Hibbaan/DIVYADRISHTI huggingface dataset:
ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMSversusELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER
Case No.: WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No. 434/2023
Decision Date: 26-04-2024
Disposal: Disposed off
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC341

SANJIV KHANNA*, DIPANKAR DATTA* Issue for Consideration Petitioners sought directions for re-introduction of the paper ballot system; or that the printed slip from the Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) machine be given to the voter to verify, and put in the ballot box, for should be 100% counting of the VVPAT slips in addition to electronic counting by the control unit. Headnotes Elections – Electoral Process – Representation of the People Act, 1951 – Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 – Use of Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) – 

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.ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMSversusELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER-[2024] 5 S.C.R. 4152024 INSC 341Coram : SANJIV KHANNA*, DIPANKAR DATTA*Issue for Consideration Petitioners sought directions for re-introduction of the paper ballot system; or that the printed slip from the Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) machine be given to the voter to verify, and put in the ballot box, for should be 100% counting of the VVPAT slips in addition to electronic counting by the control unit. Headnotes Elections – Electoral Process – Representation of the People Act, 1951 – Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 – Use of Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) –
RAVINDRA KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 5902/2012
Decision Date: 22-02-2024
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC131

J.K. MAHESHWARI*, K.V. VISWANATHAN Issue for Consideration There was a non-disclosure of a criminal case (in which the candidate was acquitted) in the verification form of the employment. The State cancelled the selection of the appellant. Was the State justified in cancelling the selection of the appellant. Headnotes Service Law Selection – Non-disclosure of a criminal case in verification – Appellant applied for the post of constable – After submitting application, he was embroiled in a criminal case – He cleared exam – In the criminal case, appellant was acquitted – After being 

Summary: Englishहिन्दी - Hindiਪੰਜਾਬੀ - 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.RAVINDRA KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.-[2024] 2 S.C.R. 7222024 INSC 131Coram : J.K. MAHESHWARI*, K.V. VISWANATHANIssue for Consideration There was a non-disclosure of a criminal case (in which the candidate was acquitted) in the verification form of the employment. The State cancelled the selection of the appellant. Was the State justified in cancelling the selection of the appellant. Headnotes Service Law Selection – Non-disclosure of a criminal case in verification – Appellant applied for the post of constable – After submitting application, he was embroiled in a criminal case – He cleared exam – In the criminal case, appellant was acquitted – After being
RAMKRISHNA MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL & RESEARCH CENTREversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 12235/2024
Decision Date: 07-11-2024
Disposal: Case Partly allowed
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC845

BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI*, K.V. VISWANATHAN Issue for Consideration Issue arose as to whether the appellant-colleges made out a case for a direction to the respondent authorities to create a compensatory seat in the ensuing academic year. Headnotes† Education/Educational institutions – Medical admission seat in the ensuing academic year – Orders by the Director, Medical Education directing appellants-medical colleges to keep one MBBS seat vacant in the appellant-colleges with a direction that the said seat would not be included in the College Level Counseling Round for the academic 

Summary: RAMKRISHNA MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL & RESEARCH CENTREversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.-[2024] 11 S.C.R. 7002024 INSC 845Coram : BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI*, K.V. VISWANATHANIssue for Consideration Issue arose as to whether the appellant-colleges made out a case for a direction to the respondent authorities to create a compensatory seat in the ensuing academic year. Headnotes† Education/Educational institutions – Medical admission seat in the ensuing academic year – Orders by the Director, Medical Education directing appellants-medical colleges to keep one MBBS seat vacant in the appellant-colleges with a direction that the said seat would not be included in the College Level Counseling Round for the academic
MANJIT SINGH & ANR.versusDARSHANA DEVI & ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 13066/2024
Decision Date: 21-11-2024
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC895

