(1) MAGEBA BRIDGE PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. M/S. TRADE CENTRE[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 12-08-2026 Partnership Act, 1932 — Section 69(2) — Proof of registration of firm — Memorandum of Registration — Held, a Memorandum issued by the Registrar of Firms acknowledging receipt and recording the registration number and date of registration of a firm constitutes sufficient proof of registration for purposes of S. 69(2), and is further corroborated by a certified copy of Form-VIII of the Registrar of India Law Library Docid # 2448918
(2) DINESH KUMAR Vs. THE STATE OF HARYANA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 12-08-2026 Evidence Act, 1872 — Circumstantial evidence — Chain of circumstances — Last-seen, recent unexplained possession, and recovery of deceased's articles — Held, conviction based on circumstantial evidence can be sustained only when each circumstance is firmly proved, forms a complete chain, and is consistent solely with guilt — The circumstance of last-seen, though insufficient by itself, was materially India Law Library Docid # 2448919
(3) RASPELLI BHAGYA KISHAIYA AND OTHERS Vs. GENERAL MANAGER, WESTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 12-08-2026 National Coal Wage Agreement-VI — Cl. 9.3.4 — Compassionate appointment — Determination of relevant date for reckoning upper age limit of 35 years — Held, in the absence of any express stipulation in Cl. 9.3.4 fixing the cut-off date, age eligibility for compassionate appointment cannot be reckoned with reference to the date on which the application is ultimately taken up for consideration by the employer — Where the dependent was within the prescribed age limit on the India Law Library Docid # 2448920
(4) UNION OF INDIA Vs. SUNIL BIYANI[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 12-08-2026 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 — Interim relief on dismissal of writ petition — Whether High Court can grant protection against arrest while dismissing petition as not maintainable — Held, an interim relief can only be granted in aid of and ancillary to the main relief; once a court finds no merit in the main challenge and dismisses the petition, the question of granting further relief, India Law Library Docid # 2448921
(5) KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LIMITED Vs. REKHA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 12-08-2026 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 — Maintainability of writ petition involving disputed questions of fact — Electrocution claims — Held, where a claim for compensation on account of electrocution involves disputed questions of fact, a writ petition under Article 226 is not the proper remedy — the High Court ought to have relegated the writ petitioners to the civil court instead of proceeding to India Law Library Docid # 2448922
(6) PARAG KISHORE SATOSKAR AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 12-08-2026 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Section 318(4) — Cheating — Dishonest intention must exist at inception — Mere breach of commercial contract insufficient — Held, mere breach of contract cannot give rise to criminal prosecution for cheating unless fraudulent or dishonest intention is shown right from inception of the transaction — A promise as to future performance becomes deception only if India Law Library Docid # 2448923
(7) R.K. YADAV AND ANOTHER Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 12-08-2026 Constitution of India, 1950 — Articles 14 and 16 — Pay fixation — Scope of judicial review — Held, pay fixation is essentially an executive function and equation of posts and salaries is a complex matter best left to expert bodies; courts are not suited to evaluate the justifiability of differentiation in pay scales on affidavits and pleadings, and will not interfere unless mala fides or apparent anomaly is India Law Library Docid # 2448924
(8) SHRUTI MANAV SHARMA AND ANOTHER Vs. SUNANINA SINGH AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 12-08-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 43 Rule 1(r) — Scope of appellate interference with discretionary orders — An appellate court exercising jurisdiction under Order XLIII Rule 1(r) does not undertake a fresh reconsideration of the entire matter, nor substitute its own view merely because it might have reached a different conclusion on the same material — interference India Law Library Docid # 2448925
(9) BASSANNA SINCE DECEASED BY LRS. AND OTHERS Vs. BHIMANNA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 12-08-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 96 and Order 41 Rule 1 — Maintainability of composite appeal against common judgment in two suits by same plaintiff — A composite appeal filed under Section 96 challenging a common judgment rendered in two suits filed by the same plaintiff, where the suits were clubbed and tried together with common evidence, certified copies of India Law Library Docid # 2448926
(10) SRINIVASA REDDY VELAGALA Vs. SRAVANTHI INFRATECH PVT. LTD.[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 12-08-2026 Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — Sections 3(12), 5(21), 9 and 238A — Termination vs. frustration of contract — Effluxion of time and frustration are distinct concepts — an EPC contract does not terminate merely because the timeline lapses, nor is it "frustrated" by delay caused by a party's own default — Frustration under S. 56, Contract Act requires an unforeseen supervening India Law Library Docid # 2448928
