⚖
Loading…
Loading…
Indian case law by case name, citation, provision or legal issue, with the case summary, the judgment text where we hold it and the provisions it applies.
201–220 · Page 11 of 500
Supreme Court of India3 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 121 · [2026] 2 S.C.R. 558
Could the High Court entertain an application invoking and exercising its powers of superintendence u/Art.227 of the Constitution, even where a specific remedial provision available in the Code of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) relating to the subject matter – issue is the focal point arising to be addressed in the present appeal.
Supreme Court of India4 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 120 · [2026] 2 S.C.R. 481
Indian case law by case name, citation, provision or legal issue, with the case summary, the judgment text where we hold it and the provisions it applies.
201–220 · Page 11 of 500
Supreme Court of India3 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 121 · [2026] 2 S.C.R. 558
Could the High Court entertain an application invoking and exercising its powers of superintendence u/Art.227 of the Constitution, even where a specific remedial provision available in the Code of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) relating to the subject matter – issue is the focal point arising to be addressed in the present appeal.
Supreme Court of India4 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 120 · [2026] 2 S.C.R. 481
Whether after submitting a final report u/s.173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) (s.193(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS)), the police/investigating agency can conduct further investigation u/s.173(8) of CrPC (s.193(9) of BNSS) without obtaining the leave of the Magistrate/ Court concerned.
Supreme Court of India6 Jan 2026Full text
2026 INSC 12 · [2026] 1 S.C.R. 119
Issue arose whether the appellant-promoter and non-executive Chairman of a group entity, entitled to bail in a money laundering case when there has been long period of incarceration and the trial has not even commenced.
Supreme Court of India4 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 119 · [2026] 2 S.C.R. 362
Whether the appellant herein should be allowed to change his cadre from Tamil Nadu to Rajasthan, against the ‘insider’ vacancy. The selection pertains to the year 2004. The appellant is already in service in Tamil Nadu for more than two decades.
Supreme Court of India4 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 118 · [2026] 2 S.C.R. 352
Matter pertains to the dispute regarding the custody of two minor sons born to the appellant-husband and the respondent-wife.
Supreme Court of India4 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 117 · [2026] 2 S.C.R. 323
Whether part time contractual instructors/teachers appointed in Upper Primary School in the State of U.P. are entitled to revision of their honorarium of Rs.7,000/- per month which was fixed for a contract period of eleven months in the year 2013 or would continue to receive the same fixed honorarium for years together or for all times to come without any increment.
Supreme Court of India4 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 116 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 1
Issue arose for consideration whether dispute with regard to the existence and validity of Clause 23 of the Contract Agreement clause could have been raised before the arbitrator; that the appointment of the arbitrator was during SBP & Co’s case regime and before the legislative amendments which came into effect from 23.10.2015, were the courts below justified in setting aside the award by holding that the clause 23 of the contract was not an arbitration agreement.
Supreme Court of India4 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 114 · [2026] 2 S.C.R. 370
Whether the NCDRC was right in dismissing the complaint filed by the appellants on the premise that they do not fall under the definition of ‘consumer’ for leasing out the subject property for commercial purposes, falling within the exclusion clause of s.2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
Supreme Court of India2 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 113 · [2026] 2 S.C.R. 285
Matter pertains to dispute as regards the sharing of the waters of the Pennaiyar River between the State of Tamil Nadu and the State of Karnataka.
Supreme Court of India3 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 112 · [2026] 2 S.C.R. 295
Whether a Court can entertain an application u/s.29A(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to extend the mandate of the arbitrator(s) for making the award even after an ‘award’ is rendered, though after the expiry of the statutory limit of eighteen- month period.
Supreme Court of India2 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 106 · [2026] 2 S.C.R. 270
Whether the disputes can be referred to arbitration or an arbitrator can be appointed when the very existence of arbitration agreement itself is seriously disputed on the allegations of forgery and fabrication; whether in the factual matrix of the case, the disputes between the parties could have been referred to the arbitration u/s.8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and correspondingly whether the High Court was justified in declining the appointment of an arbitrator u/s.11 of the 1996 Act.
Supreme Court of India2 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 105 · [2026] 2 S.C.R. 257
The instant appeal is directed against the interim order dated 18.07.2025 passed by the High Court wherein it directed the Returning Officer to allot a symbol to respondent no.1 (the writ petitioner) and permit him to participate in the election to the office of Zila Panchayat Member.
Supreme Court of India5 Jan 2026Full text
2026 INSC 10 · [2026] 1 S.C.R. 24
Matter pertains to contempt petitions by the appellant-petitioner, alleging, inter alia, that respondent no. 1 willfully failed to comply with the directions issued by this Court in the case of Dharmendra Sharma v. Agra Development Authority, (2025) 1 SCC 422, whereby the respondent was called to refund an amount of Rs. 3,99,100/- , being the cost of the non-judicial stamp papers purchased by the petitioner.
