ive
Latest Cases

(841) KANAIYALAL MAFATLAL PATEL Vs. THE STATE OF GUJARAT AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-12-2023
Gujarat Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1947 - Sections 2(4) and 31(2) - Eviction - Appellant challenged orders from authorities that deemed the sale transaction in their favor a violation of the Gujarat Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1947 - High Court ruled against the appellant, upholding the authorities' decision and directing the appellant's summary eviction from the disputed land - In the context of Section 31(2) of the Act of 1
India Law Library Docid # 1603786

(842) COX AND KINGS LTD. Vs. SAP INDIA PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-12-2023
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Section 2(1)(h) read with Section 7 - Arbitration Proceedings - Applicability of Group of Companies Doctrine - Group of Companies doctrine is applicable to arbitration proceedings - Definition of "parties" under Section 2(1)(h) read with Section 7 of the Arbitration Act includes both the signatory as well as non-signatory parties - Conduct of the non-signatory parties could be an indicator of their consent to be bound by the arbitration agreement - Requir
India Law Library Docid # 1603787

(843) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. M/S JINDAL STEEL AND POWER LIMITED THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-12-2023
Income Tax Act, 1961 - Section 32(1) - Income Tax Rules, 1962 - Rule 5(1A) - There is no requirement under the second proviso to sub-rule (1A) of Rule 5 of the Rules that any particular mode of computing the claim of depreciation has to be opted for before the due date of filing of the return - All that is required is that the assessee has to opt before filing of the return or at the time of filing the return that it seeks to avail the depreciation provided in Section 32(1) under sub-rule (1) of
India Law Library Docid # 1603788

(844) M/S GREATER ASHOKA AND LAND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY @ APPELLANT Vs. KANTI PRASAD JAIN (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-12-2023
Suit for specific performance - Refund of earnest money - Merely refunding the earnest money paid, after sixty years will be unreasonable as the respondent, after booking the plot, has been waiting all along as even in the litigation since 1986 - Price of the land in the area has increased manifold for the last sixty years - Appellant pays a total amount of Rs. 50,00,000/- to the respondent as full and final settlement of claim in the suit - Appeals disposed of.
India Law Library Docid # 1603789

(845) SELVARAJ Vs. REVATHI [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-12-2023
Custody of child - For the proper growth of a child, the love and affection of both parents are deemed necessary - In any custody matter, the paramount consideration is the welfare of the child - The child in question is currently 12 years and 9 months old, and he is capable of making decisions - However, it is determined that granting custody to the respondent-mother at this stage would not be in the child's best interest for upbringing - Nevertheless, the mother is allowed visitation rights an
India Law Library Docid # 1603790

(846) KANAIYALAL MAFATLAL PATEL Vs. THE STATE OF GUJARAT AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-12-2023
Gujarat Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1947 - Sections 2(4) and 31(2) - Eviction - Appellant challenged orders from authorities that deemed the sale transaction in their favor a violation of the Gujarat Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1947 - High Court ruled against the appellant, upholding the authorities' decision and directing the appellant's summary eviction from the disputed land - In the context of Section 31(2) of the Act of 1
India Law Library Docid # 1603786

(847) COX AND KINGS LTD. Vs. SAP INDIA PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-12-2023
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Section 2(1)(h) read with Section 7 - Arbitration Proceedings - Applicability of Group of Companies Doctrine - Group of Companies doctrine is applicable to arbitration proceedings - Definition of "parties" under Section 2(1)(h) read with Section 7 of the Arbitration Act includes both the signatory as well as non-signatory parties - Conduct of the non-signatory parties could be an indicator of their consent to be bound by the arbitration agreement - Requir
India Law Library Docid # 1603787

(848) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. M/S JINDAL STEEL AND POWER LIMITED THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-12-2023
Income Tax Act, 1961 - Section 32(1) - Income Tax Rules, 1962 - Rule 5(1A) - There is no requirement under the second proviso to sub-rule (1A) of Rule 5 of the Rules that any particular mode of computing the claim of depreciation has to be opted for before the due date of filing of the return - All that is required is that the assessee has to opt before filing of the return or at the time of filing the return that it seeks to avail the depreciation provided in Section 32(1) under sub-rule (1) of
India Law Library Docid # 1603788

(849) M/S GREATER ASHOKA AND LAND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY @ APPELLANT Vs. KANTI PRASAD JAIN (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-12-2023
Suit for specific performance - Refund of earnest money - Merely refunding the earnest money paid, after sixty years will be unreasonable as the respondent, after booking the plot, has been waiting all along as even in the litigation since 1986 - Price of the land in the area has increased manifold for the last sixty years - Appellant pays a total amount of Rs. 50,00,000/- to the respondent as full and final settlement of claim in the suit - Appeals disposed of.
India Law Library Docid # 1603789

