Supreme Court

Here u will get all latest & landmark judgements of Supreme Court.

Nomination vs. Succession: Supreme Court Clarifies Who Gets GPF Funds After Death
3Mar By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Nomination vs. Succession: Supreme Court Clarifies Who Gets GPF Funds After Death

This Supreme Court judgment clarifies that a nomination under the General Provident Fund Rules only authorizes receipt of funds and does not confer absolute title. When a nomination becomes invalid due to the subscriber acquiring a family, the amount must be distributed equally among all eligible family members, regardless of any unmodified nomination. Facts Of The Case: The dispute arose from the death of Bolla Mohan, a government employee who died in service on July 4, 2021. Upon joining service in 2000, the deceased had nominated his mother, B. Suguna (respondent No. 1), as the recipient of his General Provident Fund (GPF), Central Government Employees Group Insurance Scheme (CGEIS), and Death cum Retirement Gratuity (DCRG). However, on June 20, 2003, he married Bolla Malathi (the app...
Read More
Illegal Memo Struck Down: Supreme Court Says Registration Certificate is Enough, No Need for Registrar’s Recommendation
3Mar By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Illegal Memo Struck Down: Supreme Court Says Registration Certificate is Enough, No Need for Registrar’s Recommendation

In this judgment, the Supreme Court held that executive mandates imposing superfluous requirements beyond statutory provisions constitute illegality in administrative law. It ruled that requiring a Cooperative Registrar's recommendation for stamp duty exemption under Section 9A of the Stamp Act is irrelevant and unnecessary, as a society's registration certificate is conclusive proof of its existence under Section 5(7) of the Cooperative Societies Act. Facts Of The Case: The appellant, Adarsh Sahkari Grih Nirman Swawalambi Society Ltd., a cooperative society registered under the Jharkhand Self-Supporting Cooperative Societies Act, 1996, challenged an executive memorandum issued by the Principal Secretary of the Registration Department, Jharkhand. The impugned Memo No. 494, dated Fe...
Read More
Landmark Motor Accident Judgment: Supreme Court Lays Down Principles for Consortium and Future Prospects
3Mar By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Landmark Motor Accident Judgment: Supreme Court Lays Down Principles for Consortium and Future Prospects

The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred by applying an incorrect multiplier of 15 instead of 16 for a 33-year-old deceased. It also corrected the deduction for personal expenses from 1/4th to 1/5th due to seven dependents. Furthermore, the Court enhanced consortium awards, granting separate spousal, filial, and parental consortium to each claimant. Facts Of The Case: Sobran Singh, aged 33, died in a vehicular accident on 2 September 2009 when the motorcycle he was riding was dashed by a rashly driven Gypsy jeep near Jhansi. He sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to them on 10 September 2009 while undergoing treatment at Gwalior Hospital. The deceased was employed at Rajaram Stone Crusher, earning Rs. 6,000 per month, and also engaged in agricultural activities from f...
Read More
Breaking: Supreme Court Invokes Article 142 to Quash Rape Case After Accused and Prosecutrix Marry
3Mar By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Breaking: Supreme Court Invokes Article 142 to Quash Rape Case After Accused and Prosecutrix Marry

In this judgment, the Supreme Court exercised its plenary power under Article 142 of the Constitution to quash an entire criminal proceeding, including the conviction and sentence, to secure complete justice. The Court reasoned that since the parties had married and were residing together, continuing the prosecution would be counterproductive. Consequently, the pending appeal before the High Court was rendered infructuous. Facts Of The Case: The appellant and the prosecutrix first connected in 2015 through a social media platform, where they developed a mutual fondness for each other. This relationship eventually progressed into a consensual physical relationship, which the prosecutrix later claimed was based on the appellant's alleged false promise of marriage. When the appellant sought...
Read More
Can a Court Award More Than You Claimed? Supreme Court Upholds ‘Just Compensation’ in Accident Cases
3Mar By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Can a Court Award More Than You Claimed? Supreme Court Upholds ‘Just Compensation’ in Accident Cases

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal in part, holding that tribunals can award compensation exceeding the claimed amount under the Motor Vehicles Act to ensure just and fair relief. It emphasized adding future prospects to monthly income for calculating loss of earnings due to functional disability. The Court also granted a lump sum for attendant care based on the claimant's age and injuries. Facts Of The Case: On 26.01.2012, the appellant, R. Logeshkumar, aged 21, was riding a motorcycle from Selaiyur to Medavakkam in Chennai. At the Kamarajapuram junction, a jeep owned by the first respondent and insured by the second respondent came from the opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner, without sounding a horn, and collided with his motorcycle. The accident caused grievous injuri...
Read More
Commercial Contracts & Interest Rates: Supreme Court Reaffirms ‘Party Autonomy’ Over ‘Public Policy’
3Mar By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Commercial Contracts & Interest Rates: Supreme Court Reaffirms ‘Party Autonomy’ Over ‘Public Policy’

