⚖
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.
1,421–1,440 · Page 72 of 500
Supreme Court of India6 Sep 2024Full text
2024 INSC 715 · [2024] 9 S.C.R. 638
Matter pertains to foreclosing of the right of the opposite party- appellant to file written statement.
Supreme Court of India20 Sep 2024Full text
2024 INSC 713 · [2024] 9 S.C.R. 818
High Court, if justified in acquitting the parents-in-laws and the husband of the victim-daughter-in-law of the offences punishable u/ss.304-B and 498-A IPC.
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.
1,421–1,440 · Page 72 of 500
Supreme Court of India6 Sep 2024Full text
2024 INSC 715 · [2024] 9 S.C.R. 638
Matter pertains to foreclosing of the right of the opposite party- appellant to file written statement.
Supreme Court of India20 Sep 2024Full text
2024 INSC 713 · [2024] 9 S.C.R. 818
High Court, if justified in acquitting the parents-in-laws and the husband of the victim-daughter-in-law of the offences punishable u/ss.304-B and 498-A IPC.
Supreme Court of India20 Sep 2024Full text
2024 INSC 711 · [2024] 9 S.C.R. 490
Issue arose as to whether the arbitral award is in conflict with the public policy of India, or/and is vitiated by patent illegality appearing on the face of the award; whether the holding company could have been subjected to arbitration and made jointly and severally liable along with the project beneficiary-appellant for the award; whether respondent’s claim for the outstanding principal amount barred by limitation; whether the counter claim, in respect of cost of repair/replacement of gear boxes and fan modules, could be treated as barred by time when the other side’s claim, arising out of
Supreme Court of India20 Sep 2024Full text
2024 INSC 710 · [2024] 9 S.C.R. 894
What is the scope of jurisdiction of the referral court under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996; Whether in the instant case, on a prima facie view, the SRG Group being a non-signatory to the Family Arrangement Agreement (FAA), can be referred to arbitration.
Supreme Court of India30 Jan 2024Full text
2024 INSC 71 · [2024] 1 S.C.R. 1105
The appellants-landlords purchased the subject-premises in the year 1992 from its erstwhile owner. Both the tenants were inducted by the erstwhile owner of the building in question. On 23.01.2002, a demolition notice was issued by the Municipal Council. Thereafter, the notices for eviction were subsequently sent to the tenants, on the various grounds including municipality’s demolition notice and bonafide requirement of landlord. In the present appeals, the appellants are assailing a judgment delivered by a Single Judge of the High Court on 04.08.2015 exercising his revisional jurisdiction inv
Supreme Court of India20 Sep 2024Full text
2024 INSC 709 · [2024] 9 S.C.R. 443
Whether the subject land and all other liabilities associated with it were transferred to the Appellant in terms of the Scheme; Whether it was the Appellant or JAL who was legally obliged to pay the compensation amount determined under the Supplementary Award; Whether the land in terms of Section 101 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 can be returned to the Respondent Nos. 1-6 at this stage under the scheme of the Act; In other words, what is the scope of Section 101; Whether the State of Himachal Pradesh, being a w
Supreme Court of India20 Sep 2024Full text
2024 INSC 708 · [2024] 9 S.C.R. 774
Respondent Nos.3 and 4, son-in-law and daughter of the petitioner respectively, made attempts to falsely implicate the Respondent No.2-a star witness in the Nitish Katara case on whose evidence the accused son and nephew of Ex-Minister and M.P. Mr. D.P. Yadav were convicted, by filing various false proceedings in the name of the petitioner without his knowledge, consent or authority in the High Court and Supreme Court with the assistance of a battery of advocates and many other unknown persons. Present SLP was filed against Respondent No.2 in the name of the petitioner against the order allowi
Supreme Court of India19 Sep 2024Full text
2024 INSC 706 · [2024] 9 S.C.R. 425
The core issue involved in these appeals centres around the deduction of 50% compensation awardable to the appellant- claimants, who have assailed the concurrent findings of the Courts below on the aspect of contributory negligence whereby, the driver of the car, who also died in the accident, was held jointly responsible for causing the collision.
