Hibbaan/DIVYADRISHTI huggingface dataset:
THANGAM AND ANOTHERversusNAVAMANI AMMAL
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 8935/2011
Decision Date: 04-03-2024
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC164

C.T. RAVIKUMAR*, RAJESH BINDAL Issue for Consideration Genuineness of the Will, a registered document, executed by testator (husband of appellant no.1 and father of appellant no.2) in favour of respondent-plaintiff (daughter of his brother). Headnotes Will – Genuineness of – When not surrounded by suspicious bequeathed a part of his property in favour of the respondent-daughter of his brother – Names of his widow-appellant no.1 and minor daughter- appellant no.2 were not mentioned in the Will – Suit filed by the respondent for declaration and injunction was decreed, Will was held to 

Summary: Englishਪੰਜਾਬੀ - PunjabiDisclaimer 
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools. 
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.
						 
						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India. 
						 
						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text. 
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.THANGAM AND ANOTHERversusNAVAMANI AMMAL-[2024] 3 S.C.R. 1462024 INSC 164Coram : C.T. RAVIKUMAR*, RAJESH BINDALIssue for Consideration Genuineness of the Will, a registered document, executed by testator (husband of appellant no.1 and father of appellant no.2) in favour of respondent-plaintiff (daughter of his brother). Headnotes Will – Genuineness of – When not surrounded by suspicious bequeathed a part of his property in favour of the respondent-daughter of his brother – Names of his widow-appellant no.1 and minor daughter- appellant no.2 were not mentioned in the Will – Suit filed by the respondent for declaration and injunction was decreed, Will was held to
SUHAS CHAKMAversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Case No.: WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No. 1082/2020
Decision Date: 23-10-2024
Disposal: Directions issued
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC813

BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI*, K.V. VISWANATHAN Issue for Consideration Access to free and timely legal aid for prison inmates. Headnotes† Free Legal Aid – Constitutional and Statutory Framework – Constitution of India – Articles 21, 39-A – Equal justice and free legal aid – Legal Services Authorities Act, by NALSA for making legal services available, creating awareness about convict’s right of appeal, availability of free legal services – Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) by NALSA on Access to Legal Aid Services to Prisoners and Functioning of the Prison Legal Aid Clinics 2022 Flip viewPDF

Summary: SUHAS CHAKMAversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.-[2024] 10 S.C.R. 17692024 INSC 813Coram : BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI*, K.V. VISWANATHANIssue for Consideration Access to free and timely legal aid for prison inmates. Headnotes† Free Legal Aid – Constitutional and Statutory Framework – Constitution of India – Articles 21, 39-A – Equal justice and free legal aid – Legal Services Authorities Act, by NALSA for making legal services available, creating awareness about convict’s right of appeal, availability of free legal services – Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) by NALSA on Access to Legal Aid Services to Prisoners and Functioning of the Prison Legal Aid Clinics 2022Flip viewPDF
ATHAR PARWEZversusUNION OF INDIA
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 5387/2024
Decision Date: 17-12-2024
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

ABHAY S. OKA*, AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH Issue for Consideration Appellant alleged to be an active member of the Popular Front of India (PFI) involved in planning to cause disturbance during the proposed visit of Prime Minister of India to Patna in 2022. Chargesheet filed against the appellant under Sections 121, 121A, 122, 153A & 18, 18A, 18B & 20, Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. Charges not framed yet. Appellant has undergone long incarceration, no likelihood of trial being completed in near future. High Court whether justified in denying bail. Headnotes† Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 

Summary: ATHAR PARWEZversusUNION OF INDIA-[2024] 12 S.C.R. 1093Coram : ABHAY S. OKA*, AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIHIssue for Consideration Appellant alleged to be an active member of the Popular Front of India (PFI) involved in planning to cause disturbance during the proposed visit of Prime Minister of India to Patna in 2022. Chargesheet filed against the appellant under Sections 121, 121A, 122, 153A & 18, 18A, 18B & 20, Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. Charges not framed yet. Appellant has undergone long incarceration, no likelihood of trial being completed in near future. High Court whether justified in denying bail. Headnotes† Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967
RAJENDHIRANversusMUTHAIAMMAL @ MUTHAYEE & ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 37/2024
Decision Date: 03-01-2024
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC12

VIKRAM NATH*, RAJESH BINDAL Issue for Consideration Whether the High Court was justified in allowing the Second Appeal filed by the respondents and setting aside the concurrent judgments of the trial court and the Sub-Judge dismissing the suit of the respondents and decreeing the suit. Headnotes Suit – Suit for by the High Court – Sustainability of, when on perverse findings and ignoring relevant material findings – Suit by the respondent seeking declaration that the sale deed executed was null and void; that suit property belonged to the respondents and for relief of an injunction against 

Summary: Englishनेपाली - Nepaliਪੰਜਾਬੀ - PunjabiDisclaimer 
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools. 
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.
						 
