⚖
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.
4,741–4,760 · Page 238 of 500
Supreme Court of India31 Aug 2020Full text
2020 INSC 489 · [2020] 8 S.C.R. 510
Judiciary – Though a fair criticism of judgment is permissible in law, a person cannot exceed the right u/Art.19(1)(a) to scandalize F the institution – Constitution of India – Art.19(1)(a). Judiciary – If a scathing attack is made on the judges, it would become difficult for them to work fearlessly and with the object…
Supreme Court of India14 Aug 2020Full text
2020 INSC 489 · [2020] 8 S.C.R. 443
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.
4,741–4,760 · Page 238 of 500
Supreme Court of India31 Aug 2020Full text
2020 INSC 489 · [2020] 8 S.C.R. 510
Judiciary – Though a fair criticism of judgment is permissible in law, a person cannot exceed the right u/Art.19(1)(a) to scandalize F the institution – Constitution of India – Art.19(1)(a). Judiciary – If a scathing attack is made on the judges, it would become difficult for them to work fearlessly and with the object…
Supreme Court of India14 Aug 2020Full text
2020 INSC 489 · [2020] 8 S.C.R. 443
H *P.N. Duda v. P. Shiv Shanker & Others (1988) 3 SCC 167 : [1988] 3 SCR 547 - relied on. IN RE: PRASHANT BHUSHAN AND ANR. 445 2.1 It is well settled that a citizen while exercising right A under Article 19(1) of the Constitution of India is entitled to make a fair criticism of a judge, judiciary and its functioning. H…
Supreme Court of India14 Aug 2020Full text
2020 INSC 488 · [2020] 6 S.C.R. 854
– s.53A. Transfer of Property Act, 1882 – s.53A – Defence under – G Discussed – Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Dismissing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1.1 The judgment and decree dated 28.09.1989 passed in the proceedings under Sections 30 and 31 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 has become final. Same was not questioned …
Supreme Court of India11 Aug 2020Full text
2020 INSC 487 · [2020] 10 S.C.R. 135
[2020] 10 S.C.R. 135 135 VINEETA SHARMA A v. RAKESH SHARMA & ORS. (Civil Appeal No. Diary No.32601 of 2018) AUGUST 11, 2020 B [ARUN MISHRA, S.ABDUL NAZEER AND M. R. SHAH, JJ.] Hindu Succession Act, 1956 – s.6 as amended by Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 – Interpretation of – Held: The provisions contained in su…
Supreme Court of India10 Aug 2020Full text
2020 INSC 484 · [2020] 7 S.C.R. 941
into ‘distinct category’ and seek representation in JCM that would not only defeat the purpose of JCM but would lead to groupism obstructing the working atmosphere and neither joint consultation nor consensus would prevail and th…
Supreme Court of India7 Aug 2020Full text
2020 INSC 483 · [2020] 9 S.C.R. 504
existed “sufficient cause” - The provision being a beneficial legislation “sufficient cause” must be given liberal interpretation to serve the object of the Act – In the present case delay of 45 days has been properly explained – The strict approach taken in the impugned order was hypertechnical and hence not sustainab…
Supreme Court of India7 Aug 2020Full text
2020 INSC 482 · [2020] 13 S.C.R. 318
Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966– ss.3,4, B 8, 21, 22, 51, 59-65, 68, 71-74, 91; Chapter VII- ss.125-129 – Scheme of the Act – Discussed. Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966– s.91 – Held: Condition precedent for variation of a scheme u/s.91 is an error, irregularity or informality. C Consti…
Supreme Court of India6 Aug 2020Full text
2020 INSC 481 · [2020] 6 S.C.R. 19
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited v. R. Santhakumari Velusamy and Others (2011) 9 SCC 510 : [2011] 14 SCR 502; Union of India v. Pushpa Rani (2008) 9 SCC D 242 : [2008] 11 SCR 440 – relied on. Case Law Reference [2011] 14 SCR 502 relied on Para 10 [2008] 11 SCR 440 relied on Para 12 E CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil App…
Supreme Court of India5 Aug 2020Full text
2020 INSC 478 · [2020] 7 S.C.R. 173
B Ms. Swarupama Chaturvedi, AAG, Puneet Jain, Ms. Pratibha Jain, Ms. Christi Jain, Sunny Choudhary, Harsh Parashar Advs. for the appearing parties. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by NAVIN SINHA, J. C 1. Leave granted. 2. The appellant assails his conviction under Section 8C read with Section 20(b)(ii)(c) of th…
