⚖
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.
161–180 · Page 9 of 500
Supreme Court of India6 Jan 2026Full text
2026 INSC 22 · [2026] 2 S.C.R. 47
The authority conducting the auction expected a higher bid than what the highest bidder had bid, whether it can be a reason to discard the highest bid.
Supreme Court of India10 Mar 2026Full text
2026 INSC 219 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 465
i) Whether the Smt. Radhika Sinha Institute and Sachchidanand Sinha Library (Requisition & Management) Act, 2015 is manifestly arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India; ii) Whether the impugned Act effects compulsory acquisition and extinguishment of rights in a confiscatory manner, thereby offending Article 300A read with Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
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.
161–180 · Page 9 of 500
Supreme Court of India6 Jan 2026Full text
2026 INSC 22 · [2026] 2 S.C.R. 47
The authority conducting the auction expected a higher bid than what the highest bidder had bid, whether it can be a reason to discard the highest bid.
Supreme Court of India10 Mar 2026Full text
2026 INSC 219 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 465
i) Whether the Smt. Radhika Sinha Institute and Sachchidanand Sinha Library (Requisition & Management) Act, 2015 is manifestly arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India; ii) Whether the impugned Act effects compulsory acquisition and extinguishment of rights in a confiscatory manner, thereby offending Article 300A read with Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
Supreme Court of India10 Mar 2026Full text
2026 INSC 218 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 393
Whether the absence of a uniform policy governing compensation in cases of death or injury following administration of COVID-19 vaccination results in violation of right to life protected under the Constitution; if yes, can this Court direct the respondents to frame a policy in that regard.
Supreme Court of India10 Mar 2026Full text
2026 INSC 217 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 314
Whether the conviction of the appellant-P based solely on circumstantial evidence as convicted by the trial court and upheld by the High Court could be sustained in law. Whether the incriminating evidence are proved by cogent and admissible evidence, forming an unbroken chain pointing unequivocally towards the guilt of the appellant.
Supreme Court of India10 Mar 2026Full text
2026 INSC 216 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 301
Whether Sugarcane Growers Cooperative Societies, Bajpur and Gadarpur, situated in Udham Singh Nagar, District of Uttarakhand could be treated as Multi-State Cooperative Societies by operation of s.103 of Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002, despite their prior reorganisation and confinement of their area of operations to a single State, under the statutory framework governing State reorganisation.
Supreme Court of India10 Mar 2026Full text
2026 INSC 213 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 493
Issue arose whether the reduction of share capital u/s.66 of the Companies Act, 2013, and the consequent forced exit of minority shareholders, was arbitrary and unfair.
Supreme Court of India9 Mar 2026Full text
2026 INSC 212 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 293
Issue arose whether the High Court erred in granting the relief of quashing solely to sister-in-law, on the ground that the allegations against her were general in nature, while declining the same relief to the appellants-parents-in-laws.
Supreme Court of India9 Mar 2026Full text
2026 INSC 211 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 277
Whether the High Court’s omission to expressly adjudicate the application filed u/Or.XLI, r.27 of CPC while deciding the first appeal has resulted in any manifest injustice or miscarriage of justice so as to warrant interference by this Court.
Supreme Court of India6 Jan 2026Full text
2026 INSC 21 · [2026] 1 S.C.R. 332
Issue arose whether the High Court was justified in dismissing the writ petitions by not applying s.4 of the Repealing Act and thereby not granting relief to the appellants; was the delivery of notice u/s.10(5) of the ULC Act to the appellants (as possessors of the concerned lands) a mandatory step, the non-fulfilment of which would render abatement of the proceedings in terms of s.4 of the Repealing Act; and that despite the recording of lands in the name of the State Government, if actual possession was not subsequently transferred to the Government, would this render the proceedings to abat
Supreme Court of India5 Jan 2026Full text
2026 INSC 2 · [2026] 1 S.C.R. 609
Matter pertains to grant of bail to accused-appellants in relation to arrests made pursuant to Delhi Riots, 2020, considering the prolonged incarceration, and the constitutional plea u/Art.21 of the Constitution.
Supreme Court of India18 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 167 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 266
The appellants herein were dismissed from the post of librarian on which they were appointed by the State of Bihar. It was on account of the fact that the degree obtained by them from the University of Technology and Science, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, was declared invalid as the Chhattisgarh Niji Kshetra Vishwavidyalaya Act, 2002 under which the University was established, was later on declared to be ultra vires.