(11) PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK Vs. M/S. SHREE JYOTI EDUCATION AND MANAGEMENT TRUST WORLD AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 12-08-2026 Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 — Section 2(g) — "Debt" — Includes interest — Held, "debt" under S. 2(g) includes any liability, inclusive of interest, claimed as due by a bank or financial institution from a person — The interest component maintained in a separate suspense account by a bank, subsequent to classification of a loan account as a non-performing asset, forms part of the debt India Law Library Docid # 2448915
(12) M/S. CARESTREAM HEALTH INDIA PVT. LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 12-08-2026 Customs Tariff Act, 1975 — Chapter 90, Note 2 — Classification of accessories — Rule 2(b) vis-a-vis Rule 2(c) — Held, Note 2(b) to Chapter 90 applies only to parts/accessories suitable for use solely or principally with a particular kind of machine, or with machines falling under the same tariff heading; where an accessory is compatible with machines falling under different tariff headings, Rule 2(b) is inapplicable and the accessory must be classified under residuary CTH 9033 00 00 as India Law Library Docid # 2448916
(13) LAHRA BAI TAMRE AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF CHATTISGARH AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 12-08-2026 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 — Custodial Death — Compensation in public law — Inadequate quantification by High Court — Held, compensation awarded in public law under Article 226 for violation of fundamental rights is in the nature of exemplary damages against the wrongdoer, independent of remedies in tort or prosecution under penal law — Where the High India Law Library Docid # 2448917
(14) SHATRUGHN YADAV Vs. THE FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS TRAVANCORE LTD. (F.A.C.T.) AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 11-08-2026 Service Law — Termination — Suppression of criminal antecedents in verification form — Writ jurisdiction — Maintainability — Held, existence of alternative remedy under Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 does not operate as absolute bar to writ jurisdiction, particularly where challenge is to legality of termination order itself — High Court's finding that disputed questions of fact rendered writ petition India Law Library Docid # 2448883
(15) BASUDEV AND OTHERS Vs. SANJAY KUMAR AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 11-08-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 8 Rules 6A to 6D and Section 96 — Suit and counterclaim disposed of by common judgment — Maintainability of composite appeal — Held, a suit and counterclaim, when adjudicated by a single common judgment, can be challenged by a composite appeal — Rule 6A treats counterclaim as cross-suit facilitating a common judgment — Rule 6C's exclusion of India Law Library Docid # 2448884
(16) SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Vs. RAJEEV VASANT SHETH AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 11-08-2026 Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 — Section 12A(d)(e) and 15G — Securities and Exchange Board of India (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Regulations, 2015 — Regulation 4(1) — Insider trading — Trading while in possession of UPSI — Purpose of proceeds irrelevant — Held, once it is established that a person traded while in possession of unpublished price sensitive India Law Library Docid # 2448885
(17) NATIONAL PROJECTS CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION LTD. Vs. ISHVAKOO (INDIA) PVT. LTD.[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 11-08-2026 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 9 — Maintainability of post-award application by unsuccessful party (Award Debtor) — Held, a Section 9 application filed post-award by a party that has lost in arbitration is maintainable — denying such relief would leave an unsuccessful party remediless where the challenge under Section 34 is pending, since Sections 34 and 36 provide no protective remedy for a losing party — however, the threshold for grant of interim relief is higher for an India Law Library Docid # 2448886
(18) RAHUL Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 11-08-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Quashing of proceedings — Dowry death — Plea of alibi supported by unimpeachable official record — Held, Where the accused places on record an official, contemporaneous service certificate issued by an Armed Forces unit, never disputed as to authenticity or issuing authority, and never impugned by the prosecution at any stage, such material India Law Library Docid # 2448887
(19) JUPUDI SURESH Vs. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 11-08-2026 Evidence Act, 1872 — Dying declaration — Reliability — Two dying declarations recorded on same day by different persons but overlapping in timing, one showing recording time inconsistent with FIR registered over 15 hours later — Medical evidence indicating credible statement possible only where burns between 80-90%, whereas victim suffered 96% burns — Motive stated differing between the two declarations — Held, dying declarations rendered suspicious and unsafe to found India Law Library Docid # 2448881
(20) M/S SIMRAN PHARMACEUTICALS AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND OTHERS[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT (JAMMU BENCH)] 11-08-2026 Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 — Sections 18-A, 23(4) — Supply of sample portion — Sample drawn from retailer, not manufacturer — Where the sample is drawn from a retailer or other person in the distribution chain rather than from the manufacturer's possession, the Drug Inspector's obligation under S. 18-A stands discharged upon delivering the requisite sample portion to the person whose India Law Library Docid # 2448888