Hibbaan/DIVYADRISHTI huggingface dataset:
ABHISHEK SAXENAversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 3628/2023
Decision Date: 28-11-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC1088

 




 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.
						 ABHISHEK SAXENA versus THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR - [2023] 16 S.C.R. 11262023 INSC 1088 C.T. RAVIKUMAR, SANJAY KUMAR HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Whether the chargesheet submitted showed prima facie case u/ss. 323, 384 and 406, IPC for voluntarily causing hurt, for extortion and for criminal breach of trust; Whether the High Court has fallen in error in not invoking the powers u/s. the proceedings qua the appellant. Penal Code, 1860 – ss.323, 384 and 406 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.482 – An FIR was registered against the appellant, his parents and relatives on 04.09.2016 alleging commission of offences u/ss. 323, 363, 384 and 406 of the
GPSK CAPITAL PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS MANTRI FINANCE LIMITED)versusTHE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 2402/2008
Decision Date: 20-03-2023
Disposal: Disposed off
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC262

AJAY RASTOGI*, BELA M. TRIVEDI Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992: s. 15(Z) – Securities and Exchange Board of India (Stock Brokers and Sub Brokers) Regulations, 1992 – Sch. III, para 4 – Fees continuity benefits under – Entitlement of individual membership into a corporate entity – On facts, a member of Calcutta Stock Exchange-CSE, registered as a stock broker, transferred his membership of CSE in favour of the appellant company which was a member of National Stock Exchange- NSE – Appellant company then
ICON EDUCATION SOCIETYversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & OTHERS
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 1760/2023
Decision Date: 17-03-2023
Disposal: Disposed off
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC256

DINESH MAHESHWARI*, SANJAY KUMAR Madhya Pradesh Niji Vyavsayik Shikshan Sanstha (Pravesh Ka Viniyaman Avam Shulk Ka Nirdharan) Adhiniyam, 2007 – s.9 – Fee-fixation – Power of Admission and Fee Regulatory Committee (AFRC) – Held: AFRC constituted under the 2007 of ‘regulation’ in respect of the fees proposed by the institution, conditioned by the parameters in s.9(1) of the 2007 Act – Liberty given to unaided institutions to propose the fees that they wish to charge, keeping in mind the factors set out in s.9(1) of the 2007 Act
BHIM RAO BASWANTH RAO PATILversusK. MADAN MOHAN RAO AND ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 4632/2023
Decision Date: 24-07-2023
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC641

S. RAVINDRA BHAT*, ARAVIND KUMAR Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Or. VII, r.11, Or. XII, r.6 – Representation of People Act, 1951 – ss. 8, 33A, 33B, 81, 84, 100 – Appellant was a successful candidate in the election – The respondent preferred an appellant u/ss. 81 & 84 r/w ss. 100(1)(d)(i)(ii)(iii) & (iv) of 1951 Act alleging, inter-alia, furnishing of false information, non-disclosure of cases pending and those in which appellant was convicted – Appellant filed application u/Or. VII, r.11 of CPC for its rejection –
M/S IL&FS TAMIL NADU POWER COMPANY LIMITEDversusT. MURUGANANDAM & OTHERS
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 1811/2015
Decision Date: 17-02-2023
Disposal: Disposed off
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC136

M.R. SHAH*, C.T. RAVIKUMAR Environmental Law – Appellant was granted the Environment Clearance (EC) in accordance with the recommendations of the Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) under EIA Notification, 2006 – NGT upheld the validity of the EC to review the EC based on the cumulative impact assessment study and stipulate any additional conditions, if required – MoEF based on the recommendations of the EAC, issued a corrigendum to the EC imposing additional conditions to the EC – Corrigendum quashed by NGT – On
THE BELGAUM URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusDHRUVA & ANR.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 2950/2023
Decision Date: 28-04-2023
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC451

ABHAY S. OKA*, RAJESH BINDAL Allotment – Allotment of plots – Demand of additional price for the plots was raised from the respondents-allottees on account of enhancement of compensation of the land utilized for carving out the plots allotted – Correctness of – Held: Clause 5 in the allotment was given to vary the price of the plot in case there is change in the size of plot – This clause does not talk about demand of additional price on account of enhancement of compensation on account of acquisition of land for carving of the plots – Even the clauses in the
UNION OF INDIA & OTHERSversusJOGESHWAR SWAIN
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 8629/2014
Decision Date: 05-09-2023
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC802

