ive

Latest Cases

(941) M/S DAFFODILLS PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF U. P. AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 13-12-2019
The appellant (hereafter "Daffodills"), a pharmaceutical supplier, is aggrieved by a decision of the Allahabad High Court, rejecting its challenge to an order (dated 21.08.2015) issued by the Principal Secretary, Government of U.P. to its Medical and Health Department, directing it to stop local purchase from the appellant. Daffodills had participated in a tender process, in which the state called for bids from interested parties, willing to supply various categories of pharmaceutical products.
(2019) 12 JT 283 : (2020) 1 LawHeraldSC 393 : (2020) 1 OriLawRev 298 : (2019) 17 Scale 758 : (2020) 1 SCJ 780

(942) RAJNISH KUMAR MISHRA AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 13-12-2019
The appeals challenge the judgment and order passed by the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court dated 09.07.2018, which has dismissed the appeals filed by the present appellants and confirmed the order passed by the learned single judge of the said High Court dated 14.9.2017 with some modifications
(2020) 166 FLR 576) : (2020) 2 LLJ 257 : (2019) 17 Scale 607 : (2020) 2 SCJ 45 : (2020) 1 SLJ 493 : (2020) 1 UPLBEC 9

(943) SIRAJ AHMAD Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 13-12-2019
Uttar Pradesh Development Authorities Centralized Services Rules, 1985 - Rule 24(3) - Promotion - Condition of length of ten years' service was relaxed - Appellant has obtained the Bachelor of Science (Engineering) degree in the year 1987 - Appellant was entitled to be promoted immediately after the issuance of the office memorandum as he possessed the requisite degree when the office memorandum was issued - In any case the appellant is entitled to be promoted with effect from 18.01.1995 i.e. th
(2020) 1 ALT 85 : (2020) 1 JLJR 57 : (2019) 12 JT 409 : (2020) 1 LawHeraldSC 385 : (2020) 1 PLJR 139 : (2019) 17 Scale 626 : (2020) 1 SLJ 499 : (2020) 1 UPLBEC 18

(944) SATNAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 13-12-2019
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 302, 498-A read with 34 - Dowry death - Trial Court shall proceed with the trial uninfluenced by the findings recorded by the High Court in the impugned order qua the alleged suicide note or other findings in the impugned order.
(2020) 1 RCRCriminal 738

(945) SHYAM MADAM MOHAN RUIA & OTHERS Vs. MESSER HOLDINGS LIMITED & OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 13-12-2019

(2020) 2 BCR 321 : (2020) 1 SCALE 198 : (2020) 5 SCC 252 : (2020) 2 SCJ 51

(946) THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE AND ORS. Vs. M. JEYANTHI [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 13-12-2019
Special Rules of Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Service Rules - Rule 35A - Service Law - Resignation - I is evident from Clause (c) of Rule 35A that the appointing authority, while accepting the resignation, is empowered to indicate a date from which it will take effect which will not be later than the date of expiry of the notice. In other words, the authority can legitimately accept the resignation from a date anterior to the expiry of the notice. Upon the acceptance of the resignation, the ces
(2020) AIRSC 320 : (2020) 1 ApexCourtJudgments(SC) 449 : (2020) 166 FLR 231) : (2020) 2 SCJ 29 : (2020) 1 SCT 512 : (2020) 1 SLJ 508 : (2020) 2 WritLR 141

(947) JASMEET KAUR Vs. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 12-12-2019
Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 - Section 9 - Guardianship and custody - Jurisdiction - Court where the child ‘ordinarily resides’ would have jurisdiction to decide the issues of guardianship and custody.

Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 - Section 9 - Guardianship and custody - Jurisdiction - Conduct of the parties revealed that they had abandoned their domicile of origin in India, and therefore, could not be said to be ‘ordinarily residing’ in India. As a consequence, the courts in Delhi would
(2020) 141 ALR 243 : (2020) 2 ALT 15 : (2020) 1 RCRCivil 574 : (2019) 17 Scale 672

(948) M SIDDIQ (D) THROUGH LRS Vs. MAHANT SURESH DAS AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 12-12-2019
Constitution of India, 1950 - Ayodhya verdict - Review petitions - Dismissal of - This Court have carefully gone through the Review Petitions and the connected papers filed therewith - This Court do not find any ground, whatsoever, to entertain the same - Review Petitions dismissed.

(949) SARINE TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED Vs. DIYORA AND BHANDERI CORPORATION AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 12-12-2019
The present matter arises out of a Suit filed by the petitioner before us - an Israeli Company against the respondents for infringement of copyright. The plaint contains an allegation that the plaintiff has secured a registration in the USA for the sixth version i.e. version 6.0 of its Advisor(tm) software, bearing registration No. TX 8-252-522, the text whereof includes programming from all previous versions.
(2020) 81 PTC 369

(950) JASMEET KAUR Vs. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 12-12-2019
Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 - Section 6(a) - Guardians And Wards Act, 1890 - Sections 7, 9, 11 and 25 - Guardianship Petition - Children have the right to be brought up by both parents as a family in the U.S - It is in the best interest of the children that the Petitioner returns to the U.S.
(2020) 1 RCRCivil 574

(951) RAMJI SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 11-12-2019
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 and 452 - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) - Sections 157 and 173(2) - Murder - Appeal against conviction and Sentence - Medical evidence fully supports the ocular evidence and there is virtually no contradiction - Version of the two eye witnesses with regard to the injuries caused by the fire arms and sharp edged weapons, find corroboration from the medical report - Direction, as pointed out above cannot be specifically ascertained from a
(2020) 112 ACrC 344 : (2020) AIRSC 169 : (2020) AIRSCCri 536 : (2020) 3 AllLJ 162 : (2020) 1 AndhLDCriminal 585 : (2020) 3 CriCC 794 : (2020) CriLJ 1027 : (2020) CriLJ 1027 : (2019) 4 Crimes 585 : (2019) 12 JT 267 : (2020) 1 SCALE 517 : (2020) 2 SCC 425

