumer Law — Medical Negligence — Concurrent Findings — Scope of Appeal — Where both the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC), based on appreciation of evidence and medical records, have returned concurrent findings holding a hospital and its doctor medically negligent, the Supreme Court will generally affirm such findings unless they are shown to be perverse, based on no evidence, or contrary to established legal principl
India Law Library Docid # 2424926

(44) DALBIR SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S. KRISAM PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 22-04-2025
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 8 — Arbitrability of Disputes — Scope of Judicial Review Post-Amendments (2015 & 2019) — Kompetenz-Kompetenz — Following the legislative amendments of 2015 and 2019, the scope of judicial scrutiny under Section 8 of the Act at the referral stage is extremely limited — The court’s role is primarily to conduct a prima facie review to ascertain the existence of a valid arbitration agreement — Issues relating to the arbitrability of the dispute are, a
India Law Library Docid # 2425084

(45) HARYANA AGRO-INDUSTRIES CORPORATION LTD. Vs. M/S. DEVI DAYAL SACHIN KUMAR AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 22-04-2025
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Sections 34 & 37 — Limitation Act, 1963 — Contract Act, 1872 — Arbitration Claim — Bar of Limitation.

Arbitration proceedings initiated significantly beyond the limitation period prescribed both within the governing agreement and under the general law of limitation are liable to be rejected as time-barred — An arbitral award dismissing a claim on the ground of limitation, where the delay is undisputed and substantial is generally not liable to be interf
India Law Library Docid # 2425085

(46) HABEEN ALIAS HABIN ALIAS HABIB Vs. STATE OF HARYANA[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 22-04-2025
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) — Section 483 [(as invoked in the order)] — Regular Bail — Factors for Grant — Haryana Gauvansh Sanrakshan & Gausamvardhan Act, 2015 / IPC S. 120-B. - In exercising jurisdiction invoked under Section 483 BNSS for grant of regular bail concerning offences under the Haryana Gauvansh Sanrakshan & Gausamvardhan Act, 2015 (Sections 3/13(1), 8/13(3)) and Section 120-B IPC, the Court considered the cumulative effect of several factors: (i) the period of c
India Law Library Docid # 2425086

(47) B.S YEDDIYURAPPA Vs. A. ALAM PASHA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 21-04-2025
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — S. 17A — Prior Approval for Investigation — Relevant Considerations — What are the specific factors and criteria that the appropriate authority or government must consider under Section 17A of the PC Act before granting approval for the police to initiate any enquiry, inquiry, or investigation against a public servant concerning acts related to their official functions or duties?
India Law Library Docid # 2424851

(48) ARUNKUMAR H SHAH HUF Vs. AVON ARCADE PREMISES CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 21-04-2025
Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act, 1963 (MOFA) — Section 11(3), 11(4) & Section 5A — Powers of Competent Authority — Deemed Conveyance — Nature of Proceedings — Scope of Enquiry — Adjudication of Title — Proceedings before the Competent Authority under Section 11(3) of MOFA for issuance of a certificate for deemed conveyance are summary in nature, as indicated by the MOFA Rules (Rule 13(5) prohibiting cross-examination) —
India Law Library Docid # 2424852

(49) ELECTROSTEEL STEEL LIMITED (NOW M/S ESL STEEL LIMITED) Vs. ISPAT CARRIER PRIVATE LIMITED[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 21-04-2025
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) — Section 31 — Approval of Resolution Plan — Effect on Claims — Extinguishment — Binding Nature — ‘Clean Slate’ Principle — Once a resolution plan is approved by the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT) under Section 31 of the IBC, it is binding on the corporate debtor, its employees, members, creditors (including central/state government, local authorities, operational creditors), guarantors, and other stakeholders — Upon such approval, all claims, including
India Law Library Docid # 2424853

(50) LARSEN AND TOUBRO LIMITED Vs. PURI CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 21-04-2025
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Sections 34 & 37 — Scope of Judicial Review — Power to Modify Award — Severability — The scope of interference by a Court under Section 34 or in appeal under Section 37 is limited — Following the precedent in Project Director, NHAI v. M. Hakeem (2021) 9 SCC 1, courts do not possess the power to modify an arbitral award; the “limited remedy” is only to set aside the award, either wholly or partially if severable, under the specified grounds — The Appellate
India Law Library Docid # 2424854

(51) VINOD BOOB Vs. DODBALLAUR SPINNING MILLS PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 21-04-2025
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 — Special Leave Petition — Disposal by Consent Order — Where a Special Leave Petition was preferred by the complainant challenging the High Court's order setting aside the conviction and sentence of the accused-respondents under Section 138 of the NI Act, the petition was disposed of by the Supreme Court in terms of a consensual order agreed upon by the parties, detailing specific payment terms.
India Law Library Docid # 2424855

