Supreme Court

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

Supreme Court Ruling :How Non-Disclosure of Death in Court Cases Can Backfire
7Aug By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Ruling :How Non-Disclosure of Death in Court Cases Can Backfire

The Supreme Court ruled that failure to comply with Order XXII Rule 10A CPC, which mandates lawyers to inform the court about a party's death, prevents the opposing side from claiming abatement due to non-substitution of legal heirs. The Court emphasized that no party can benefit from their own wrong (nullus commodum capere potest de injuria sua propria). It clarified that procedural lapses should not override substantive justice and remanded the case for fresh consideration, highlighting the distinction between joint and indivisible decrees in abatement cases. The judgment reinforces the duty of pleaders to ensure fair litigation. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from a Title Suit No. 106 of 1984 filed by the appellants (Binod Pathak & others) before the Sub-Judge, Gopalganj, ...
Read More
Who Pays Entry Tax? Supreme Court Decides Liquor Warehouse vs. Manufacturer Case
7Aug By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Who Pays Entry Tax? Supreme Court Decides Liquor Warehouse vs. Manufacturer Case

The Supreme Court upheld the levy of entry tax on liquor manufacturers under the Madhya Pradesh Entry Tax Act, 1976. It ruled that manufacturers "caused the entry of goods" into local areas under Section 3(1) read with Section 2(3), even through state warehouses. The Court clarified that Section 3B (special provision for liquor) was merely an enabling provision, and the absence of a notification under it did not bar tax collection under Section 14 (general machinery provision). The judgment affirmed that the tax liability rests on manufacturers, not warehouses, as they initiated the goods' movement into the state. Facts Of The Case: The case involved M/S United Spirits Ltd. and other liquor manufacturers challenging their liability to pay entry tax under the Madhya Pradesh Entry Tax Act,...
Read More
Supreme Court Clarifies Jurisdiction of Electricity Regulators in Franchisee Disputes
7Aug By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Clarifies Jurisdiction of Electricity Regulators in Franchisee Disputes

The Supreme Court ruled that Electricity Regulatory Commissions (ERCs) lack jurisdiction to entertain petitions solely based on public interest under the Electricity Act, 2003. It held that franchisees, as agents of distribution licensees, are not directly regulated by ERCs, and investigations under Section 128 must target licensees, not franchisees. The Court emphasized that ERCs cannot micromanage franchisee agreements, as their regulatory oversight is limited to licensees. The judgment clarified that contractual disputes between licensees and franchisees fall outside ERCs' adjudicatory scope under Section 86(1)(f). The appeal was allowed, setting aside APTEL's order. Facts Of The Case: The case involved a dispute between Torrent Power Limited (appellant) and the Uttar Pradesh Elec...
Read More
Teachers’ Gratuity Rights Clarified: Supreme Court Decides Between State Rules and Payment of Gratuity Act
7Aug By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Teachers’ Gratuity Rights Clarified: Supreme Court Decides Between State Rules and Payment of Gratuity Act

The Supreme Court ruled that aided school teachers in Maharashtra are governed by the Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1982 (under Article 309) for gratuity, not the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. The Court held that since their pay and service conditions are state-regulated, they fall under the more beneficial state scheme, which includes pension and death-cum-retirement gratuity (DCRG). Legal heirs need not produce a heirship certificate if nominated, but must submit an indemnity undertaking. Interest at 7% was mandated for delayed payments. Facts Of The Case: The petitioner, Vikram Ghongade, is the son of a deceased teacher employed at an aided school in Maharashtra. His mother passed away while in service, and he sought gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. How...
Read More
Supreme Court Landmark Judgment Allows Secret Spouse Recordings as Evidence in Divorce Cases
7Aug By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Landmark Judgment Allows Secret Spouse Recordings as Evidence in Divorce Cases

The Supreme Court held that covertly recorded conversations between spouses are admissible as evidence in divorce proceedings under Section 122 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which permits disclosure of marital communications in suits between married persons. The Court clarified that such evidence does not violate the right to privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution, as Section 122’s exception prioritizes fair trial rights over spousal privacy in matrimonial disputes. The ruling emphasized that Family Courts can admit such evidence if it meets the relevance, authenticity, and accuracy standards under Sections 65A and 65B of the Evidence Act, which govern electronic records. The judgment harmonized the Evidence Act’s provisions with the Family Courts Act, 1984, ensuring procedural f...
Read More
Supreme Court Rules: Companies Can Also Be ‘Victims’ in Criminal Cases
7Aug By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Rules: Companies Can Also Be ‘Victims’ in Criminal Cases

