ive
User not Logged..
India's Biggest Headnotes Library over 53.69 Lakhs Headnotes
     Free Artificial Intelligence Case Analyzer  

   AI Submission Generator [on behalf of Appellant/Respondent]  

Latest Cases

(841) EMCIPI ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD. Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 18-03-2025
Administrative Law — Resolution of Dispute — Consent Order — Expired Licence and Completion Certificate — A complex dispute involving non—issuance of completion certificates for commercial towers due to an expired licence, outstanding dues, and issues with a collaborator, can be resolved through a consent arrangement facilitated by the Court, balancing the interests of the licensee, the Authority, and occupants (Para 5, 8, 11, 12 of 21.01.2025 order; Para 12 of final order)
India Law Library Docid # 2424529

(842) LIN-O-MATIC GRAPHIC INDUSTRIES Vs. TRULINES TECHNOLOGIES AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 18-03-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 482 — Interference with Investigation — Expert Opinion — The High Court’s power under Section 482 CrPC should not ordinarily be used to direct the Investigating Officer (IO) on the specific course of investigation, such as mandating the procurement of a second expert opinion when
India Law Library Docid # 2424534

(843) RAMA SINGH Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 18-03-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 319 — Consideration of Evidence/Material — Post—Application Developments — When deciding an application under Section 319 CrPC, the trial court must consider all lawfully collected ‘material’ or ‘evidence’ available on record at the time of forming its opinion, including material such as a supplementary investigation report under S.
India Law Library Docid # 2424542

(844) PRADEEP NIRANKARNATH SHARMA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-03-2025
Constitution of India, 1950 — Articles 14, 21 — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Sections 154, 482 — Registration of FIR — Preliminary inquiry — Abuse of process — Appellant, a retired IAS officer, sought writ of mandamus for preliminary inquiry before registering FIRs against him for alleged irregularities during his tenure — Contended successive FIRs and lack of preliminary inquiry violated his rights to liberty and due process, citing Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh — State
India Law Library Docid # 2428549

(845) THE JOINT SECRETARY, CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION Vs. RAJ KUMAR MISHRA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-03-2025
A direct master-servant relationship established on paper is required for employment, and supervisory control alone is not enough — The Supreme Court allowed the CBSE's appeal, holding that a direct master-servant relationship must be established on paper to claim employment; supervisory control by the CBSE over the private respondents did not automatically make them employees — The High Court's order for fresh adjudication by the Labour Court was set aside.
India Law Library Docid # 2423662

(846) THE AUROVILLE FOUNDATION Vs. NATASHA STOREY[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-03-2025
Auroville Foundation Act, 1988 — Sections 11(3) and 16 — General superintendence, direction, and management of the affairs of the Foundation — Statutory Powers of Governing Board — The Governing Board of a statutory body, like the Auroville Foundation, has the power to issue Standing Orders for the efficient discharge of its duties and performance of its functions under the Act, as per Section 11(3) and Section 16 of the Auroville Foundation Act.
India Law Library Docid # 2423540

(847) THE AUROVILLE FOUNDATION Vs. NAVROZ KERSASP MODY AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-03-2025
National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 — Section 14 — Jurisdiction of National Green Tribunal (NGT) — The NGT has jurisdiction over civil cases involving substantial environmental questions, which must arise from the implementation of enactments specified in Schedule I of the NGT Act.
India Law Library Docid # 2423541

(848) VISHNOO MITTAL Vs. M/S SHAKTI TRADING COMPANY[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-03-2025
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 — Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — Section 14 — Moratorium — Moratorium under IBC — A moratorium order under Section 14 IBC prohibits institution or continuation of suits, including proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (NI Act), against the corporate debtor
India Law Library Docid # 2423542

(849) PRADEEP NIRANKARNATH SHARMA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-03-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 154 — Information in cognizable cases — Mandatory Registration of FIRs — Under Section 154 of the CrPC, registration of an FIR is mandatory if the information discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, with no preliminary inquiry permissible in such situations
India Law Library Docid # 2423543

(850) PRADEEP NIRANKARNATH SHARMA Vs. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-03-2025
Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 — Section 3 — Money Laundering as a Continuing Offence — The offence of money laundering under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) is a continuing offence, extending beyond the commission of the scheduled offence, as long as the proceeds of crime are concealed, used, or projected as untainted property
India Law Library Docid # 2423544

