Hibbaan/DIVYADRISHTI huggingface dataset:
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 14versusJASJIT SINGH
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 6566/2023
Decision Date: 26-09-2023
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC882

English हिन्दी - Hindiਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi 




 Disclaimer 


 
								 
						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.
						 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 14 versus JASJIT SINGH - [2023] 13 S.C.R. 7062023 INSC 882 S. RAVINDRA BHAT, ARAVIND KUMAR HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: In search and seizure, the Assessing Offi cer was of the opinion that some documents and material “belonging to” the respondents(s) assessee, were involved – Notice was issued by the concerned jurisdictional A.Os. to the said assessees period for which they were required to fi le returns, commenced only from the date the materials were forwarded to their A.Os. Income Tax Act, 1961 – s.153C – The Revenue urged that the date (relatable to the period for which six years returns were to be fi led by the assessee) was
SURENDRA SINGHversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANR.
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1059/2023
Decision Date: 11-04-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC354

M.R. SHAH*, C.T. RAVIKUMAR Penal Code, 1860 – s.149 – Applicability of – High Court set aside the respondent-accused’s conviction for the offence punishable u/s.302/149, IPC on the ground that the initial charge- sheet was filed only against two accused persons (one of and the remaining three persons were subsequently arrayed as the accused and are being tried separately thus, s.149, IPC shall not be attracted – Held: When five persons were specifically named in the FIR and are facing the trial though separately, s.149 IPC would be attracted –
MARSH INDIA INSURANCE BROKERS PRIVATE LIMITEDversusM/S ATKINS SPECIAL RISKS LTD. & ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 4678/2018
Decision Date: 24-03-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC293

ANIRUDDHA BOSE*, SUDHANSHU DHULIA Insurance Act, 1938: s.41(1) – Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority (Insurance Brokers) Regulations, 2013 – Clause 37(1) – Complaint by the first respondent-insurance broker alleging adoption of il legal means business of international reinsurance cover of J firm, it paid bribe to Chairman of the J firm to obtain brokerage contract, thus the appellant violated s.41(1) of the Act of 1938 and Clause 37(1) of the 2013 Regulations – Basis of the complaint was certain emails by which the Chirman
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusASHA PRAKASH
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 364/2023
Decision Date: 20-01-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC69

M.R. SHAH*, C.T. RAVIKUMAR Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 – s.24(2) –Writ petition was preferred by original writ petitioner-subsequent purchaser – High Court relying upon Pune Municipal Corporation & Anr. vs Harakchand writ petitioners and held that the acquisition proceedings in respect of land in question is deemed to have lapsed u/s.24(2) of 2013 Act as compensation was not paid to the original landowners – On appeal, held : The subsequent purchaser has no locus to challenge the
SABIR ALI KHANversusSYED MOHD. AHMAD ALI KHAN AND OTHERS
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 7086/2009
Decision Date: 13-04-2023
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC368

K.M. JOSEPH*, HRISHIKESH ROY Waqf Act, 1995: Wakf properties, of parties who are Shia Muslims – Beneficiaries and their rights – Beneficiaries perfecting title by adverse possession – Permissibility of – Held: A beneficiary of a waqf, being neither a trustee nor a co-owner of waqf adverse possession even if it is the property of the waqf – There cannot be any embargo against a beneficiary of a waqf claiming acquisition of title by adverse possession – Beneficiary of a waqf cannot be described as a stranger to the waqf – No doubt, a beneficiary is
RAHIMAL BATHU & OTHERSversusASHIYAL BEEVI
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 6232/2023
Decision Date: 26-09-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC861

PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA*, MANOJ MISRA HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Whether a revision u/s.115, CPC is maintainable against an order of the subordinate Court rejecting on merits an application for review of an appealable decree passed in a civil suit. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – s.115 – Exercise of of revisional powers cannot be claimed as of right – It is a discretionary power – Revisional Court is not bound to interfere merely because any of the three conditions, as laid down in s.115 for exercise of such power, is satisfi ed – The Court, exercising revisional powers,
SUSHIL PANDEY & ANRversusSTATE OF U.P.THR. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (HOME) & ORS
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 1838/2018
Decision Date: 16-01-2023
Disposal: Disposed off
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC40

AJAY RASTOGI*, ANIRUDDHA BOSE Uttar Pradesh Police Radio Service Rules, 1979 – rr. 17, 22 – 50% vacancies for the post of Assistant Radio Officers to be filled through direct recruitment and 50% by promotion from the feeder cadre (Radio Inspectors)– Appointments from both the dates– Combined selection list, quashed by High Court for being in violation of r.17 and r.22 – Fresh selection list was prepared, challenged by appellants-candidates from the feeder cadre – List sustained by High Court – Held: Manner in which appointment orders were
VIKAS RATHIversusTHE STATE OF U.P. & ANR.
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 644/2023
Decision Date: 01-03-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC186