The Supreme Court ruled that a company qualifies as a "victim" under Section 2(wa) CrPC if it suffers loss or injury due to an offence, entitling it to file an appeal against acquittal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC. The Court clarified that such appeals are independent of Section 378 CrPC and need not be restricted to cases where the victim is the complainant. The judgment reinforces the expansive interpretation of "victim" to include corporations, ensuring their right to challenge wrongful acquittals in criminal cases involving infringement or fraud. Facts Of The Case: Asian Paints Limited, a leading paint manufacturer, discovered counterfeit products being sold under its brand name at a shop owned by Ram Babu in Jaipur. The company had authorized M/s Solution, an IPR consultanc...
Read More
Supreme Court Clarifies Compensation Rules Under MV Act: Insurer Liable Despite Negligence Claims
5Aug By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Clarifies Compensation Rules Under MV Act: Insurer Liable Despite Negligence Claims

The Supreme Court held that under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, proof of negligence is not required for claiming compensation, as the provision operates on a structured formula basis. The Court emphasized that compensation must be computed as per the Second Schedule of the Act, excluding non-scheduled heads like loss of love and affection. It ruled that the deceased, being a third party to the offending vehicle, entitled the claimants to compensation, payable jointly and severally by the insurer of the offending vehicle. The judgment clarified that Section 163A has an overriding effect over other provisions of the Act, ensuring expedited compensation without fault liability adjudication. Facts Of The Case: On the night of November 15, 2006, Surender Singh was driving a tr...
Read More
Supreme Court Orders Insurance Payout Despite FIR Delay : Justice for Victim’s Family
5Aug By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Orders Insurance Payout Despite FIR Delay : Justice for Victim’s Family

The Supreme Court of India overturned the High Court's decision, ruling that the delay in FIR registration and minor discrepancies in eyewitness testimony did not disprove the involvement of the offending vehicle in the accident. The Court upheld the Tribunal's compensation award, emphasizing that the insurer failed to examine the investigating officer to challenge the evidence. The judgment reinforced the principle that technicalities should not override substantive justice in motor accident claims. Facts Of The Case: The case involved a motor accident where the deceased, a school peon, died after his motorcycle collided with a speeding vehicle. His wife and three minor children filed a claim before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT), which awarded them compensation of ₹46,29,15...
Read More
Supreme Court Explains : When Can Courts Quash Serious Crimes?
5Aug By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Explains : When Can Courts Quash Serious Crimes?

The Supreme Court, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC, quashed criminal proceedings—including a non-compoundable offense under Section 376 IPC—based on an amicable settlement between the parties. The Court emphasized that while such offenses are grave, exceptional circumstances (victim’s unequivocal settlement, societal harmony, and futility of trial) justified judicial intervention to prevent abuse of process. The ruling reaffirms that ends of justice override rigid legal constraints in unique cases. Facts Of The Case: The case arose from two FIRs registered in November 2023 at Mehunbare Police Station, Jalgaon. The first FIR (No. 302/2023) was filed against Madhukar and others under Sections 324, 143, 147, 452, and others of the IPC, alleging they assaulted a woman a...
Read More
Supreme Court Rules Against Bypassing Agricultural Tenancy Act in Goa Land Dispute
5Aug By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Rules Against Bypassing Agricultural Tenancy Act in Goa Land Dispute

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, affirming that the Administrative Tribunal rightly denied permission for a compromise between the Communidade of Tivim and private respondents. The proposed consent terms violated the Goa Agricultural Tenancy Act, 1964, and the Goa Land Use Act, 1991, by attempting to confer ownership rights and permit non-agricultural use without following statutory procedures. The Court emphasized that such compromises cannot bypass legal frameworks or undermine tenancy rights. The appeal was dismissed, leaving the tenancy dispute to be adjudicated on merits by the Appellate Court. Facts Of The Case: The case involves the Communidade of Tivim, an agricultural association in Goa, which challenged the dismissal of its writ petition by the High Court of ...
Read More