Supreme Court of India28 Aug 2024Full text
2024 INSC 704 · [2024] 8 S.C.R. 984
Issue arose as regards admissibility of the insufficiently stamped agreement to sell.
Supreme Court of India3 Jan 2024Full text
2024 INSC 7 · [2024] 1 S.C.R. 21
Three appellants herein were appointed as Assistant Teachers at the Junior High School on 25.06.1999. From October, 2005, abruptly their salaries were stopped. Whether the State was justified in abruptly stopping their salary.
Supreme Court of India9 Sep 2024Full text
2024 INSC 699 · [2024] 9 S.C.R. 408
Issue arose as regards the fixation of the fee for the undergraduate medical degree course offered by college.
Supreme Court of India13 Sep 2024Full text
2024 INSC 692 · [2024] 9 S.C.R. 830
Whether the High Court was right in declining to grant relief to the writ petitioners-appellants herein on the ground of delay and laches; whether the appeals filed by the respondent-Mumbai Municipal Corporation would call for any interference; what order to be passed.
Supreme Court of India3 Sep 2024Full text
2024 INSC 691 · [2024] 9 S.C.R. 229
In 2014, an application purported to be u/s. 141 CPC or under Order XX Rule 12 CPC was filed by the respondents for the determination of the mesne profits as directed by the judgment, order and decree dated 12.07.1973. Whether such an application is barred by limitation.
Supreme Court of India23 Jul 2024Full text
2024 INSC 690 · [2024] 7 S.C.R. 1476
High Court whether justified in exercising its inherent power under Section 482, Cr.P.C and the power under Section 147, N.I. Act, 1881 to compound the offence u/s.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, despite the non-consent of the complainant-appellant.
Supreme Court of India13 Sep 2024Full text
2024 INSC 689 · [2024] 9 S.C.R. 354
Issue arose as to whether the Court can dismiss an election petition at the very threshold on an application u/Ord. VII r. 11 CPC or that the petition needs a detailed consideration by the Court.
Supreme Court of India13 Sep 2024Full text
2024 INSC 687 · [2024] 9 S.C.R. 683
The instant appeals are directed against the judgments and orders dated 05.08.2024 passed by the High Court, dismissing the appellant’s challenge to his arrest being illegal as well as his application for the grant of regular bail.
Supreme Court of India12 Sep 2024Full text
2024 INSC 686 · [2024] 9 S.C.R. 473
Whether an application for extension of time under Section 29A, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 can be filed after the expiry of the period for making of the arbitral award.
Supreme Court of India9 Sep 2024Full text
2024 INSC 685 · [2024] 9 S.C.R. 414
Eviction decree was passed against the respondent-tenant (contemnor). Supreme Court dismissed the SLP filed by him vide order dtd. 06.06.2023 and he was granted nine months time expiring on 06.03.2024 to vacate the suit premises subject to filing of undertaking/affidavit. Undertaking/affidavit was filed belatedly and the contemnor continued to litigate filing Review Petitions and applications seeking extension of time which were dismissed. He deliberately did not appear in the Court despite specific directions issued for personal appearance or on service of bailable/non-bailable warrant. Fresh
Supreme Court of India12 Sep 2024Full text
2024 INSC 684 · [2024] 9 S.C.R. 397
FIR under Section 23 of the Pre Conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 and a complaint under Section 28(1) was filed against the appellant and co-accused persons. The allegation was of indulging in the illegal activity of sex determination using ultrasound. In the facts of the case, when there was no legal decision by the Appropriate Authority in terms of sub-section (1) of Section 30 to search for the appellant’s clinic and the decision to carry out the search was an individual decision of the Civil Surgeon-Chairman of the concerned Appropriate
Supreme Court of India12 Sep 2024Full text
2024 INSC 683 · [2024] 9 S.C.R. 313
Issue arose as to whether the non-supply of the statement of the person stating about the detenu’s dealing in foreign exchange to the detenu, has affected the right of the detenu to make an effective representation u/Art. 22(5); and whether non-receipt of the representation and the delay in deciding the representation by the Detaining Authority and the Central Government would affect the right of detenu u/Art.22(5) of the Constitution.