ABHAY S. OKA*, RAJESH BINDAL Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 : s. 319 – Summoning of additional accused – Murder of a person working in the appellant’s firm – Complaint by the brother of the deceased – FIR registered against unknown persons – However, after two months, complaint by the – Appellant listed as a prosecution witness – Application u/s. 319 by the complainant to summon the appellant as accused – Dismissed by the trial court – High Court quashed the order passed by trial court and remanded the matter – On appeal, held: On
AMAN SEMI-CONDUCTORS (PVT.) LTDversusHARYANA STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. & ANR.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 572/2010
Decision Date: 27-02-2023
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC172

S. RAVINDRA BHAT*, DIPANKAR DATTA Consumer Protection – Industrial plot was alloted in favour of the appellant by respondent-Corporation – However, the allotment was cancelled and the respondent resumed the plot stating that serious in implementing the proposed project and that the plot was lying vacant – Justification of – Held: The idea behind development of industrial plots and allotting them to deserving applicants is to act as a catalyst to promote economic growth – In the present case, the
C. HARIDASANversusANAPPATH PARAKKATTU VASUDEVA KURUP & OTHERS
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 4072/2022
Decision Date: 13-01-2023
Disposal: Matter referred to larger bench
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC37

M.R. SHAH*, B.V. NAGARATHNA Specific Relief Act, 1963 : ss. 10, 16(c), 20 – Discretion as to decreeing specific performance – On facts execution of the agreement to sell land between the parties and receipt of consideration by the appellant-buyer – Balance amount to be paid within six made available the document of title and purchase certificate after measuring the property – Thereafter notice served by the appellant to the respondent to execute the sale deed – Refusal of the respondent to execute the sale deed and cancelled the agreement – Suit
THE STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERSversusJASWANT SINGH
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 11871/2014
Decision Date: 05-09-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC798

J.K. MAHESHWARI*, K.V. VISWANATHAN HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Issue arose as regards the justifi cation of the discharge order of the probationer constable by the Superitendent of Police due to prolonged absence from training without any intimation. Service Law – Punjab Police Rules, 1934 – r. 12.21 – Superitendent of Police owing to his prolonged absence from duty without any intimation – Legality of: Held: It is clear from r. 12.21 that in case a probationary constable is found unlikely to prove an effi cient police offi cer, he may be discharged by the Senior Superintendent of
UDAY PRATAP THAKUR AND ANR.versusTHE STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 3155/2023
Decision Date: 28-04-2023
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC461

M.R. SHAH*, C.T. RAVIKUMAR Service Law : Work Charged Establishment Revised Service Conditions (Repealing) Rules, 2013 : r. 5(v) – Pensionary benefits – Computation of, of work charged employees, whose services were subsequently regularized – Counting of the period of work charged services rendered as work charged under the work charged establishment, if to be counted and/or considered for the determination of the amount of pension – Held: Work charged employees are not appointed on a substantive post – They are not appointed after due process of selection and as per
HEM RAJversusNEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 4642/2023
Decision Date: 25-07-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC644

B.V. NAGARATHNA*, UJJAL BHUYAN Consumer Protection – Appellant-insured is the owner of the vehicle covered by an insurance policy issued by respondent-insurer – Vehicle met with an accident – Medical expenses were borne by the appellant in the treatment of the injuries sustained by the injured Held: Evidence in the form of Exhibits C-19 to C-28 issued by the Hospital were on record, as per which the appellant had incurred expenditure in the medical treatment of the injured – The insurance company did not dispute these documents, instead, the contention of the insurer before
AJAY DABRAversusPYARE RAM & ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 716/2023
Decision Date: 31-01-2023
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC90

PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA*, SUDHANSHU DHULIA Limitation Act, 1963: s.5 – Delay in filing appeal – Condonation of – Held: An appeal has to be filed within the stipulated period, prescribed under the law – Belated appeals can only be condoned when sufficient reason is shown before the court for delay – In the of the court – The only reason assigned by the appellant for the delay of 254 days in filing the first appeal was that he was not having sufficient funds to pay the court fee – This was not found to be a sufficient reason for the condonation of delay as the appellant was an
STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.versusMITUL KUMAR JANA
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 8510/2011
Decision Date: 22-08-2023
Disposal: Disposed off
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC754

