ive
Latest Cases

(941) P. KISHORE KUMAR Vs. VITTAL K. PATKAR [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 20-11-2023
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 – Section 100 - Second appellate court is not expected to conduct a “third trial on facts” or be “one more dice in the gamble” - The decision rendered by the first appellate court, not being in violation of the settled position of law, ought not to have been interfered with - With utmost respect to the High Court, This Court is constrained to observe that the question framed by it could be regarded as one of law, if it all, but did not merit the label of a substantial
India Law Library Docid # 1603746

(942) PRIYA INDORIA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS ETC. [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 20-11-2023
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Section 438 - The terms "the High Court" or "the Court of Session" in legal context are limited to the local limits or specific territorial jurisdiction - However, this does not imply that if an FIR is filed in one state, the accused can seek anticipatory bail from a court in another state - The individual can do so if, at the time of the FIR, they are residing or present for a legitimate purpose in another state - Section 438 of the CrPC does not explicitl
India Law Library Docid # 1603747

(943) VIVEK KAISTH AND ANOTHER Vs. THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 20-11-2023
Service Law – Appointment - Post of Civil Judge (Junior Division) - On February 1, 2013, the Himachal Pradesh Public Service Commissionissued an advertisement inviting applications for eight vacancies in the post of Civil Judge (Junior Division) in Himachal Pradesh Judicial Service - Of these, six vacancies were existing, and two were anticipated – There has been a violation of the process in making selection/appointment of the appellants, in as much as the vacancies on which the appellants were
India Law Library Docid # 1603748

(944) TARUN KUMAR Vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 20-11-2023
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 – Sections 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) – Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 120B read with sections 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 - Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 - Sections 44 and 45 - offence of money laundering – Bail - This court rejects the granting of bail solely because other co-accused in similar situations have been granted bail, emphasizing that parity is not a legal principle - Instead, when applying the principle
India Law Library Docid # 1603749

(945) M/S SWETA ESTATE PVT. LTD. GURGAON Vs. HARYANA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 10-11-2023
Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 - Sections 25 and 26 - Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 - Section 21 - Grant of Consent to Establish (CTE) - An appeal could have been preferred by the appellant for challenging condition no. 4 by taking recourse to Section 28 of the Water Act and Section 31 of the Air Act - Appellant did not challenge the Board's decision dated 8th February 2012, authorising the Board to grant ex-post facto CTE, which clearly provided that
India Law Library Docid # 1603742

(946) STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNOR OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 10-11-2023
Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 168 and 200 - Governor is a symbolic head and cannot withhold action on Bills passed by the State Legislature - The Governor, as an unelected Head of the State, is entrusted with certain constitutional powers - However, this power cannot be used to thwart the normal course of lawmaking by the State Legislatures - Consequently, if the Governor decides to withhold assent under the substantive part of Article 200, the logical course of action is to pursue the
India Law Library Docid # 1603756

(947) M/S SWETA ESTATE PVT. LTD. GURGAON Vs. HARYANA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 10-11-2023
Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 - Sections 25 and 26 - Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 - Section 21 - Grant of Consent to Establish (CTE) - An appeal could have been preferred by the appellant for challenging condition no. 4 by taking recourse to Section 28 of the Water Act and Section 31 of the Air Act - Appellant did not challenge the Board's decision dated 8th February 2012, authorising the Board to grant ex-post facto CTE, which clearly provided that
India Law Library Docid # 1603742

(948) STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNOR OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 10-11-2023
Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 168 and 200 - Governor is a symbolic head and cannot withhold action on Bills passed by the State Legislature - The Governor, as an unelected Head of the State, is entrusted with certain constitutional powers - However, this power cannot be used to thwart the normal course of lawmaking by the State Legislatures - Consequently, if the Governor decides to withhold assent under the substantive part of Article 200, the logical course of action is to pursue the
India Law Library Docid # 1603756

(949) M/S. IFCI LIMITED Vs. SUTANU SINHA AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 09-11-2023
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - Section 62 - Second appeal - Question of law - Jurisdiction under Section 62 of IBC - Jurisdiction is restricted to a question of law akin to a second appeal - Law does not envisage unlimited tiers of scrutiny and every tier of scrutiny has its own parameters - Thus, the lis inter se the parties has to be analyzed within the four corners of the ambit of the statutory jurisdiction conferred on this Court - Appeal does not raise any such question of law and t
India Law Library Docid # 1603767

(950) STATE OF U.P. AND ANR. ETC. Vs. BALESHWAR SINGH AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 09-11-2023
This is an unfortunate litigation which arises out of bifurcation of the State of Uttar Pradesh into the State of Uttaranchal, which was subsequently renamed as Uttarakhand, and the State of Uttar Pradesh, by virtue of the provisions of the U.P. Reorganization Act, 2000. Interestingly, the bifurcation was given effect exactly 23 years back on 9th November, 2000. Today, we have a case of the first respondent - Baleshwar Singh, who was admittedly an employee of the undivided State of Uttar Pradesh
India Law Library Docid # 1603784