J.B. PARDIWALA*, MANOJ MISRA HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Whether the High Court was justifi ed in setting aside the dismissal order of the constable found guilty of misconduct, since it was vitiated by infraction of the prescribed procedure as also was based on no evidence. Service Law – Border Security Border Security Force Rules, 1969 – rr. 49(3), 142(2) – Dismissal from service – Plea of guilty – Procedural safeguards u/r. 142(2) – Non-compliance of – Allegations against Border Security Force constable of clicking the photographs of lady doctor while
APPAIYAversusANDIMUTHU @ THANGAPANDI & ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 14630/2015
Decision Date: 20-09-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC835

BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI*, C.T. RAVIKUMAR HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Whether the High Court was correct in holding that owing to the non-production of any document by appellant evincing as to how the sons’ of the seller obtained the suit property in a partition Exhibit A1-registered sale deed whereby the property was sold vendor, being a registration copy-secondary evidence, could not be admitted in evidence as proof of the contents of its original. Evidence Act, 1872 – s. 65(e), 74, 76, 77 and 79 – Registration Act, 1908 – s. 57(5) – Admissibility in evidence of certifi ed copies
LAL BAHADUR SHASTRI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY & ANR.versusDELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 5647/2023
Decision Date: 05-09-2023
Disposal: Disposed off
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC797

A.S. BOPANNA*, PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Claim for payment of interest on refund of the amount deposited by the appellants-charitable institutions with the respondent to avail the benefi t of the construction based on additional FAR, if justifi ed. Interest – Claim for, on refunded Held: On facts, as on the date when the writ petition was fi led and the petitioner had voluntarily off ered to deposit the amount, the amount was to be paid and recoverable under the notifi cation dated 10.10.2008 and 23.12.2008 if the benefi t of additional FAR was to be availed –
MS. INDIRA JAISINGversusSUPREME COURT OF INDIA, THROUGH SECRETARY GENERAL
Case No.: MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION No. 709/2022
Decision Date: 12-05-2023
Disposal: Directions issued
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC524

SANJAY KISHAN KAUL*, AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH, ARAVIND KUMAR Advocates Act, 1961: s. 16 – Designation of Senior Advocates – Criteria for – Guidelines laid down in *Indira Jaising case, to bring in greater transparency and objectivity in the designation process of Senior Advocates – 2017 Judgment given effect by the Supreme Court Guidelines to Regulate Conferment of Designation of Senior Advocates, 2018 – Plea that the guidelines enumerated not
INDRAKUNWARversusTHE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Case No.: CONTEMPT PETITION (CRIMINAL) No. 1730/2012
Decision Date: 19-10-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC934

ABHAY S. OKA*, SANJAY KAROL HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Whether, in explaining the purported incriminating circumstance against her, the convict-appellant ought to have disclosed, over and above denial of any relationship with the deceased child, the specifi cs of her miscarriage and its aftermath; particularly has failed to discharge its burden of establishing such relationship between the deceased and the convict -appellant. Constitution of India – Right to Privacy – Personal life of a woman accused of committing a crime – Failure of Prosecution to discharge its duty: Held: The
BIRBAL NATHversusTHE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1587/2008
Decision Date: 30-10-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC957

SANJAY KISHAN KAUL*, SUDHANSHU DHULIA HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Whether the High Court was justifi ed in acquitting the accused for the major off ences u/ss. 302 and 307 IPC, and convicting them only for the off ences u/ss. 147, 148, 323, 324, 325/149 and reducing their sentences to the period already undergone contractions in the two statements of the injured eye witness, one given to police u/s.161 Cr.PC., and the other given before the court, would be suffi cient to discredit a witness. Penal Code, 1870 – ss. 304 Part I, 308, 147, 148, 323, 324, 325/149 – Culpable homicide not
M/S. KEWAL COURT PVT. LTD. AND ANRversusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 6257/2014
Decision Date: 09-10-2023
Disposal: Matter referred to larger bench
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC884