Supreme Court of India5 Jan 2026Full text
2026 INSC 1 · [2026] 2 S.C.R. 1
By the impugned judgment dated 28 June 2019, the High Court declined to grant the reliefs sought by the appellant, Adani Power Limited, which had inter alia prayed for a declaration that no customs duty was leviable on electrical energy generated in its power plant located in a Special Economic Zone (SEZ) and supplied to the Domestic Tariff Area (DTA), and for consequential refund of amounts deposited towards such duty. The High Court took the view that its earlier judgment delivered in 2015 in favour of the appellant was confined to a particular notification and period, and could not be exten
Supreme Court of India13 Jul 2026Full text
2026 INSC 679 · [2026] 8 S.C.R. 104
[2026] 8 S.C.R. 104 : 2026 INSC 679 Kirloskar Ferrous Industries Ltd. and Anr. v. Union of India & Anr. (Writ Petition (C) No. 733 of 2025) 13 July 2026 [J.B. Pardiwala and K.V. Viswanathan,* JJ.] Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether the explanations appended to r.38 of the 2016 Rules and r.45(8)(a) of the 2017 …
Supreme Court of India22 May 2026Full text
2026 INSC 528 · [2026] 6 S.C.R. 592
Circumstantial Evidence – Complete chain of circumstances, when not established – Trial court found from the last seen together theory, extra-judicial confession, recovery of the objects used as weapons and a motorbike, the seizures carried out and the serology report, that a complete chain of circumstances was establi…
Supreme Court of India4 May 2026Full text
2026 INSC 447 · [2026] 5 S.C.R. 347
[2026] 5 S.C.R. 347 : 2026 INSC 447 Dr. Bais Surgical and Medical Institute Pvt. Ltd & Ors. v. Dhananjay Pande (Civil Appeal No. 8973 of 2010) 04 May 2026 [Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok Aradhe, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Whether, in the absence of a formal entry of the respondent no.1’s name in the register of…
Supreme Court of India2 Apr 2026Full text
2026 INSC 315 · [2026] 4 S.C.R. 298
Advs. for the Appellant(s): Ms. Kavita Vadia, Sr. Adv., Tabrez Ahmad, Syed Mehdi Imam, Varun Verma, Chavi Jain, S. U. Abbas. Advs. for the Respondent(s): Divynk Panwar, Ms. Pallavi Garg, Ms. Sanjana Sharma, Prajjwal Singh, Ms. Nidhi Jaswal. 300 [2026] 4 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court…
Supreme Court of India17 Mar 2026Full text
2026 INSC 251 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 586
* Author [2026] 3 S.C.R. 587 Mohammad Kaleem v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. weight of all testimonies and circumstances – Similarly, reliance on documentary corroboration is not required; oral evidence alone, if credible, may suffice – The Court’s emphasis on the lack of jail records and the physical plausibility of …
Supreme Court of India2 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 105 · [2026] 2 S.C.R. 257
Headnotes† Constitution of India – Art.243-O – Uttarakhand Panchayati Raj Act, 2016 – The Uttarakhand State Election Commission issued a revised notification resuming the Panchayat elections in the State – Pursuant thereto, respondent no.1 submitted his nomination for election to the post of Zila Panchayat – On failure…
Also on Law on Tips: Bare Acts · Legal news and analysis
Whether after submitting a final report u/s.173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) (s.193(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS)), the police/investigating agency can conduct further investigation u/s.173(8) of CrPC (s.193(9) of BNSS) without obtaining the leave of the Magistrate/ Court concerned.
Supreme Court of India6 Jan 2026Full text
2026 INSC 12 · [2026] 1 S.C.R. 119
Issue arose whether the appellant-promoter and non-executive Chairman of a group entity, entitled to bail in a money laundering case when there has been long period of incarceration and the trial has not even commenced.
Supreme Court of India4 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 119 · [2026] 2 S.C.R. 362
Whether the appellant herein should be allowed to change his cadre from Tamil Nadu to Rajasthan, against the ‘insider’ vacancy. The selection pertains to the year 2004. The appellant is already in service in Tamil Nadu for more than two decades.
Supreme Court of India4 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 118 · [2026] 2 S.C.R. 352
Matter pertains to the dispute regarding the custody of two minor sons born to the appellant-husband and the respondent-wife.
Supreme Court of India4 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 117 · [2026] 2 S.C.R. 323
Whether part time contractual instructors/teachers appointed in Upper Primary School in the State of U.P. are entitled to revision of their honorarium of Rs.7,000/- per month which was fixed for a contract period of eleven months in the year 2013 or would continue to receive the same fixed honorarium for years together or for all times to come without any increment.
Supreme Court of India4 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 116 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 1
Issue arose for consideration whether dispute with regard to the existence and validity of Clause 23 of the Contract Agreement clause could have been raised before the arbitrator; that the appointment of the arbitrator was during SBP & Co’s case regime and before the legislative amendments which came into effect from 23.10.2015, were the courts below justified in setting aside the award by holding that the clause 23 of the contract was not an arbitration agreement.