(52) SUMITRABEN SINGABHAI GAMIT Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 21-04-2025
Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 — Section 26(1), Proviso and Section 11 — Date for Determination of Market Value — Mandatory Requirement — The proviso to Section 26(1) of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 lays down a mandatory requirement, emphasized by the use of the word ‘shall’, that the market value of land acquired under the Act must be determined as on the date of issuance of the preliminary notification under Section 11 — Thi
India Law Library Docid # 2424856

(53) LILABEN Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 21-04-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 389 — Suspension of Sentence Pending Appeal — Scope of Enquiry — Findings of Trial Court — The jurisdiction under Section 389 CrPC is primarily concerned with the suspension of the execution of the sentence pending appeal, based on reasons to be recorded in writing — The court considering an application under S. 389 cannot undertake a merits-based review of the conviction or re-assess and cast doubt upon findings of fact recorded by the Trial Court
India Law Library Docid # 2424857

(54) SACHIN Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 21-04-2025
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 142 — Complete Justice — Sentence Modification — Sentence Already Served — Where subsequent orders of the High Court and Special Court enhancing an initial sentence (from 7 years to life imprisonment) are found erroneous and set aside by the Supreme Court, resulting in the revival of the original lesser sentence, but the appellant has already undergone actual incarceration significantly exceeding even the revived original sentence (11 years 8 months vs. 7 ye
India Law Library Docid # 2424858

(55) MANJUNATH TIRAKAPPA MALAGI AND ANOTHER Vs. GURUSIDDAPPA TIRAKAPPA MALAGI (DEAD THROUGH LRS)[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 21-04-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 23 Rule 3 & Rule 3A; Section 96(3) — Compromise Decree — Challenge Thereof — Bar on Fresh Suit — Exclusive Remedy — A compromise decree passed by a court under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC, upon satisfaction that a suit has been adjusted by a lawful agreement or compromise, cannot be challenged by initiating a fresh suit on the ground that the compromise was not lawful (due to alleged coercion or fraud) — Order 23 Rule 3A CPC explicitly bars such a suit — Furtherm
India Law Library Docid # 2424859

(56) KULDEEP Vs. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANOTHER[DELHI HIGH COURT] 21-04-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — S. 397 — Revisional Jurisdiction — Scope against Conviction — Discussion on the limited scope of the High Court's revisional jurisdiction under S. 397 Cr.P.C. when examining concurrent findings of conviction by the Trial Court and the Appellate Court — The revisional court's role is primarily confined to satisfying itself as to the correctness, legality, or propriety of the findings, sentence, or order and the regularity of the proceedings of the lower courts — Th
India Law Library Docid # 2424863

(57) RAMESH SUNEJA Vs. UNION OF INDIA[DELHI HIGH COURT] 21-04-2025
Railways Act, 1989 — Ss. 123(c), 124-A — Untoward Incident — Accidental Fall from Train vs. Attempt to Alight — Bona Fide Passenger — Consideration of whether a fall from a moving train resulting in injury to a bona fide passenger constitutes an “untoward incident” under S. 123(c) liable for compensation under S. 124-A. Analysis contrasting the claimant’s consistent account of falling due to a push/jostling in an overcrowded compartment near a station with the Railways’ defence that it was an at
India Law Library Docid # 2424864

(58) DR. ABHISHEK AGGARWAL AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 21-04-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) — Section 311 — Power to Summon Material Witness or Recall/Re-examine — Scope and Principles — The power under Section 311 Cr.P.C. is wide but must be exercised judiciously, with caution and circumspection, only to meet the ends of justice. Its objective is to discover the truth or obtain proper proof of facts essential for a just decision, not to fill up lacunae in the prosecution case resulting in prejudice to the accused or as an abuse of process. The c
India Law Library Docid # 2425047

(59) AMARJIT KAUR AND OTHERS Vs. JAGJIT SINGH AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 21-04-2025
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Just Compensation — Assessment — Overall Award vs. Component-wise Errors — While assessing appeals seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, the appellate court must consider the overall ‘justness’ of the compensation awarded — Even if the Tribunal commits errors in calculating individual components enhancement is not warranted if the total compensation awarded is already adequate, just, or even excessive when view
India Law Library Docid # 2425081

(60) NEERAJ KUMAR Vs. NARINDER SINGH AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 21-04-2025
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Sections 138 and 147 — Compounding of Offence — At Revisional Stage — Effect of Settlement and Payment — An offence under Section 138 of the NI Act, being primarily compensatory in nature with the punitive element aimed at enforcing the compensatory aspect, is compoundable under Section 147 of the Act — Where the parties, during the pendency of a criminal revision petition challenging concurrent conviction under Section 138, arrive at a settlement and
India Law Library Docid # 2425082