SURYA KANT*, DIPANKAR DATTA HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: The issue pertains to the true construction, meaning and import of the expression ‘vacant land’ contained in Section 2(q) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 especially with reference to sub-clause and Regulation) Act, 1976 – s.2(q) – Expression ‘Vacant land’ – Construction, meaning and import of – Interpretation and scope of s.2(q)(i) & (ii): Held: Discordance between *Jhonson’s case [two-Judge Bench] and **Billimoria’s case Decision Date : 09-10-2023 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL No. 6257/2014 | Disposal Nature : Matter referred to larger bench  | Direction Issue : Matter to be placed before Hon’b le CJI for appropriate directions  |  Bench : 2 Judges
SHANTI BHUSHAN (D) THR. LR. & ORSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 8388/2017
Decision Date: 25-04-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC425

ABHAY S. OKA*, RAJESH BINDAL Stamp Act,1899 – ss.31,32, 47-A and Art. 23 of the Schedule IB – Market Value of property – Determination of – A property was purchased by the appellants under a registered sale deed from the vendor – Appellants were already in possession land as tenants – The value of the property and paid the stamp duty quantified at Rs. 46,700/- – The Assistant Stamp Collector, held that the market value of the land will have to be calculated at the rate of Rs. 24,000/per sq. meter – Thus, on the date of the sale deed, the market value of the sale deed
INDRAJIT DASversusTHE STATE OF TRIPURA
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 609/2015
Decision Date: 28-02-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC175

BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI*, VIKRAM NATH Penal Code, 1860 : ss. 302/34, 201 – Murder – Circumstantial evidence – Information received from one of the prosecution witness that his nephew was missing since the previous evening – Victim had gone on his bike but did not return – On informed that the victim had gone out with two friends – Both the friends alleged to have confessed their crime before the investigating officer – One of them being juvenile, tried under Juvenile Act – As regards the other the trial court held that the prosecution had fully
SAMIR KUMAR MAJUMDERversusTHE UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 6027/2014
Decision Date: 20-09-2023
Disposal: Case Partly allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC836

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.
						 SAMIR KUMAR MAJUMDER versus THE UNION OF INDIA & ORS. - [2023] 12 S.C.R. 2542023 INSC 836 J.K. MAHESHWARI, K.V. VISWANATHAN HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Whether the High Court was justifi ed in denying the absorption of appellant as an Assistant Teacher in the Higher Secondary section and also rejecting his claim for continuity of service. Service Law – Claim for absorption as an Higher Secondary section – Tenable or not: Held: The appellant was appointed as a substitute teacher in the payscale of a primary teacher – When he fi led the fi rst round of proceedings in O.A. No. 209 of 1991, no plea was raised that he worked as an Assistant Teacher in the Higher
CARDINAL MAR GEORGE ALENCHERRYversusSTATE OF KERALA & ANR.
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 836/2023
Decision Date: 17-03-2023
Disposal: Disposed off
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC250

DINESH MAHESHWARI*, BELA M. TRIVEDI Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Issuance of summons – Legality of – A complaint was made against the appellant-archbishop and other accused persons for having committed an offense u/s 120B, 406, 409, 418, 420, 423, 465, 467, 468 r/w 34 of IPC alleging along with other accused persons had fraudulently disposed of certain immovable property belonging to the church – The first complaint filed by the complainant was dismissed by the court at Maradu on 30.09.2021 without taking cognizance of the complaint as the counsel for complainant did
M/S. CREATIVE GARMENTS LTDversusKASHIRAM VERMA
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 5758/2012
Decision Date: 16-03-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC243

ABHAY S. OKA*, RAJESH BINDAL Labour Laws: Labour dispute – Non-mentioning of the permanent address of the workman, addressed furnished is care of Union, and as such efforts to serve him at the given address remained futile – Held: Effective relief can granted to a worker only if the permanent address of in the pleadings – Issuance of directions to the authorities working under the various labour laws to take corrective measure – Parties to furnish their permanent address – Even if the representative of the workman is appearing, he shall furnish permanent address of the
KAMAL PRASAD & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH (NOW STATE OF CHHATTISGARH)
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1578/2012
Decision Date: 10-10-2023
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC895

ABHAY S. OKA*, SANJAY KAROL HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Case of the prosecution rested primarily on the testimonies of three witnesses, conviction of the appellants for off ence punishable u/ss.148, 302 r/w 149, 307 r/w 149, IPC and ss.4/5 of the Explosive Substance Act, sentence imposed, if justifi ed. Evidence – Testimonies of eyewitnesses – Reliance upon: Held: Death of the deceased ‘C’ and his son ‘K’ is undisputed – Deceased ‘C’ having sustained multiple injuries upon vital parts of the body as a
M/S. S.D. SHINDE TR. PARTNERversusGOVT. OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 6107/2017
Decision Date: 22-08-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC751