Supreme Court of India17 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 164 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 243
Whether the High Court was justified in reducing the sentence awarded to the Private Respondents.
Supreme Court of India17 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 162 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 231
Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, there was a complete chain of circumstances leading only to the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused without leaving room for any other hypothesis; whether the order of the Trial Court convicting the accused and that of the High Court affirming the same ought to be set aside.
Supreme Court of India17 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 161 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 220
Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order passed by the High Court granting bail to respondent No.1 extending the parity principle ought to be set aside.
Supreme Court of India6 Jan 2026Full text
2026 INSC 16 · [2026] 2 S.C.R. 31
Whether in absence of any provision in the Maharashtra State Warehousing Corporation (Staff) Service Regulations, 1992 for institution of departmental proceedings against a superannuated employee, the Corporation could have proceeded against the appellant applying Rule 27(I)(2)(b)(i) of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1982. In case enquiry is instituted after retirement of appellant, whether the Corporation had the jurisdiction to continue such enquiry and impose punishment, withholding the retiral benefits and direct recovery.
Supreme Court of India13 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 159 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 179
Issue arose for consideration whether change of land use-CLU dated 13.12.2021 could have been granted for the proposed unit when the land use under the Master Plan for Sangrur treated the site as falling in rural agricultural zone; whether “approval” recorded in the 43rd meeting of the Punjab Regional and Town Planning and Development Board dated 05.01.2022 could lawfully cure the admitted defect in the CLU and whether such approval is capable in law of operating as an alteration or amendment of the Master Plan under the PRTPD Act; whether the siting norms and environmental safeguards, includi
Supreme Court of India13 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 154 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 160
Issue as regards the applicability of the judgments in S.Nithya to the cricket associations; applicability of BCCI Constitution to the Appellant-District Cricket Association.
Supreme Court of India13 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 152 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 144
In the absence of any subsisting statutory control or saving provision operative on the date of the alleged incident, whether the prosecution of the appellants under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 is legally tenable.
Supreme Court of India13 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 151 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 125
Issue arose for consideration whether r.6(2)(24)(iii) of Chapter XXXII of the Kerala Education Rules mandates that the State Eligibility Test-SET qualification must be in the concerned subject only for appointment as Higher Secondary School Teachers-HSST or in any subject would suffice for eligibility, and if so, whether the appellant satisfies the said requirement or qualifies for exemption u/r.10(4) of Chapter XXXII of the Rules.
Supreme Court of India12 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 150 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 113
Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the sale in favour of the Appellant was without notice; whether the sale in favour of the Appellant can be brought within the purview of pendente lite, given that the arbitral award is for the recovery of money; whether the Appellant is a transferee pendente lite/post arbitral award purchaser, and is barred by Or.XXI r.102, CPC from resisting the execution.
Also on Law on Tips: Bare Acts · Legal news and analysis
Supreme Court of India10 Mar 2026Full text
2026 INSC 218 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 393
Whether the absence of a uniform policy governing compensation in cases of death or injury following administration of COVID-19 vaccination results in violation of right to life protected under the Constitution; if yes, can this Court direct the respondents to frame a policy in that regard.
Supreme Court of India10 Mar 2026Full text
2026 INSC 217 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 314
Whether the conviction of the appellant-P based solely on circumstantial evidence as convicted by the trial court and upheld by the High Court could be sustained in law. Whether the incriminating evidence are proved by cogent and admissible evidence, forming an unbroken chain pointing unequivocally towards the guilt of the appellant.
Supreme Court of India10 Mar 2026Full text
2026 INSC 216 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 301
Whether Sugarcane Growers Cooperative Societies, Bajpur and Gadarpur, situated in Udham Singh Nagar, District of Uttarakhand could be treated as Multi-State Cooperative Societies by operation of s.103 of Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002, despite their prior reorganisation and confinement of their area of operations to a single State, under the statutory framework governing State reorganisation.
Supreme Court of India10 Mar 2026Full text
2026 INSC 213 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 493
Issue arose whether the reduction of share capital u/s.66 of the Companies Act, 2013, and the consequent forced exit of minority shareholders, was arbitrary and unfair.
Supreme Court of India9 Mar 2026Full text
2026 INSC 212 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 293
Issue arose whether the High Court erred in granting the relief of quashing solely to sister-in-law, on the ground that the allegations against her were general in nature, while declining the same relief to the appellants-parents-in-laws.