Supreme Court of India5 Aug 2020Full text
2020 INSC 477 · [2020] 6 S.C.R. 289
D Constitution of India: Arts. 136 and 142 – Suit for recovery – Territorial jurisdiction questioned – Objection rejected – Later territorial jurisdiction objected to on the basis of exclusionary jurisdiction clause in the agreement between the parties – Objection rejected – In Revision E High Court directed return of …
Supreme Court of India5 Aug 2020Full text
2020 INSC 475 · [2020] 7 S.C.R. 158
educational institutions and for appointment in service – The Constitutional amendment was challenged on the grounds that it was ultra vires as it altered the basic structure of the Constitution; that it ran contrary to the dictum in *Indra Sawhney case etc. – Held: The questions involved and raised in the present case…
Supreme Court of India31 Jul 2020Full text
2020 INSC 474 · [2020] 11 S.C.R. 397
– s.21 – Constitution of India – Art.47. Words & Expressions – “established” – Meaning of – G Discussed. Dismissing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1.1 At the outset, this Court may straightaway agree with the dictum in Chintpurnic Medical College that the act of the H 397 398 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 11 S.C.R. A State…
Supreme Court of India30 Jul 2020Full text
2020 INSC 472 · [2020] 6 S.C.R. 8
round of litigation District Judge dismissed the petition – High Court by impugned order again remanded the matter to be adjudicated afresh – Appeal to Supreme Court – Held: District Judge had disposed of the petition u/s. 34 giving adequate reasons – High Court wrongly remanded the matter – Appeal disposed of. E CIVIL…
Supreme Court of India29 Jul 2020Full text
2020 INSC 470 · [2020] 6 S.C.R. 955
955 956 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 6 S.C.R. A vacancies nor the case of non-availability of candidates – The rank list which was operative till 03.10.2013 did not reflect the policy of reservation – Order of the Tribunal is restored. Allowing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1. The Circular of the Commission and the B Ex…
Supreme Court of India16 Jan 2020Full text
2020 INSC 47 · [2020] 1 S.C.R. 113
be covered by s.2-A of the 1947 Act – Workmen in their wisdom (or possibly, lack of it) approached the civil court and have been left high and dry for the last fifteen years without any adjudication on merits of their claims – Suit has not even been proceeded with on the basis that matter is pending before Supreme Cour…
Supreme Court of India29 Jul 2020Full text
2020 INSC 468 · [2020] 8 S.C.R. 165
Indisputably, it was the responsibility of the appellant-assessee to transport the goods (cement) of the company; and how to accomplish this task of transportation was a matter exclusively C within the domain of the appellant. Hence, hiring the services of truck operators/owners for this purpose could have only been un…
Supreme Court of India28 Jul 2020Full text
2020 INSC 467 · [2020] 6 S.C.R. 508
508 SUPREME COURT[2020]REPORTS6 S.C.R. 508 [2020] 6 S.C.R. A PARMINDER KAUR @ P.P. KAUR @ SONI v. STATE OF PUNJAB (Criminal Appeal No. 283 of 2011) B JULY 28, 2020 [N. V. RAMANA, SURYA KANT AND KRISHNA MURARI, JJ.] Penal Code, 1860 – ss.366A and 506 – Case of prosecution that the appellant, a single lady who had a youn…
Supreme Court of India27 Jul 2020Full text
2020 INSC 466 · [2020] 5 S.C.R. 299
300 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 5 S.C.R. A compensation of Rs. 41,69,831/- as claimed along with simple interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of application till the date of payment. Allowing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1. There are three aspects which are required to B be examined: the application of multipl…
Supreme Court of India27 Jul 2020Full text
2020 INSC 465 · [2020] 7 S.C.R. 89
ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE part time Director of the said Company and was never in charge A of the day to day business of the Company was very much on the record of the adjudicating officer. Thus, the material was brought by the appellant on the record that he was a part-time, non-executive Director not in charge of the a…