MANJIT SINGH & ANR. versus DARSHANA DEVI & ORS.  - [2024] 11 S.C.R. 8762024 INSC 895 J.B. PARDIWALA, R MAHADEVAN Issue for Consideration High Court held that the appellants-subsequent purchasers could not be said to be bona fide purchasers in accordance with Section 19 (b) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 and decreed the suit of the plaintiff granting specific performance of oral agreement of sale between defendant (owner of the suit property). Headnotes† Specific Relief Act, 1963 – s.19(b) – General Clauses Act – s.3(22) – Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 – s.2(11) – “good faith” – Oral agreement for sale of the suit property between 

Summary: MANJIT SINGH & ANR.versusDARSHANA DEVI & ORS.-[2024] 11 S.C.R. 8762024 INSC 895Coram : J.B. PARDIWALA, R MAHADEVANIssue for Consideration High Court held that the appellants-subsequent purchasers could not be said to be bona fide purchasers in accordance with Section 19 (b) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 and decreed the suit of the plaintiff granting specific performance of oral agreement of sale between defendant (owner of the suit property). Headnotes† Specific Relief Act, 1963 – s.19(b) – General Clauses Act – s.3(22) – Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 – s.2(11) – “good faith” – Oral agreement for sale of the suit property between
SRI SUJIES BENEFIT FUNDS LIMITEDversusM. JAGANATHUAN
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 3369/2024
Decision Date: 13-08-2024
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC602

HIMA KOHLI*, AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH Issue for Consideration In order to partly discharge the loan amount, a cheque was issued by the respondent-accused for a sum of Rs.19,00,000/-. However, the cheque was returned with the endorsement ‘Account Closed’. Whether a discrepancy apropos the rate of interest, whether it be sufficient to disbelieve the claim of the appellant-chitfund company. Headnotes† Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 – s. 138 – The respondent- accused, being a subscriber of the appellant-chitfund company, borrowed loan amounts on several dates from appellant totaling Rs. 

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.SRI SUJIES BENEFIT FUNDS LIMITEDversusM. JAGANATHUAN-[2024] 8 S.C.R. 3222024 INSC 602Coram : HIMA KOHLI*, AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAHIssue for Consideration In order to partly discharge the loan amount, a cheque was issued by the respondent-accused for a sum of Rs.19,00,000/-. However, the cheque was returned with the endorsement ‘Account Closed’. Whether a discrepancy apropos the rate of interest, whether it be sufficient to disbelieve the claim of the appellant-chitfund company. Headnotes† Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 – s. 138 – The respondent- accused, being a subscriber of the appellant-chitfund company, borrowed loan amounts on several dates from appellant totaling Rs.
THE VVF LTD. EMPLOYEES UNIONversusM/S. VVF INDIA LIMITED & ANR.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 2744/2023
Decision Date: 09-04-2024
Disposal: Disposed off
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC293

ANIRUDDHA BOSE*, SANJAY KUMAR Issue for Consideration The two appeals arise out of a judgment delivered by a Single Judge of the High Court of Bombay on 25.07.2019 directing, inter alia, wage revisions pertaining to the workmen of employer-VVF Ltd. working in two units at Sewree and Sion. Whether the High beyond its jurisdiction in appreciating facts and in that process substituted the finding of the Tribunal with its own finding on facts. Headnotes Constitution of India – Writ – Scope of jurisdiction of High Court – Wages – Revision – The demands of the Union would 

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.THE VVF LTD. EMPLOYEES UNIONversusM/S. VVF INDIA LIMITED & ANR.-[2024] 4 S.C.R. 5762024 INSC 293Coram : ANIRUDDHA BOSE*, SANJAY KUMARIssue for Consideration The two appeals arise out of a judgment delivered by a Single Judge of the High Court of Bombay on 25.07.2019 directing, inter alia, wage revisions pertaining to the workmen of employer-VVF Ltd. working in two units at Sewree and Sion. Whether the High beyond its jurisdiction in appreciating facts and in that process substituted the finding of the Tribunal with its own finding on facts. Headnotes Constitution of India – Writ – Scope of jurisdiction of High Court – Wages – Revision – The demands of the Union would
STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS.versusNAVIN KUMAR SINHA
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 1279/2024
Decision Date: 19-11-2024
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC874