J.K. MAHESHWARI*, K.V. VISWANATHAN HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Whether the High Court erred in allowing the writ petition fi led by the respondent, setting aside the order passed by the Administrative Tribunal and directing the appointment of the respondent as constable in the West Bengal police force. Suppression of material information – When not: Held: Information sought in the verifi cation roll was regarding arrest, detention and conviction by a Court in any off ence – In reply to the information asked the respondent gave the answer as “no” – As per the
LAND AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT THR. SECRETARY & ANRversusATTRO DEVI & ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 2749/2023
Decision Date: 11-04-2023
Disposal: Disposed off
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC357

ABHAY S. OKA*, RAJESH BINDAL Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 – s. 24(2) – Notification u/s 4 was issued on 23.06.1989 – Another notification u/s 6 was issued on 20.06.1990 – – Respondents filed a writ petition in the High Court claiming that neither possession was taken over nor compensation was paid thus the acquisition had lapsed u/s 24(2) – The appellant’s stand before the High Court was that the possession of the land was taken on
STATE OF HARYANAversusDHARAMRAJ
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2635/2023
Decision Date: 29-08-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC784

AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH*, SARASA VENKATANARAYANA BHATTI HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: In instant appeal, the State seeks cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the sole respondent by the Single Judge of the High Court. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 438 – Pre arrest bail – FIR u/ss. 147, 148, 149, 323, 325, 341, charges u/ss. 186, 353 and 364 against the respondent – Grant of anticipatory bail to the respondent by the High Court – Cancellation of: Held: Much like bail, grant of anticipatory bail is to be exercised with judicial discretion – Each case turns on its own facts and
COAL INDIA LIMITED AND ANRversusCOMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA AND ANR
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 2845/2017
Decision Date: 15-06-2023
Disposal: Unknown
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC580

K.M. JOSEPH*, B.V. NAGARATHNA, AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH Competition Law: Competition Act, 2002 – ss. 2(h), 19(4)(g) and 28 – “Enterprise” – Applicability of the Act – Competition Appellate Tribunal affirmed the findings recorded by the Competition Commission of India on various facets of position against the Coal India Limited and its subsidiary company – Whether the Competition Act, 2002 applies to the appellants or not – Held: The appellants are Government Companies – They were created to take the place of the Central Government in the matter of supervising Decision Date : 15-06-2023 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL No. 2845/2017  | Direction Issue :  Appeal posted for being dealt on merits.  |  Bench : 3 Judges
ASHOK RAM PARHAD & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 822/2023
Decision Date: 15-03-2023
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC233

SANJAY KISHAN KAUL*, ABHAY S. OKA Divisional Forest Officer (in Maharashtra Forest Service, Class I) (Recruitment) Rules, 1984 – Proviso to r.2 – Maharashtra Forest Service, Group A (Junior Scale) (Recruitment) Rules, 1998 – rr.3(b), 6 – Appellants who were recruited in 2014 and to the post of Assistant Conservator of Forest (ACF) through nomination (direct appointment) in 2016 whereas respondent nos.4 to 9 were directly promoted to the post of ACF in 2014 and were not required to undergo the aforesaid training – Appellants filed application before Tribunal
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusNARVADA DEVI & ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 735/2023
Decision Date: 09-02-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC110

M.R. SHAH*, C.T. RAVIKUMAR Land Acquisition – Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 – s.24(2) – Respondent no.1 filed writ petition, claiming relief for declaration that acquisition proceedings pertaining to subject lands were deemed to 2013 as neither physical possession of the subject lands had been taken nor compensation had been tendered to respondent no.1– High Court allowed the writ petition and declared that acquisition with respect to the land in question was deemed to have lapsed – Held: The view taken by
YUVRAJ @ MUNNA PRALHAD JAGDALE & ORS.versusJANARDAN SUBAJIRAO WIDE
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 2855/2011
Decision Date: 21-03-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC266

SUDHANSHU DHULIA*, SANJAY KUMAR Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates (Control) Act, 1947 – ss.13(1)(e) and 15 – Eviction under – Plaintiff Nos.1 & 2, the predecessors-in-title of the appellants filed suit for recovery of possession of the leased premises from the tenant – It was their case that of the hotel/premises and possession of the same was given to a third person – Lease deed recorded that business of hotel was the independent business of the tenant and he would not assign the business or transfer the same to any third person – Trial Court decreed suit on the
NEERAJ DUTTAversusSTATE (GOVT. OF N.C.T. OF DELHI)
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1669/2009
Decision Date: 17-03-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC245

ABHAY S. OKA*, RAJESH BINDAL Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 : ss. 7, 13(1)(d), 13(2) – Proof of demand of illegal gratification – Prosecution case that a trap was laid and the appellant-Electricity Inspector came with the co-accused and demanded the documents and bribe of which was paid by the complainant circumstantial evidence on record to prove the guilt of the appellant, convicted her for the offence punishable u/ ss. 7 and 13(i)(d)(i) and (ii) rw 13(2) – High Court upheld the same – On appeal, held : Apart from the evidence of PW-5-shadow witness, there is no other evidence
MUKESHBHAI VALLABHBHAI ABHANGIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1391/2023
Decision Date: 04-05-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC496