						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India. 
						 
						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text. 
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.RAJENDHIRANversusMUTHAIAMMAL @ MUTHAYEE & ORS.-[2024] 1 S.C.R. 812024 INSC 12Coram : VIKRAM NATH*, RAJESH BINDALIssue for Consideration Whether the High Court was justified in allowing the Second Appeal filed by the respondents and setting aside the concurrent judgments of the trial court and the Sub-Judge dismissing the suit of the respondents and decreeing the suit. Headnotes Suit – Suit for by the High Court – Sustainability of, when on perverse findings and ignoring relevant material findings – Suit by the respondent seeking declaration that the sale deed executed was null and void; that suit property belonged to the respondents and for relief of an injunction against
UNION OF INDIA & ANR.versusDR. ASKET SINGH & ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 1636/2016
Decision Date: 01-05-2024
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC409

ABHAY S. OKA*, UJJAL BHUYAN Issue for Consideration Matter pertains to the challenge to the relief of solatium and interest on the compensation amount granted by the High Court. Headnotes Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952 – s. 8(1)(a) – Compensation – Delay in payment of – by the High Court – Challenge to: Held: Right to hold immovable property is no longer a fundamental right but is a right u/Art. 300A – On facts, land owned by the first respondent stood vested in the Central Government in the year 1964 – Offer for payment of compensation was 

Summary: Englishनेपाली - Nepaliਪੰਜਾਬੀ - PunjabiDisclaimer 
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools. 
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.
						 
						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India. 
						 
						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text. 
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.UNION OF INDIA & ANR.versusDR. ASKET SINGH & ORS.-[2024] 6 S.C.R. 2272024 INSC 409Coram : ABHAY S. OKA*, UJJAL BHUYANIssue for Consideration Matter pertains to the challenge to the relief of solatium and interest on the compensation amount granted by the High Court. Headnotes Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952 – s. 8(1)(a) – Compensation – Delay in payment of – by the High Court – Challenge to: Held: Right to hold immovable property is no longer a fundamental right but is a right u/Art. 300A – On facts, land owned by the first respondent stood vested in the Central Government in the year 1964 – Offer for payment of compensation was
ALL INDIA JUDGES ASSOCIATIONversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS
Case No.: WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No. 643/2015
Decision Date: 04-01-2024
Disposal: Directions issued
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC26

D.Y. CHANDRACHUD*, J.B. PARDIWALA, MANOJ MISRA Issue for Consideration Allowances granted to judicial officers and retired judicial officers by the Second National Judicial Pay Commission (SNJPC). Headnotes Judiciary – District Judiciary – Recommendations by Second National Judicial Pay various allowances for judicial officers and retired judicial officers – 21 allowances considered by SNJPC in its report: Held: As regards House Building Advance (HBA), recommendation of SNJPC that HBA be available to judicial officers also for the purchase of a ready built house from 

Summary: Englishਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabiతెలుగు - TeluguDisclaimer 
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools. 
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.
						 
						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India. 
						 
						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text. 
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.ALL INDIA JUDGES ASSOCIATIONversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS-[2024] 1 S.C.R. 3272024 INSC 26Coram : D.Y. CHANDRACHUD*, J.B. PARDIWALA, MANOJ MISRAIssue for Consideration Allowances granted to judicial officers and retired judicial officers by the Second National Judicial Pay Commission (SNJPC). Headnotes Judiciary – District Judiciary – Recommendations by Second National Judicial Pay various allowances for judicial officers and retired judicial officers – 21 allowances considered by SNJPC in its report: Held: As regards House Building Advance (HBA), recommendation of SNJPC that HBA be available to judicial officers also for the purchase of a ready built house from
NISAR AHMAD & ORS.versusSAMI ULLAH (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. & ANR.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 9739/2011
Decision Date: 24-10-2024
Disposal: Unknown
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC820

ABHAY S. OKA*, UJJAL BHUYAN Issue for Consideration Issue as regards the shares of the parties in the disputed land. High Court whether justified in upholding the order passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation in revision and holding that the appellants had 1/12 share jointly in the plots comprised in Khata Nos. plot Nos. 35, 37, 111 and 112 which exclusively belonged to the respondents. Consolidation authorities whether erred in alloting 1/2 share to the predecessor-in-interest of the appellants. Headnotes† Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 – ss.9(2), 11(1) – High Decision Date : 24-10-2024 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL No. 9739/2011  | Direction Issue : Civil Appeals dismissed. Contempt Petition closed.  |  Bench : 2 JudgesFlip viewPDF