Supreme Court of India4 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 114 · [2026] 2 S.C.R. 370
Whether the NCDRC was right in dismissing the complaint filed by the appellants on the premise that they do not fall under the definition of ‘consumer’ for leasing out the subject property for commercial purposes, falling within the exclusion clause of s.2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
Supreme Court of India2 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 113 · [2026] 2 S.C.R. 285
Matter pertains to dispute as regards the sharing of the waters of the Pennaiyar River between the State of Tamil Nadu and the State of Karnataka.
Supreme Court of India3 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 112 · [2026] 2 S.C.R. 295
Whether a Court can entertain an application u/s.29A(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to extend the mandate of the arbitrator(s) for making the award even after an ‘award’ is rendered, though after the expiry of the statutory limit of eighteen- month period.
Supreme Court of India2 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 106 · [2026] 2 S.C.R. 270
Whether the disputes can be referred to arbitration or an arbitrator can be appointed when the very existence of arbitration agreement itself is seriously disputed on the allegations of forgery and fabrication; whether in the factual matrix of the case, the disputes between the parties could have been referred to the arbitration u/s.8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and correspondingly whether the High Court was justified in declining the appointment of an arbitrator u/s.11 of the 1996 Act.
Supreme Court of India2 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 105 · [2026] 2 S.C.R. 257
The instant appeal is directed against the interim order dated 18.07.2025 passed by the High Court wherein it directed the Returning Officer to allot a symbol to respondent no.1 (the writ petitioner) and permit him to participate in the election to the office of Zila Panchayat Member.
Supreme Court of India5 Jan 2026Full text
2026 INSC 10 · [2026] 1 S.C.R. 24
Matter pertains to contempt petitions by the appellant-petitioner, alleging, inter alia, that respondent no. 1 willfully failed to comply with the directions issued by this Court in the case of Dharmendra Sharma v. Agra Development Authority, (2025) 1 SCC 422, whereby the respondent was called to refund an amount of Rs. 3,99,100/- , being the cost of the non-judicial stamp papers purchased by the petitioner.
Supreme Court of India5 Jan 2026Full text
2026 INSC 1 · [2026] 2 S.C.R. 1
By the impugned judgment dated 28 June 2019, the High Court declined to grant the reliefs sought by the appellant, Adani Power Limited, which had inter alia prayed for a declaration that no customs duty was leviable on electrical energy generated in its power plant located in a Special Economic Zone (SEZ) and supplied to the Domestic Tariff Area (DTA), and for consequential refund of amounts deposited towards such duty. The High Court took the view that its earlier judgment delivered in 2015 in favour of the appellant was confined to a particular notification and period, and could not be exten
Supreme Court of India13 Jul 2026Full text
2026 INSC 679 · [2026] 8 S.C.R. 104
[2026] 8 S.C.R. 104 : 2026 INSC 679 Kirloskar Ferrous Industries Ltd. and Anr. v. Union of India & Anr. (Writ Petition (C) No. 733 of 2025) 13 July 2026 [J.B. Pardiwala and K.V. Viswanathan,* JJ.] Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether the explanations appended to r.38 of the 2016 Rules and r.45(8)(a) of the 2017 …
Supreme Court of India22 May 2026Full text
2026 INSC 528 · [2026] 6 S.C.R. 592
Circumstantial Evidence – Complete chain of circumstances, when not established – Trial court found from the last seen together theory, extra-judicial confession, recovery of the objects used as weapons and a motorbike, the seizures carried out and the serology report, that a complete chain of circumstances was establi…
Supreme Court of India4 May 2026Full text
2026 INSC 447 · [2026] 5 S.C.R. 347
[2026] 5 S.C.R. 347 : 2026 INSC 447 Dr. Bais Surgical and Medical Institute Pvt. Ltd & Ors. v. Dhananjay Pande (Civil Appeal No. 8973 of 2010) 04 May 2026 [Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok Aradhe, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Whether, in the absence of a formal entry of the respondent no.1’s name in the register of…
Supreme Court of India2 Apr 2026Full text
2026 INSC 315 · [2026] 4 S.C.R. 298
Advs. for the Appellant(s): Ms. Kavita Vadia, Sr. Adv., Tabrez Ahmad, Syed Mehdi Imam, Varun Verma, Chavi Jain, S. U. Abbas. Advs. for the Respondent(s): Divynk Panwar, Ms. Pallavi Garg, Ms. Sanjana Sharma, Prajjwal Singh, Ms. Nidhi Jaswal. 300 [2026] 4 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court…
Supreme Court of India17 Mar 2026Full text
2026 INSC 251 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 586
* Author [2026] 3 S.C.R. 587 Mohammad Kaleem v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. weight of all testimonies and circumstances – Similarly, reliance on documentary corroboration is not required; oral evidence alone, if credible, may suffice – The Court’s emphasis on the lack of jail records and the physical plausibility of …
Supreme Court of India2 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 105 · [2026] 2 S.C.R. 257
Headnotes† Constitution of India – Art.243-O – Uttarakhand Panchayati Raj Act, 2016 – The Uttarakhand State Election Commission issued a revised notification resuming the Panchayat elections in the State – Pursuant thereto, respondent no.1 submitted his nomination for election to the post of Zila Panchayat – On failure…
Also on Law on Tips: Bare Acts · Legal news and analysis