ABHAY S. OKA*, UJJAL BHUYAN Issue for Consideration Issue arose as regards whether the Bank could have initiated disciplinary proceedings against the employee after his superannuation. Headnotes† Service law – Dismissal from service – Initiation of disciplinary proceeding post superannuation – Employee with the Bank, on completion of 30 years was due to superannuate on 26.12.2003, however, was given extension until 01.10.2010 – In August 2009 employee placed under suspension for irregularities and sanctioning loans in favour of his relatives in violation of banking norms and 

Summary: STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS.versusNAVIN KUMAR SINHA-[2024] 11 S.C.R. 7992024 INSC 874Coram : ABHAY S. OKA*, UJJAL BHUYANIssue for Consideration Issue arose as regards whether the Bank could have initiated disciplinary proceedings against the employee after his superannuation. Headnotes† Service law – Dismissal from service – Initiation of disciplinary proceeding post superannuation – Employee with the Bank, on completion of 30 years was due to superannuate on 26.12.2003, however, was given extension until 01.10.2010 – In August 2009 employee placed under suspension for irregularities and sanctioning loans in favour of his relatives in violation of banking norms and
P. RAVINDRANATH & ANR.versusSASIKALA & ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 7792/2024
Decision Date: 15-07-2024
Disposal: Case Allowed
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC533

VIKRAM NATH*, PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA Issue for Consideration Parties entered into an agreement to sell for sale of a property. Defendant no.1 sent various notices to plaintiffs to execute the sale deed. However, plaintiffs did not execute the sale deed. Thereafter, defendants executed sale deeds in favour of another persons instituted suit for specific performance and permanent injunction. Whether plaintiffs were always ready and willing to get the sale deed executed and registered. Headnotes† Specific Relief Act, 1963 – s.16(c) – Parties entered into an agreement to sell for sale of a 

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.P. RAVINDRANATH & ANR.versusSASIKALA & ORS.-[2024] 7 S.C.R. 13472024 INSC 533Coram : VIKRAM NATH*, PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRAIssue for Consideration Parties entered into an agreement to sell for sale of a property. Defendant no.1 sent various notices to plaintiffs to execute the sale deed. However, plaintiffs did not execute the sale deed. Thereafter, defendants executed sale deeds in favour of another persons instituted suit for specific performance and permanent injunction. Whether plaintiffs were always ready and willing to get the sale deed executed and registered. Headnotes† Specific Relief Act, 1963 – s.16(c) – Parties entered into an agreement to sell for sale of a
SMT. VIDYA K. & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 2899/2024
Decision Date: 22-02-2024
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC137

PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA*, ARAVIND KUMAR Issue for Consideration Whether a notification for filling up 18 posts of lecturers of Home Science in First Grade College run by State of Karnataka is liable to be quashed for not providing the breakup of the ‘subjects’ within Home Science. Headnotes Karnataka (Department of Collegiate Education) (Recruitment) Rules, 1964, and the Karnataka Education Department Service (Department of Collegiate Education) (Special Recruitment) Rules, 1993 – Recruitment – Notification inviting application for the posts of lecturers of Home Science – 

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.SMT. VIDYA K. & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.-[2024] 2 S.C.R. 7132024 INSC 137Coram : PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA*, ARAVIND KUMARIssue for Consideration Whether a notification for filling up 18 posts of lecturers of Home Science in First Grade College run by State of Karnataka is liable to be quashed for not providing the breakup of the ‘subjects’ within Home Science. Headnotes Karnataka (Department of Collegiate Education) (Recruitment) Rules, 1964, and the Karnataka Education Department Service (Department of Collegiate Education) (Special Recruitment) Rules, 1993 – Recruitment – Notification inviting application for the posts of lecturers of Home Science –