S. RAVINDRA BHAT*, DIPANKAR DATTA HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Award made in favour of the appellant- contractor was challenged by the respondent-State u/s.30, 33, Arbitration Act, 1940 and was set aside by Courts below inter alia holding that the claim was time-barred – Legality. Arbitration ss.30 and 33 – Jurisdiction of Courts – Scope: Held: A claim crystallizes upon the issuance of the fi nal bill which in this case was on 14.12.1992 – Contractor’s complaint with respect to payment was fi rst aired in 1988; the rejection resulted in an appeal before the
M/S. RPS INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.versusMUKUL KUMAR & ANR.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 5590/2021
Decision Date: 11-09-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC816

SANJAY KISHAN KAUL*, SUDHANSHU DHULIA HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Whether the commercial entity’s claim pertaining to an arbitral award, in appeal u/s. 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, is liable to be included at a belated stage-after the resolution plan approved by the Committee of Creditors and pending Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – Initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against the Corporate Debtor – Resolution plan approved by the Committee of Creditors-CoC and pending approval by the adjudicating authority – Inclusion of commercial entity’s
R. RAGHAVENDRANversusC. RAJA JOHN & ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 2552/2022
Decision Date: 13-09-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC849

SANJAY KISHAN KAUL*, SUDHANSHU DHULIA HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Whether the observations made by NCLAT in the impugned judgment, in the context of the judgment of the Tribunal in Saravana Global Holdings Ltd. & Anr. Vs. Bafna Pharmaceuticals Ltd. & Ors., that if the Corporate Debtor is an MSME it is not necessary for with other Resolution Applicants to regain the control of the Corporate Debtor, can be sustained or not in the conspectus of the observations in the Bafna’s case, the appeal where against was dismissed by the Supreme Court. Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – Corporate debtor,
SUPREME COURT BAR ASSOCIATIONversusMINISTRY OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT & ORS.
Case No.: WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No. 640/2022
Decision Date: 23-03-2023
Disposal: Disposed off
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC278

D.Y. CHANDRACHUD*, SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA Constitution of India – Art. 32 – Supreme Court Bar Association sought writ of mandamus directing Union Ministry of Urban Development to (i) grant permission for the conversion into a chamber block for lawyers of land admeasuring 1.33 acres situated near the ITO, which has been allotted to the Supreme Court; (ii) convert the entire area around the Supreme Court as ‘a Supreme Court Complex’ , so that all the buildings can be utilized for conversion into chambers or for being redeveloped as a
ANOOP BARTARIA & ETCversusDY. DIRECTOR ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE & ANR.
Case No.: SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) No. 2397/2019
Decision Date: 21-04-2023
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC413

Unknown
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusEMINENT MARKETING PVT. LTD. & ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 337/2023
Decision Date: 16-01-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC43

M.R. SHAH*, C.T. RAVIKUMAR AUTHORITY v. EMINENT MARKETING PVT. LTD. & ORS. (Civil Appeal No. 337 of 2023) JANUARY 16, 2023 [M. R. SHAH AND C. T. RAVIKUMAR JJ.] Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 – s. 24(2) – High Court relying upon to have lapsed u/s. 24(2) of 2013 Act solely on the ground that compensation has not been paid to the petitioner – On appeal, held: Possession of land in question was taken on 27.09.2012 – The entire compensation with respect to land in question was deposited with Treasury –
KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD. KSCARDBversusTHE ASSESSING OFFICER, TRIVANDRUM AND ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 10069/2016
Decision Date: 14-09-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC830

B.V. NAGARATHNA*, UJJAL BHUYAN HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Whether the appellant-assessee, a co- operative society, is entitled to claim deduction of the whole of its profi ts and gains of business attributable to the business of credit facilities to its members who are all co-operative societies u/s.80P, Income Tax Act, 1961. Income Tax Act, 1961 – s.80P – Appellant, if a co-operative bank within the scope and meaning of sub-section (4) of s.80P and thus, not eligible to the benefi t of deduction as