Also on Law on Tips: Bare Acts · Legal news and analysis
Supreme Court of India20 Sep 2024Full text
2024 INSC 711 · [2024] 9 S.C.R. 490
Issue arose as to whether the arbitral award is in conflict with the public policy of India, or/and is vitiated by patent illegality appearing on the face of the award; whether the holding company could have been subjected to arbitration and made jointly and severally liable along with the project beneficiary-appellant for the award; whether respondent’s claim for the outstanding principal amount barred by limitation; whether the counter claim, in respect of cost of repair/replacement of gear boxes and fan modules, could be treated as barred by time when the other side’s claim, arising out of
Supreme Court of India20 Sep 2024Full text
2024 INSC 710 · [2024] 9 S.C.R. 894
What is the scope of jurisdiction of the referral court under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996; Whether in the instant case, on a prima facie view, the SRG Group being a non-signatory to the Family Arrangement Agreement (FAA), can be referred to arbitration.
Supreme Court of India30 Jan 2024Full text
2024 INSC 71 · [2024] 1 S.C.R. 1105
The appellants-landlords purchased the subject-premises in the year 1992 from its erstwhile owner. Both the tenants were inducted by the erstwhile owner of the building in question. On 23.01.2002, a demolition notice was issued by the Municipal Council. Thereafter, the notices for eviction were subsequently sent to the tenants, on the various grounds including municipality’s demolition notice and bonafide requirement of landlord. In the present appeals, the appellants are assailing a judgment delivered by a Single Judge of the High Court on 04.08.2015 exercising his revisional jurisdiction inv
Supreme Court of India20 Sep 2024Full text
2024 INSC 709 · [2024] 9 S.C.R. 443
Whether the subject land and all other liabilities associated with it were transferred to the Appellant in terms of the Scheme; Whether it was the Appellant or JAL who was legally obliged to pay the compensation amount determined under the Supplementary Award; Whether the land in terms of Section 101 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 can be returned to the Respondent Nos. 1-6 at this stage under the scheme of the Act; In other words, what is the scope of Section 101; Whether the State of Himachal Pradesh, being a w
Supreme Court of India20 Sep 2024Full text
2024 INSC 708 · [2024] 9 S.C.R. 774
Respondent Nos.3 and 4, son-in-law and daughter of the petitioner respectively, made attempts to falsely implicate the Respondent No.2-a star witness in the Nitish Katara case on whose evidence the accused son and nephew of Ex-Minister and M.P. Mr. D.P. Yadav were convicted, by filing various false proceedings in the name of the petitioner without his knowledge, consent or authority in the High Court and Supreme Court with the assistance of a battery of advocates and many other unknown persons. Present SLP was filed against Respondent No.2 in the name of the petitioner against the order allowi
Supreme Court of India19 Sep 2024Full text
2024 INSC 706 · [2024] 9 S.C.R. 425
The core issue involved in these appeals centres around the deduction of 50% compensation awardable to the appellant- claimants, who have assailed the concurrent findings of the Courts below on the aspect of contributory negligence whereby, the driver of the car, who also died in the accident, was held jointly responsible for causing the collision.
Supreme Court of India28 Aug 2024Full text
2024 INSC 704 · [2024] 8 S.C.R. 984
Issue arose as regards admissibility of the insufficiently stamped agreement to sell.