(851) GOPAL PRADHAN Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-03-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — While a court cannot direct the police to file a charge sheet against a specific person, it has the power to differ from the police's final report, take cognizance of a crime, and summon individuals as accused — The Supreme Court dismissed a special leave petition against a High Court order that upheld a Magistrate's summoning of the petitioner as an accused after the police had submitted a final form not recommending trial — The Court clarified that althou
India Law Library Docid # 2423603

(852) RITESH KUMAR Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-03-2025
Criminal Law — Bail — An anticipatory bail order should not contain a specific direction for the arrest of the accused upon the filing of a charge sheet; instead, the trial court should be left to consider bail afresh based on the materials presented — The Supreme Court modified a High Court order granting anticipatory bail which stipulated that the bail would lose effect upon the submission of a charge sheet and the trial court would take coercive steps to ensure the petitioner's custody — The
India Law Library Docid # 2423604

(853) KIRAN RAJU PENUMACHA Vs. TEJUSWINI CHOWDHURY[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-03-2025
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 26 — Custody of children — Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 — Custody of Minor Children — In deciding custody cases, courts must prioritize the child's welfare, considering factors beyond physical comforts, including moral and ethical values, and the child's ordinary comfort, contentment, health, education, and favorable surroundings.
India Law Library Docid # 2423552

(854) SHIVALEELA AND OTHERS Vs. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-03-2025
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Assessment of Deceased's Income — In motor accident claims, the court should consider all evidence, including bank records, loan documents, and testimony, to accurately assess the deceased's monthly income from various sources
India Law Library Docid # 2423553

(855) MADIVALAPPA Vs. MAHARASHTRA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-03-2025
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 173 — Multiplier for ‘Loss of Future Earnings’ — The appropriate multiplier for a 24-year-old claimant is ‘18’, as per the judgment in Sarla Verma v Delhi Transport Corporation, to calculate ‘loss of future earnings’.
India Law Library Docid # 2423554

(856) GANGUBAI RAGHUNATH AYARE Vs. GANGARAM SAKHARAM DHURI (D) THR. LRs AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-03-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 1 Rule 9 — Necessity of Proper Parties in a Suit — A court cannot grant relief in a civil suit if necessary parties, especially co-owners in a partition suit, are not impleaded.
India Law Library Docid # 2423555

(857) RANJIT SARKAR Vs. RAVI GANESH BHARDWAJ AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-03-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 256 — Acquittal for Complainant’s Non-appearance — Conditions Precedent — Purpose of Listing — Acquittal of the accused under Section 256(1) CrPC upon the complainant's non-appearance is permissible only if (i) the summons was issued on complaint, (ii) the date was appointed specifically for the appearance of the accused (or a subsequent date to which the hearing was adjourned for that purpose), (iii) the complainant fails to appear on such date, and (iv)
India Law Library Docid # 2424051

(858) M/S.UTTAM RICE MILL, DHAMTARI Vs. M/S.ASHOK CONSTRUCTION COMPANY[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-03-2025
Equity — Conduct of Litigant — Vigilance and Promptness — Entitlement to Relief — A litigant, particularly a decree-holder in execution proceedings, who displays prolonged lethargy, passivity, consistent absence, negligence, and a lackadaisical approach over several years, demonstrates non-diligent conduct — Such conduct, which allows the litigant's cause to suffer due to their own inaction, is not condonable and disentitles them from claiming any equitable relief from the court — Vigilance and
India Law Library Docid # 2424052

(859) STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS Vs. TILDA RICELAND PVT. LTD.[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-03-2025
Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1961 — Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets (General) Rules, 1962 — R. 30(5) — Market Fees — Double Levy — Transfer of Stock — Challenge to High Court order holding that transferring agricultural produce stock, on which market fee has already been paid (within or outside the State), from one market committee area to another does not amount to a business transaction or sale liable for additional market fee under Rule 30(5) — High Court found demand for addi
India Law Library Docid # 2424604

(860) HIRARAM Vs. BHAGWATI AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-03-2025
Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 — S. 4 — Bar on Suit/Claim — A claim by a person asserting that properties held in the name of another (mother) or jointly with another (mother) were actually purchased from his own funds falls squarely within the definition of a benami transaction, and any suit or claim to enforce rights in respect thereof by the person claiming to be the real owner is barred under
India Law Library Docid # 2424531