Summary: NISAR AHMAD & ORS.versusSAMI ULLAH (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. & ANR.-[2024] 10 S.C.R. 18552024 INSC 820Coram : ABHAY S. OKA*, UJJAL BHUYANIssue for Consideration Issue as regards the shares of the parties in the disputed land. High Court whether justified in upholding the order passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation in revision and holding that the appellants had 1/12 share jointly in the plots comprised in Khata Nos. plot Nos. 35, 37, 111 and 112 which exclusively belonged to the respondents. Consolidation authorities whether erred in alloting 1/2 share to the predecessor-in-interest of the appellants. Headnotes† Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 – ss.9(2), 11(1) – HighDecision Date :24-10-2024| Case No :CIVIL APPEAL No. 9739/2011| Direction Issue :Civil Appeals dismissed. Contempt Petition closed.|  Bench :2 JudgesFlip viewPDF
K. NIRMALA & ORS.versusCANARA BANK & ANR.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 9916/2024
Decision Date: 28-08-2024
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC634

HIMA KOHLI*, SANDEEP MEHTA Issue for Consideration Whether a person who joined the services of a Nationalized Bank/Government of India undertaking based on a certificate that identified him/her as belonging to a Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe in the State of Karnataka, pursuant to the State Government’s after the caste/ tribe was de-scheduled. Headnotes† Service Law – Appellants were employed by respondent No.1-bank in the Scheduled Castes Category based on Caste Certificates obtained following due process of law, certifying that they belonged to the ‘Kotegara’ 

Summary: Englishਪੰਜਾਬੀ - PunjabiDisclaimer 
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools. 
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.
						 
						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India. 
						 
						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text. 
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.K. NIRMALA & ORS.versusCANARA BANK & ANR.-[2024] 8 S.C.R. 8682024 INSC 634Coram : HIMA KOHLI*, SANDEEP MEHTAIssue for Consideration Whether a person who joined the services of a Nationalized Bank/Government of India undertaking based on a certificate that identified him/her as belonging to a Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe in the State of Karnataka, pursuant to the State Government’s after the caste/ tribe was de-scheduled. Headnotes† Service Law – Appellants were employed by respondent No.1-bank in the Scheduled Castes Category based on Caste Certificates obtained following due process of law, certifying that they belonged to the ‘Kotegara’
SONU AGNIHOTRIversusCHANDRA SHEKHAR & ORS.
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 388/2024
Decision Date: 22-11-2024
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC888

ABHAY S. OKA*, AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH, AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH Issue for Consideration The appellant-Judicial Officer has preferred these appeals for expunging adverse findings/remarks recorded against him in the impugned order dated 02.03.2023 by the Delhi High Court. Headnotes† Judicial Service – Expunging of adverse Officer passed some strict orders against police officials – He pointed out flaws in the investigation and failure of the police officials – Writ petition – The High Court directed all the remarks made against the IO & SHO expunged and recorded findings/remarks 

Summary: SONU AGNIHOTRIversusCHANDRA SHEKHAR & ORS.-[2024] 11 S.C.R. 8612024 INSC 888Coram : ABHAY S. OKA*, AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH, AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIHIssue for Consideration The appellant-Judicial Officer has preferred these appeals for expunging adverse findings/remarks recorded against him in the impugned order dated 02.03.2023 by the Delhi High Court. Headnotes† Judicial Service – Expunging of adverse Officer passed some strict orders against police officials – He pointed out flaws in the investigation and failure of the police officials – Writ petition – The High Court directed all the remarks made against the IO & SHO expunged and recorded findings/remarks
UMA & ANR.versusTHE STATE REP. BY THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 757/2015
Decision Date: 22-10-2024
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC809

BELA M. TRIVEDI*, SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA 1757 : 2024 INSC 809 Uma & Anr. v. The State Rep. by the Deputy Superintendent of Police (Criminal Appeal No. 757 of 2015) 22 October 2024 [Bela M. Trivedi and Satish Chandra Sharma,* JJ] Issue for Consideration Whether the High Court was able to demonstrate perversity and non-appreciation s.4A – Appellants acquitted by Trial Court – High Court in impugned judgment reversed the finding of acquittal and convicted the Appellants – Held, High Court has demonstrated perversity and non-appreciation of the materials on record by Trial Court – Appeals dismissed: Flip viewPDF

Summary: UMA & ANR.versusTHE STATE REP. BY THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE-[2024] 10 S.C.R. 17572024 INSC 809Coram : BELA M. TRIVEDI*, SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA1757 : 2024 INSC 809 Uma & Anr. v. The State Rep. by the Deputy Superintendent of Police (Criminal Appeal No. 757 of 2015) 22 October 2024 [Bela M. Trivedi and Satish Chandra Sharma,* JJ] Issue for Consideration Whether the High Court was able to demonstrate perversity and non-appreciation s.4A – Appellants acquitted by Trial Court – High Court in impugned judgment reversed the finding of acquittal and convicted the Appellants – Held, High Court has demonstrated perversity and non-appreciation of the materials on record by Trial Court – Appeals dismissed:Flip viewPDF