The Supreme Court held that under Section 31(7)(a) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, party autonomy prevails; where a commercial contract specifies an interest rate, the arbitral tribunal has no discretion to deviate. A stipulated interest rate of 36% with monthly rests in a bill discounting agreement between equal bargaining parties is not unconscionable or against public policy. The rule of contra proferentem does not apply to mutually negotiated commercial contracts. Facts Of The Case: The dispute originated from a bill discounting facility extended by the respondent, Morgan Securities and Credits Private Limited, to M/s BPL Display Device Ltd (BDDL) and the appellant, BPL Limited, through sanction letters dated 27.12.2002 and 11.06.2003. The facility allowed BDDL to ...
Read More
Supreme Court: FR 56(a) Means You’re in Service Till Month-End, Entitled to All Benefits
2Mar By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court: FR 56(a) Means You’re in Service Till Month-End, Entitled to All Benefits

The Supreme Court held that employees retiring on March 31st due to FR 56(a) are deemed "in service" on that date, entitling them to pay revisions effective from that day. Relying on Rule 5(2) of CCS (Pension) Rules and a three-Judge Bench precedent, the Court clarified that such retirement dates are working days for salary purposes, not mere formalities. Facts Of The Case: The appellants were employees of the Assam Power Generation Corporation Ltd. who both attained the age of superannuation (60 years) during the month of March 2016. By virtue of Fundamental Rule 56(a), which provides that every government servant shall retire on the afternoon of the last day of the month in which they attain the age of sixty years, their date of retirement was extended to March 31, 2016. Subsequently, ...
Read More
Degree Name vs. Subject Study: Supreme Court Orders Reinstatement of Employee Wrongfully Terminated
2Mar By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Degree Name vs. Subject Study: Supreme Court Orders Reinstatement of Employee Wrongfully Terminated

The Supreme Court held that employer decisions cannot be purely mechanical, insisting only on a degree's title while ignoring the actual curriculum studied. Relying on a committee report prepared without affording a hearing violates natural justice. Furthermore, an expert authority's eligibility opinion must be considered; ignoring it renders a termination order arbitrary and unsustainable. Facts Of The Case: The appellant, Laxmikant Sharma, was appointed on a contractual basis as a Monitoring and Evaluation Consultant in Madhya Pradesh's Public Health & Engineering Department on April 26, 2013, after responding to an advertisement that required a "Postgraduate degree in Statistics." He held an M.Com. degree, completed in 1999, which included Business Statistics and Indian Economic S...
Read More
Supreme Court: Disputed No-Dues Certificate Can’t Be Ground to Quash Criminal Proceedings
2Mar By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court: Disputed No-Dues Certificate Can’t Be Ground to Quash Criminal Proceedings

The Supreme Court held that criminal proceedings cannot be quashed where allegations prima facie disclose essential ingredients of an offence. The power under Section 482 CrPC is sparing; disputed documents like No-Dues Certificate cannot be relied upon at pre-trial stage. Civil remedy coexistence doesn't bar prosecution if allegations support criminal liability. Facts Of The Case: The dispute in this case arose from contractual and financial dealings between the appellant (accused no. 2) and respondent no. 2 (complainant) concerning construction work undertaken between 2008 and 2010. A No Dues Certificate was issued by respondent no. 2 on 10.06.2010 and acknowledged on 12.06.2010, recording that no payments were outstanding. Subsequently, disputes emerged between the parties, leading to...
Read More
Supreme Court Clarifies: Renting Residential Premises for Hostels is Exempt from GST
2Mar By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Clarifies: Renting Residential Premises for Hostels is Exempt from GST

This Supreme Court judgment holds that renting a residential dwelling for use as a hostel qualifies for GST exemption under Entry 13, as the ultimate residential use by students satisfies the condition. The Court clarified that the exemption is activity-specific, not person-specific, and the lessee need not personally occupy the premises for the exemption to apply. Facts Of The Case: The dispute originated from a residential property in Bangalore, co-owned by the respondent, which consisted of 42 rooms in a four-storied building. On June 21, 2019, the co-owners executed a lease deed in favor of M/s DTwelve Spaces Private Limited, a company that operates as an aggregator. The lessee's business model involved taking such properties on lease to sub-lease them as hostels, providing long-term...
Read More