Supreme Court of India24 Jul 2020Full text
2020 INSC 464 · [2020] 6 S.C.R. 588
– But Act does not override the Special Rules for Tamil Nadu Basic H 588 R. PALANISAMY & ORS. v. THE REGISTRAR GENERAL, 589 HIGH COURT OF MADRAS & ORS. Service – The High Court and petitioners overlooked s.68 of the A 2016 Act – However, the ultimate conclusion reached by the High Court is unassailable – No ground to i…
Also on Law on Tips: Bare Acts · Legal news and analysis
H *P.N. Duda v. P. Shiv Shanker & Others (1988) 3 SCC 167 : [1988] 3 SCR 547 - relied on. IN RE: PRASHANT BHUSHAN AND ANR. 445 2.1 It is well settled that a citizen while exercising right A under Article 19(1) of the Constitution of India is entitled to make a fair criticism of a judge, judiciary and its functioning. H…
Supreme Court of India14 Aug 2020Full text
2020 INSC 488 · [2020] 6 S.C.R. 854
– s.53A. Transfer of Property Act, 1882 – s.53A – Defence under – G Discussed – Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Dismissing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1.1 The judgment and decree dated 28.09.1989 passed in the proceedings under Sections 30 and 31 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 has become final. Same was not questioned …
Supreme Court of India11 Aug 2020Full text
2020 INSC 487 · [2020] 10 S.C.R. 135
[2020] 10 S.C.R. 135 135 VINEETA SHARMA A v. RAKESH SHARMA & ORS. (Civil Appeal No. Diary No.32601 of 2018) AUGUST 11, 2020 B [ARUN MISHRA, S.ABDUL NAZEER AND M. R. SHAH, JJ.] Hindu Succession Act, 1956 – s.6 as amended by Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 – Interpretation of – Held: The provisions contained in su…
Supreme Court of India10 Aug 2020Full text
2020 INSC 484 · [2020] 7 S.C.R. 941
into ‘distinct category’ and seek representation in JCM that would not only defeat the purpose of JCM but would lead to groupism obstructing the working atmosphere and neither joint consultation nor consensus would prevail and th…
Supreme Court of India7 Aug 2020Full text
2020 INSC 483 · [2020] 9 S.C.R. 504
existed “sufficient cause” - The provision being a beneficial legislation “sufficient cause” must be given liberal interpretation to serve the object of the Act – In the present case delay of 45 days has been properly explained – The strict approach taken in the impugned order was hypertechnical and hence not sustainab…
Supreme Court of India7 Aug 2020Full text
2020 INSC 482 · [2020] 13 S.C.R. 318
Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966– ss.3,4, B 8, 21, 22, 51, 59-65, 68, 71-74, 91; Chapter VII- ss.125-129 – Scheme of the Act – Discussed. Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966– s.91 – Held: Condition precedent for variation of a scheme u/s.91 is an error, irregularity or informality. C Consti…
Supreme Court of India6 Aug 2020Full text
2020 INSC 481 · [2020] 6 S.C.R. 19
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited v. R. Santhakumari Velusamy and Others (2011) 9 SCC 510 : [2011] 14 SCR 502; Union of India v. Pushpa Rani (2008) 9 SCC D 242 : [2008] 11 SCR 440 – relied on. Case Law Reference [2011] 14 SCR 502 relied on Para 10 [2008] 11 SCR 440 relied on Para 12 E CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil App…
Supreme Court of India5 Aug 2020Full text
2020 INSC 478 · [2020] 7 S.C.R. 173
B Ms. Swarupama Chaturvedi, AAG, Puneet Jain, Ms. Pratibha Jain, Ms. Christi Jain, Sunny Choudhary, Harsh Parashar Advs. for the appearing parties. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by NAVIN SINHA, J. C 1. Leave granted. 2. The appellant assails his conviction under Section 8C read with Section 20(b)(ii)(c) of th…
Supreme Court of India5 Aug 2020Full text
2020 INSC 477 · [2020] 6 S.C.R. 289
D Constitution of India: Arts. 136 and 142 – Suit for recovery – Territorial jurisdiction questioned – Objection rejected – Later territorial jurisdiction objected to on the basis of exclusionary jurisdiction clause in the agreement between the parties – Objection rejected – In Revision E High Court directed return of …
Supreme Court of India5 Aug 2020Full text