Supreme Court of India3 Jan 2024Full text
2024 INSC 7 · [2024] 1 S.C.R. 21
Three appellants herein were appointed as Assistant Teachers at the Junior High School on 25.06.1999. From October, 2005, abruptly their salaries were stopped. Whether the State was justified in abruptly stopping their salary.
Supreme Court of India9 Sep 2024Full text
2024 INSC 699 · [2024] 9 S.C.R. 408
Issue arose as regards the fixation of the fee for the undergraduate medical degree course offered by college.
Supreme Court of India13 Sep 2024Full text
2024 INSC 692 · [2024] 9 S.C.R. 830
Whether the High Court was right in declining to grant relief to the writ petitioners-appellants herein on the ground of delay and laches; whether the appeals filed by the respondent-Mumbai Municipal Corporation would call for any interference; what order to be passed.
Supreme Court of India3 Sep 2024Full text
2024 INSC 691 · [2024] 9 S.C.R. 229
In 2014, an application purported to be u/s. 141 CPC or under Order XX Rule 12 CPC was filed by the respondents for the determination of the mesne profits as directed by the judgment, order and decree dated 12.07.1973. Whether such an application is barred by limitation.
Supreme Court of India23 Jul 2024Full text
2024 INSC 690 · [2024] 7 S.C.R. 1476
High Court whether justified in exercising its inherent power under Section 482, Cr.P.C and the power under Section 147, N.I. Act, 1881 to compound the offence u/s.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, despite the non-consent of the complainant-appellant.
Supreme Court of India13 Sep 2024Full text
2024 INSC 689 · [2024] 9 S.C.R. 354
Issue arose as to whether the Court can dismiss an election petition at the very threshold on an application u/Ord. VII r. 11 CPC or that the petition needs a detailed consideration by the Court.
Supreme Court of India13 Sep 2024Full text
2024 INSC 687 · [2024] 9 S.C.R. 683
The instant appeals are directed against the judgments and orders dated 05.08.2024 passed by the High Court, dismissing the appellant’s challenge to his arrest being illegal as well as his application for the grant of regular bail.
Supreme Court of India12 Sep 2024Full text
2024 INSC 686 · [2024] 9 S.C.R. 473
Whether an application for extension of time under Section 29A, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 can be filed after the expiry of the period for making of the arbitral award.
Supreme Court of India9 Sep 2024Full text
2024 INSC 685 · [2024] 9 S.C.R. 414
Eviction decree was passed against the respondent-tenant (contemnor). Supreme Court dismissed the SLP filed by him vide order dtd. 06.06.2023 and he was granted nine months time expiring on 06.03.2024 to vacate the suit premises subject to filing of undertaking/affidavit. Undertaking/affidavit was filed belatedly and the contemnor continued to litigate filing Review Petitions and applications seeking extension of time which were dismissed. He deliberately did not appear in the Court despite specific directions issued for personal appearance or on service of bailable/non-bailable warrant. Fresh
Supreme Court of India12 Sep 2024Full text
2024 INSC 684 · [2024] 9 S.C.R. 397
FIR under Section 23 of the Pre Conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 and a complaint under Section 28(1) was filed against the appellant and co-accused persons. The allegation was of indulging in the illegal activity of sex determination using ultrasound. In the facts of the case, when there was no legal decision by the Appropriate Authority in terms of sub-section (1) of Section 30 to search for the appellant’s clinic and the decision to carry out the search was an individual decision of the Civil Surgeon-Chairman of the concerned Appropriate
Supreme Court of India12 Sep 2024Full text
2024 INSC 683 · [2024] 9 S.C.R. 313
Issue arose as to whether the non-supply of the statement of the person stating about the detenu’s dealing in foreign exchange to the detenu, has affected the right of the detenu to make an effective representation u/Art. 22(5); and whether non-receipt of the representation and the delay in deciding the representation by the Detaining Authority and the Central Government would affect the right of detenu u/Art.22(5) of the Constitution.
Also on Law on Tips: Bare Acts · Legal news and analysis