AJAY RASTOGI*, AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH Bail : Grant of – Appellant, along with accused no.1 who was operating an organised crime syndicate involving, inter alia, extortion, land grabbing, contract killing, money-laundering, pressurized Secret Witness 11 to enter into a deal – SW11 was threatened to execute around with either creditors of the leader of the organized crime syndicate-accused no. 1 or creditors of the appellant – Allegedly the appellant had extorted 50,000 square feet of land from the said persons – FIR against the appellant for offences punishable under the 2015 Act and Penal
PASCHIMANCHAL VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD.versusRAMAN ISPAT PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 7976/2019
Decision Date: 17-07-2023
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC625

S. RAVINDRA BHAT*, DIPANKAR DATTA Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – ss.238, 53 – Overriding effect of s.238 – Distribution of assets u/s.53 – Dues payable to secured creditors vis-à-vis Central or State Government– Held: s.238, IBC overrides the provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003 provisions which open with non-obstante clauses (ss.173 and 174) – Provisions of the IBC treat the dues payable to secured creditors at a higher footing than dues payable to Central or State Government– Electricity Act, 2003 – ss.173, 174. Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code,
DHANRAJ N ASAWANIversusAMARJEET SINGH MOHINDER SINGH BASI AND OTHERS
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2093/2023
Decision Date: 25-07-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC710

D.Y. CHANDRACHUD*, J.B. PARDIWALA, MANOJ MISRA HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Whether the provisions of s.81(5B) of Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 can be construed as preventing a share holder of the society such as the appellant, who was also an erstwhile director, from independently setting the criminal Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 – s.81(5B) – The High Court was of the view that since the provisions of the 1960 Act are special, the provisions of s.81(5B) would preclude the registration of an FIR at the behest of a person, such as the appellant, who is a shareholder Decision Date : 25-07-2023 | Case No : CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2093/2023 | Disposal Nature : Appeal(s) allowed  | Direction Issue : Appeal allowed and SLP disposed of.  |  Bench : 3 Judges
STATE OF KARNATAKAversusT. NASEER @ NASIR @ THANDIANTAVIDA NASEER @ UMARHAZI @ HAZI & ORS.
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 3456/2023
Decision Date: 06-11-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC988

VIKRAM NATH*, RAJESH BINDAL HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: The High Court rejected the applications fi led by the prosecution u/s. 311 of the Cr.P.C., seeking recall of PW-189 and to permit the prosecution to produce the report and the certifi cate u/s. 65B of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s. 311 – Evidence Act, 1872 – s.65B – A serial bomb blasts took place – Certain electronic devices were seized – Trial Court held electronic devices inadmissible in evidence – Thereafter, an application was fi led in
SIJU KURIANversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 64/2021
Decision Date: 17-04-2023
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC378

SURYA KANT*, ARAVIND KUMAR Penal Code, 1860: ss. 302, 201, 404 and 419 – Circumstantial Evidence – Reliance upon – Prosecution case that the accused- labourer in the farmhouse of the victim, murdered the victim by hitting him with iron rod and then hid the dead body in a pit located in the garden – house and sold them as also sold the land to make undue monetary gain – Acquittal by the trial court on the ground that prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt – However, the High Court convicted and sentenced the accused for the offence punishable u/ss. 302,
LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR (SOUTH)versusHARI CHAND AND ANR.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 2926/2023
Decision Date: 19-04-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC395

M.R. SHAH*, AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 – s.24(2) – High Court relying on the decision of Supreme Court in Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr. v. Harakchand Misirimal as [2014] 1 SCR 783 declared that the acquisition proceeding initiated w.r.t the land in question is deemed to have lapsed u/s.24(2) – On appeal, held: Decision in Pune Municipal Corporation case has been overruled by the Constitution Bench in Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal and
REVANASIDDAPPA & ANR.versusMALLIKARJUN & ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 2844/2011
Decision Date: 01-09-2023
Disposal: Reference answered
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC783

D.Y. CHANDRACHUD*, J.B. PARDIWALA, MANOJ MISRA HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Whether a child who is conferred with legislative legitimacy u/s. 16(1) or 16(2) is, by reason of s. 16(3), of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 entitled to the ancestral/coparcenary property of the parents or is the to the self-earned/separate property of the parents. Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – s. 16 – Children of void and voidable marriages – Conferment of legitimacy – Inheritance rights of legitimised children: Held: While conferring legitimacy in terms of s. 16(1) on a child born