(951) SAJEEV Vs. STATE OF KERALA [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 09-11-2023
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 302, 307, and 326 read with Section 120B - Abkari Act, 1077 - Section 55(a), 55 (h), 55 (i) and 57(A)(1)(ii) - Deadly conspiracy of liquor poisoning by mixing noxious substances likely to endanger human life - Life imprisonment - A conspiracy resulted in the deaths of 7 innocent individuals, left 11 blinded, and more than 40 others with varying degrees of injuries due to alcohol poisoning - Accused persons hatched a conspiracy to mix methyl alcohol with spirit t
India Law Library Docid # 1603732

(952) MADAN Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 09-11-2023
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 302 and 149 - Arms Act, 1959 - Section 25 - Murder - Death sentence - Criminal history of the convict by itself cannot be a ground for awarding him death penalty - Past conduct does not necessarily have to be taken into consideration while imposing death penalty - Present case is not a case wherein it can be held that imposition of death penalty is the only alternative - Another reason that weighs with us is that from the evidence of the witnesses, it is clear t
India Law Library Docid # 1603734

(953) THANESAR SINGH SODHI (D) THR. LRS. AND OTHERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 09-11-2023
Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (COFEPOSA) - Sections 3, 9 and 12A - Detention order - Applicability of Section 9 and Section 12A of COFEPOSA - Order of detention had not been revoked on the report of the Advisory Board or before the receipt of the report of Advisory Board or before making a reference to the Advisory Board - Further, it was an order of detention passed under Section 3 of COFEPOSA - Section 9 and Section 12A of COFEPOSA had no app
India Law Library Docid # 1603735

(954) M/S. RAJASTHAN ART EMPORIUM Vs. KUWAIT AIRWAYS AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 09-11-2023
Carriage by Air Act, 1972 - Sections 19 and 13(3) - Carrier is liable for damage occasioned by delay in the carriage by air of passengers, luggage or goods - If the carrier admits the loss of the goods, or if the goods have not arrived at the expiration of seven days after the date on which they ought to have arrived, the consignee is entitled to put into force against the carrier the rights which flow from the contract of carriage.
India Law Library Docid # 1603736

(955) UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs. D.G.O.F. EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 09-11-2023
Service Law - Parity in pay scales - Relief cannot be denied to the employees when the entitlement is denied due to irrational consideration without application of mind to the facts involved in the case by the employer, thereby denying the benefits to the employees - It is evident that parity of pay scales vis-a-vis LDCs, UDCs, Assistants/PAs and Stenographers, was maintained even prior to 01.01.1986 under the Third Central Pay Commission recommendations (for the period of 01.01.1973 to 31.03.19
India Law Library Docid # 1603737

(956) MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED Vs. RATNAGIRI GAS AND POWER PRIVATE LIMITED AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 09-11-2023
Interpretation of Contract - A commercial document cannot be interpreted in a manner that is at odds with the original purpose and intendment of the parties to the document - A deviation from the plain terms of the contract is warranted only when it serves business efficacy better.
India Law Library Docid # 1603738

(957) ANKITA THAKUR AND OTHERS Vs. THE H.P. STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 09-11-2023
Service Law - Relaxation - Eligibility qualifications - State had power to relax the eligibility criteria, the same could not have been done mid-stream without giving wide publicity of such change, and opportunity to similarly situated candidates to apply and compete with others - Eligibility criteria / conditions, unless provided otherwise in the extant rules or the advertisement, must be fulfilled by the candidate by the last date for receipt of applications specified in the advertisement - If
India Law Library Docid # 1603739

(958) ASHWINI KUMAR UPADHYAY Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 09-11-2023
Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 32 - Writ Petition - Direction to expeditious disposal of criminal cases against elected members of the Parliament and Legislative Assemblies(i) Learned Chief Justices of the High Courts shall register a suo-motu case with the title, “In Re: designated courts for MPs/MLAs” to monitor early disposal of criminal cases pending against the members of Parliament and Legislative Assemblies - The suo-motu case may be heard by the Special
India Law Library Docid # 1603740

(959) DILIP B JIWRAJKA Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 09-11-2023
Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 14 and 21 - Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 - Sections 95 to 100 - Constitutional validity of Sections 95 to 100 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 is upheld - Provisions of Section 95 to Section 100 of the IBC are not unconstitutional as they do not violate Article 14 and Article 21 of the Constitution - Resolution professional in exercise of their duty under Section 99 may not embark on a roving enquiry into the affairs of the debtor or person
India Law Library Docid # 1603757

(960) M/S. IFCI LIMITED Vs. SUTANU SINHA AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 09-11-2023
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - Section 62 - Second appeal - Question of law - Jurisdiction under Section 62 of IBC - Jurisdiction is restricted to a question of law akin to a second appeal - Law does not envisage unlimited tiers of scrutiny and every tier of scrutiny has its own parameters - Thus, the lis inter se the parties has to be analyzed within the four corners of the ambit of the statutory jurisdiction conferred on this Court - Appeal does not raise any such question of law and t
India Law Library Docid # 1603767