Supreme Court of India9 Mar 2026Full text
2026 INSC 211 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 277
Whether the High Court’s omission to expressly adjudicate the application filed u/Or.XLI, r.27 of CPC while deciding the first appeal has resulted in any manifest injustice or miscarriage of justice so as to warrant interference by this Court.
Supreme Court of India6 Jan 2026Full text
2026 INSC 21 · [2026] 1 S.C.R. 332
Issue arose whether the High Court was justified in dismissing the writ petitions by not applying s.4 of the Repealing Act and thereby not granting relief to the appellants; was the delivery of notice u/s.10(5) of the ULC Act to the appellants (as possessors of the concerned lands) a mandatory step, the non-fulfilment of which would render abatement of the proceedings in terms of s.4 of the Repealing Act; and that despite the recording of lands in the name of the State Government, if actual possession was not subsequently transferred to the Government, would this render the proceedings to abat
Supreme Court of India5 Jan 2026Full text
2026 INSC 2 · [2026] 1 S.C.R. 609
Matter pertains to grant of bail to accused-appellants in relation to arrests made pursuant to Delhi Riots, 2020, considering the prolonged incarceration, and the constitutional plea u/Art.21 of the Constitution.
Supreme Court of India18 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 167 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 266
The appellants herein were dismissed from the post of librarian on which they were appointed by the State of Bihar. It was on account of the fact that the degree obtained by them from the University of Technology and Science, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, was declared invalid as the Chhattisgarh Niji Kshetra Vishwavidyalaya Act, 2002 under which the University was established, was later on declared to be ultra vires.
Supreme Court of India17 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 164 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 243
Whether the High Court was justified in reducing the sentence awarded to the Private Respondents.
Supreme Court of India17 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 162 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 231
Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, there was a complete chain of circumstances leading only to the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused without leaving room for any other hypothesis; whether the order of the Trial Court convicting the accused and that of the High Court affirming the same ought to be set aside.
Supreme Court of India17 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 161 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 220
Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order passed by the High Court granting bail to respondent No.1 extending the parity principle ought to be set aside.
Supreme Court of India6 Jan 2026Full text
2026 INSC 16 · [2026] 2 S.C.R. 31
Whether in absence of any provision in the Maharashtra State Warehousing Corporation (Staff) Service Regulations, 1992 for institution of departmental proceedings against a superannuated employee, the Corporation could have proceeded against the appellant applying Rule 27(I)(2)(b)(i) of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1982. In case enquiry is instituted after retirement of appellant, whether the Corporation had the jurisdiction to continue such enquiry and impose punishment, withholding the retiral benefits and direct recovery.
Supreme Court of India13 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 159 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 179
Issue arose for consideration whether change of land use-CLU dated 13.12.2021 could have been granted for the proposed unit when the land use under the Master Plan for Sangrur treated the site as falling in rural agricultural zone; whether “approval” recorded in the 43rd meeting of the Punjab Regional and Town Planning and Development Board dated 05.01.2022 could lawfully cure the admitted defect in the CLU and whether such approval is capable in law of operating as an alteration or amendment of the Master Plan under the PRTPD Act; whether the siting norms and environmental safeguards, includi
Supreme Court of India13 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 154 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 160
Issue as regards the applicability of the judgments in S.Nithya to the cricket associations; applicability of BCCI Constitution to the Appellant-District Cricket Association.
Supreme Court of India13 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 152 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 144
In the absence of any subsisting statutory control or saving provision operative on the date of the alleged incident, whether the prosecution of the appellants under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 is legally tenable.
Supreme Court of India13 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 151 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 125
Issue arose for consideration whether r.6(2)(24)(iii) of Chapter XXXII of the Kerala Education Rules mandates that the State Eligibility Test-SET qualification must be in the concerned subject only for appointment as Higher Secondary School Teachers-HSST or in any subject would suffice for eligibility, and if so, whether the appellant satisfies the said requirement or qualifies for exemption u/r.10(4) of Chapter XXXII of the Rules.
Supreme Court of India12 Feb 2026Full text
2026 INSC 150 · [2026] 3 S.C.R. 113
Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the sale in favour of the Appellant was without notice; whether the sale in favour of the Appellant can be brought within the purview of pendente lite, given that the arbitral award is for the recovery of money; whether the Appellant is a transferee pendente lite/post arbitral award purchaser, and is barred by Or.XXI r.102, CPC from resisting the execution.
Also on Law on Tips: Bare Acts · Legal news and analysis