(952) CHENNAI METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY Vs. D. RAJAN DEV AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 11-12-2019
Second Master Plan for Chennai Metropolitan Area, 2026 - Regulation 36 - Premium FSI Charges - Division Bench did not keep in view the well settled principle that no right accrued to the applicant-builder by mere filing of application for approval and the right accrues only after approval is granted by the Government/concerned authorities - Impugned judgment is contrary to the well settled principle that the applicant does not acquire any right under law till his application is considered and sa
(2020) 3 LW 246 : (2020) 1 MLJ 248 : (2019) 17 Scale 703 : (2020) 2 SCC 483

(953) THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS Vs. THAWARA RAM AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 11-12-2019
It appears that the respondents-writ petitioners, Thawara Ram and Ghanshyam Singh, were allowed a second chance to complete the five kilometer run within the stipulated time of 25 minutes but even after availing the second chance on 20/22.11.2018, the two respondents could not complete the distance under 25 minutes and therefore they were declared unsuccessful in the Physical Efficiency Test (PET).
(2020) 1 SCT 574

(954) UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs. WING COMMANDER S P RATHORE [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 11-12-2019
The short question involved in this appeal filed by the Union of India is whether disability pension is at all payable in case of a Air Force Officer who superannuated from service in the natural course and whose disability is less than 20%. We may make reference to the Defence Service Regulations Pension Regulations for the Air Force, 1961. Regulations 37(a) and (b) under the heading "Disability Pension - when admissible" read as follows : "37(a) An officer who is retired from air force service
(2020) 2 SCJ 332 : (2020) 1 SCT 467

(955) JUMANI BEGAM Vs. RAM NARAYAN AND ORS. [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 11-12-2019
This appeal arises from a judgment of a learned Single Judge of the High Court of Chhattisgarh in MAC No. 1370 of 2009. The High Court, in an appeal arising from a decision of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal1, enhanced the compensation from Rs. 3,81,988 to Rs. 6,81,000 and maintained interest at the rate of six per cent.
(2020) ACJ 2148 : (2020) 1 ALD 113 : (2020) 1 AndhLD 113 : (2020) 3 MLJ 680 : (2020) 197 PLR 329 : (2020) 1 RCRCivil 634 : (2020) 5 SCC 807 : (2020) 1 SCJ 43

(956) ANDHRA PRADESH PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION Vs. KOTA LINGESWARA RAO AND ORS. [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 11-12-2019
The interpretation of Rule 6 (amended) and Rule 7 of Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission Rules of Procedure ("the APPSC Rules") is in question in this appeal. The brief facts leading to this appeal are that a written test and oral test were conducted for selection to the post of Junior Lecturer in Mathematics, and results were published by the Appellant herein, the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission ("the Commission") on 03.12.2011. Respondent No. 1, who belongs to the Open Category (
(2020) AIRSC 1733 : (2020) 1 ALD 190 : (2020) 1 AndhLD 190 : (2020) 1 SCALE 217 : (2020) 1 SCT 448

(957) ABCD Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 10-12-2019
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) - Section 195(1)(a)(i) - Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Section 181 - Contempt of court - Making a false statement on oath is an offence punishable under Section 181 of the IPC while furnishing false information with intent to cause public servant to use his lawful power to the injury of another person is punishable under Section 182 of the IPC. These offences by virtue of Section 195(1)(a)(i) of the Code can be taken cognizance of by any court only upon a proper c
(2020) ALLMRCri 1781 : (2020) 1 ALTCrl 240 : (2019) 12 JT 171 : (2020) 1 MLJCriminal 202 : (2019) 17 Scale 663 : (2020) 2 SCC 52

(958) STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS Vs. SUDARSHANA CHATTERJEE [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 10-12-2019
Fundamental Rules - Rule 73 - Summoning of officers to the Court and eventually affect the public at large - High Court was not right in directing the Principal Secretary to appear in the court and explain the reason for passing the order - Observing that merely because an order has been passed by the officer, it does not warrant the personal presence of the officer in the Court and summoning of officers to the Court and eventually affect the public at large, in Shri N.K. Janu, Deputy Director S
(2020) 139 ALR 597 : (2020) 166 FLR 245) : (2020) 3 MLJ 330 : (2020) 1 OriLawRev 273 : (2019) 17 Scale 696 : (2020) 1 SCT 289 : (2020) 2 SLJ 184

(959) RAJENDRA DIWAN Vs. PRADEEP KUMAR RANIBALA AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 10-12-2019
Chhattisgarh Rent Control Act, 2011 - Section 13(2) - Eviction - Appeal against an order of the Rent Control - Section 13(2) of the Rent Control Act ultra vires the Constitution and beyond the scope of the power of the State legislature. (Para 84)
(2019) 12 JT 129 : (2020) 1 RCRRent 103 : (2020) 1 SCALE 102

(960) BGSSGS SOMAJV Vs. NHPC LIMITED [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 10-12-2019
Three appeals before us raise questions as to maintainability of appeals under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as "the Arbitration Act, 1996"), and, given the arbitration clause in these proceedings, whether the "seat" of the arbitration proceedings is New Delhi or Faridabad, consequent upon which a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1996 may be filed dependent on where the seat of arbitration is located.
(2019) 6 ArbiLR 393 : (2020) 154 CLA 376 : (2020) 1 CTC 681 : (2020) 3 MLJ 336 : (2019) 17 Scale 369 : (2020) 4 SCC 234