(850) SELVARAJ Vs. REVATHI [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-12-2023
Custody of child - For the proper growth of a child, the love and affection of both parents are deemed necessary - In any custody matter, the paramount consideration is the welfare of the child - The child in question is currently 12 years and 9 months old, and he is capable of making decisions - However, it is determined that granting custody to the respondent-mother at this stage would not be in the child's best interest for upbringing - Nevertheless, the mother is allowed visitation rights an
India Law Library Docid # 1603790

(851) NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. ANAND PAL[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 04-12-2023
It is pointed out on behalf of the Insurance Company that the respective claimant Nos. 1, 7 and 11 - Anand Pal, Satish Kumar and Sanjay Kumar, who are brothers of the deceased victim, could not be said to be dependent, on the earnings of the victim. Mr. Kumar points out that the three are older married brothers with their respective children and although occasional help could be provided by the deceased for his family members, that cannot alter their status to that of dependents, entitled to cla
India Law Library Docid # 1884112

(852) RAM LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 04-12-2023
Service Law - Disciplinary Proceeding - Judicial Review - If the findings of the disciplinary authorities are arrived at after ignoring the relevant material the court in judicial review can interfere.
India Law Library Docid # 1603773

(853) DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD. Vs. AIRPORTS ECONOMIC REGULATORY AUTHORITY AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 04-12-2023
Calculation of the Hypothetical Regulatory Asset Base (HRAB) - Direction issued to Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) to examine effect of 'new evidence' produced by Delhi International Airport Limited (DIAL).
India Law Library Docid # 1603774

(854) SANJAY PANDURANG KALATE Vs. VISTRA ITCL (INDIA) LIMITED AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 04-12-2023
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 – Section 7, 61 and 62 – Dismissal of Order on the ground of limitation - The appeal was filed beyond the 30-day limitation period, but within the condonable 15-day period - The appeal should be returned to the NCLAT for reconsideration
India Law Library Docid # 1603810

(855) RAM LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 04-12-2023
Service Law - Disciplinary Proceeding - Judicial Review - If the findings of the disciplinary authorities are arrived at after ignoring the relevant material the court in judicial review can interfere.
India Law Library Docid # 1603773

(856) DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD. Vs. AIRPORTS ECONOMIC REGULATORY AUTHORITY AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 04-12-2023
Calculation of the Hypothetical Regulatory Asset Base (HRAB) - Direction issued to Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) to examine effect of 'new evidence' produced by Delhi International Airport Limited (DIAL).
India Law Library Docid # 1603774

(857) SANJAY PANDURANG KALATE Vs. VISTRA ITCL (INDIA) LIMITED AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 04-12-2023
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 – Section 7, 61 and 62 – Dismissal of Order on the ground of limitation - The appeal was filed beyond the 30-day limitation period, but within the condonable 15-day period - The appeal should be returned to the NCLAT for reconsideration
India Law Library Docid # 1603810

(858) REHIYANATHU BEEVI Vs. DIVISIONAL MANAGER UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 01-12-2023
The appellants are the widow and daughter of the deceased Nazarudeen, who died in a motor accident that occurred on 7/2/2005. Nazarudeen was driving a lorry bearing no. KL-01/E-1672 when his vehicle was hit by another lorry coming from the opposite side. He sustained grievous injuries and eventually died on the spot.
India Law Library Docid # 1884111

(859) MOHIT SINGHAL Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 01-12-2023
It is an admitted position that the third respondent, who is the widow of deceased Ashok Kumar, had borrowed a sum of Rs.40,000.00 from one Sandeep Bansal @ Sandeep Lala. The first appellant is the son of the said Sandeep Bansal. The third respondent, in her complaint to the police, stated that subsequently, she borrowed a sum of Rs.60,000.00 from Sandeep. While paying the said amount, Sandeep deducted a sum of Rs.15,000.00 towards interest. The third respondent in her complaint stated that on 8
India Law Library Docid # 1884121

(860) SHASHIKANT SHARMA AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 01-12-2023
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) - Section 227 - Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Sections 3(2)(v) and 14A(1) - Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 504 - Attempt to murder - Acquittal - Section 307 IPC has been applied on the basis of the gun shot allegedly fired by the accused, which admittedly did not result into any corresponding injury - There must be an allegation that the accused not being a member of Scheduled Caste
India Law Library Docid # 1603770