Filter by Date

For the Latest Updates, Please Join Our Channel 

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX, KERALA Vs. M/S. TRAVANCORE SUGARS & CHEMICALS LTD.

Appeal (Civil), 2558 of 2005, Judgment Date: May 07, 2015

Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

IQBAL & ANR Vs. STATE OF U.P.

Appeal (Crl.), 1663 of 2012, Judgment Date: May 06, 2015

Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

STATE OF A.P. Vs. P.VENKATESHWARLU

Appeal (Crl.), 1317 of 2008, Judgment Date: May 06, 2015

The demand and acceptance of the amount as illegal gratification is a sine qua non for constituting an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The prosecution is duty bound to establish that there was illegal offer of bribe and acceptance thereof and it has to be founded on facts. The offence under Section 7 of P.C. Act has been confirmed by the Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Vs. KESAVAPATNAM CHINA SWAMY

Appeal (Crl.), 89 of 2009, Judgment Date: May 06, 2015

Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

KIRSHNA TEXPORT & CAPITAL MARKETS LTD. Vs. ILA A AGRAWAL & ORS.

Appeal (Crl.), 1220 of 2009, Judgment Date: May 06, 2015

Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

STATE OF U.P. Vs. DAMODAR & ANR.

Appeal (Crl.), 714 of 2009, Judgment Date: May 06, 2015

Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

K.S. RAVINDRAN Vs. BRANCH MANAGR,NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD

31909 of 2013, Judgment Date: May 06, 2015

Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. Vs. CALCUTTA MINERAL SUPPLY CO.P.LTD. & ORS.

Appeal (Civil), 2548 of 2006, Judgment Date: May 06, 2015

Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

ZONAL.GEN.MANAGER,IRCON INTER.NATNL.LTD. Vs. M/S VINAY HEAVY EQUIPMENTS

Appeal (Civil), 7205 of 2006, Judgment Date: May 06, 2015

Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

M/S. B.P.L. LTD. Vs. COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CALICUT

Appeal (Civil), 5523 of 2004, Judgment Date: May 05, 2015

NON-REPORTABLE Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

M/S. COAL HANDLERS PVT. LTD. Vs. COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, KOLKATA

Appeal (Civil), 7215 of 2004, Judgment Date: May 05, 2015

Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

M/S. SECURE METERS LTD. Vs. COMMNR. OF CUSTOMS, NEW DELHI

Appeal (Civil), 7526 of 2004, Judgment Date: May 05, 2015

Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

K.RADHIKA Vs. T.RAJYA LAXMI & ORS.

Appeal (Civil), 4201 of 2015, Judgment Date: May 05, 2015

It consists of innumerable errors. We only hope that it is not the desire of the High Court that such candidates are required to be appointed merely because they have the higher grade qualification. We, therefore, allow the appeal and set aside the judgment under appeal. Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Full Bench (FB)- Three Judge)

RAJASTHAN HOUSING BOARD Vs. NEW PINK CITY NIRMAN SAHKA.SAM.LD.& ANR.

Appeal (Civil), 1527-1536 of 2013, Judgment Date: May 01, 2015

Constructive notice in legal fiction signifies that the individual person should know as a reasonable person would have. Even if they have no actual knowledge of it. Constructive notice means a man ought to have known a fact. A person is said to have notice of a fact when he actually knows a fact but for Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

JAGDISH CHAND SHARMA Vs. NARAIN SINGH SAINI (DEAD) THR. LRS. & ORS

Appeal (Civil), 4181-4182 of 2015, Judgment Date: May 01, 2015

14. As would be evident from the contents of Section 63 of the Act that to execute the Will as contemplated therein, the testator would have to sign or affix his mark to it or the same has to be signed by some other person in his presence and on his direction. Further the signature or mark of the testator or the signature of the person signing for him has to be so Full Judgment

Tags Will Evidence
Supreme Court of India (Full Bench (FB)- Three Judge)

RAJASTHAN HOUSING BOARD Vs. NEW PINK CITY NIRMAN SAHKA.SAM.LD.& ANR.

Appeal (Civil), 1527-1536 of 2013, Judgment Date: May 01, 2015

Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

NICHOLAS PIRAMAL INDIA LTD. Vs. HARISINGH

Appeal (Civil), 4436 of 2010, Judgment Date: Apr 30, 2015

Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

M/S ARIANE ORGACHEM PVT.LTD. Vs. WYETH EMPLOYEES UNION & ORS

Appeal (Civil), 246 of 2015, Judgment Date: Apr 29, 2015

“When a question of law is raised for the first time in a court of last resort, upon the construction of a document, or upon facts either admitted or proved beyond controversy, it is not only competent but expedient, in the interests of justice, to entertain the plea.” Therefore, with regard to the above mentioned aspect regarding the plea of the competency of the Deputy Labour Commissioner to pass an Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

KHUB RAM Vs. DALBIR SINGH & ORS.

Appeal (Civil), 2734 of 2015, Judgment Date: Apr 29, 2015

  Mr. Patwalia has rightly placed reliance to support the aforesaid submissions, on a judgment of this Court in the case of Meghmala v. G. Narasimha Reddy (2010) 8 SCC 383. The law relating to effect of fraud upon a competent authority to get an appointment/office as well as effect of fraud upon court has been discussed in detail in paragraphs 28 to 36 Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

M/S. ESCORTS LTD. Vs. COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, FARIDABAD

Appeal (Civil), 6561 of 2004, Judgment Date: Apr 29, 2015

Full Judgment