2020 INSC 475 · [2020] 7 S.C.R. 158
educational institutions and for appointment in service – The Constitutional amendment was challenged on the grounds that it was ultra vires as it altered the basic structure of the Constitution; that it ran contrary to the dictum in *Indra Sawhney case etc. – Held: The questions involved and raised in the present case…
Supreme Court of India31 Jul 2020Full text
2020 INSC 474 · [2020] 11 S.C.R. 397
– s.21 – Constitution of India – Art.47. Words & Expressions – “established” – Meaning of – G Discussed. Dismissing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1.1 At the outset, this Court may straightaway agree with the dictum in Chintpurnic Medical College that the act of the H 397 398 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 11 S.C.R. A State…
Supreme Court of India30 Jul 2020Full text
2020 INSC 472 · [2020] 6 S.C.R. 8
round of litigation District Judge dismissed the petition – High Court by impugned order again remanded the matter to be adjudicated afresh – Appeal to Supreme Court – Held: District Judge had disposed of the petition u/s. 34 giving adequate reasons – High Court wrongly remanded the matter – Appeal disposed of. E CIVIL…
Supreme Court of India29 Jul 2020Full text
2020 INSC 470 · [2020] 6 S.C.R. 955
955 956 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 6 S.C.R. A vacancies nor the case of non-availability of candidates – The rank list which was operative till 03.10.2013 did not reflect the policy of reservation – Order of the Tribunal is restored. Allowing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1. The Circular of the Commission and the B Ex…
Supreme Court of India16 Jan 2020Full text
2020 INSC 47 · [2020] 1 S.C.R. 113
be covered by s.2-A of the 1947 Act – Workmen in their wisdom (or possibly, lack of it) approached the civil court and have been left high and dry for the last fifteen years without any adjudication on merits of their claims – Suit has not even been proceeded with on the basis that matter is pending before Supreme Cour…
Supreme Court of India29 Jul 2020Full text
2020 INSC 468 · [2020] 8 S.C.R. 165
Indisputably, it was the responsibility of the appellant-assessee to transport the goods (cement) of the company; and how to accomplish this task of transportation was a matter exclusively C within the domain of the appellant. Hence, hiring the services of truck operators/owners for this purpose could have only been un…
Supreme Court of India28 Jul 2020Full text
2020 INSC 467 · [2020] 6 S.C.R. 508
508 SUPREME COURT[2020]REPORTS6 S.C.R. 508 [2020] 6 S.C.R. A PARMINDER KAUR @ P.P. KAUR @ SONI v. STATE OF PUNJAB (Criminal Appeal No. 283 of 2011) B JULY 28, 2020 [N. V. RAMANA, SURYA KANT AND KRISHNA MURARI, JJ.] Penal Code, 1860 – ss.366A and 506 – Case of prosecution that the appellant, a single lady who had a youn…
Supreme Court of India27 Jul 2020Full text
2020 INSC 466 · [2020] 5 S.C.R. 299
300 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 5 S.C.R. A compensation of Rs. 41,69,831/- as claimed along with simple interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of application till the date of payment. Allowing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1. There are three aspects which are required to B be examined: the application of multipl…
Supreme Court of India27 Jul 2020Full text
2020 INSC 465 · [2020] 7 S.C.R. 89
ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE part time Director of the said Company and was never in charge A of the day to day business of the Company was very much on the record of the adjudicating officer. Thus, the material was brought by the appellant on the record that he was a part-time, non-executive Director not in charge of the a…
Supreme Court of India24 Jul 2020Full text
2020 INSC 464 · [2020] 6 S.C.R. 588
– But Act does not override the Special Rules for Tamil Nadu Basic H 588 R. PALANISAMY & ORS. v. THE REGISTRAR GENERAL, 589 HIGH COURT OF MADRAS & ORS. Service – The High Court and petitioners overlooked s.68 of the A 2016 Act – However, the ultimate conclusion reached by the High Court is unassailable – No ground to i…
Also on Law on Tips: Bare Acts · Legal news and analysis