Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Kerala Abkari Act Case Due to Lack of Evidence: Jayan vs. State of Kerala (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the prosecution has sufficiently proven the charges of illegal transportation of spirit under the Kerala Abkari Act. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law Case Name: Jayan vs. State of Kerala [Judgment Date]: 22 October […]
Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Application to Summon Records in Adoption Dispute: Biraji vs. Surya Pratap (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a trial court can reject an application to summon records filed at a belated stage after the closure of evidence, especially when the issue was known to the applicant from the beginning. CASE TYPE: Civil
Supreme Court Enhances Compensation in Motor Accident Case: Sangeetha vs. OMR Travel Access (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Determination of fair compensation in motor accident claims, specifically regarding the assessment of income and future prospects of the deceased. CASE TYPE: Motor Accident Compensation Case Name: B Sangeetha & Anr vs OMR Travel Access Pvt Ltd & Anr
Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case: Rameshwar vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the conviction of an accused can be upheld under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, when there is no direct evidence of the specific act that
Supreme Court Orders Open Remand for Land Compensation: Ali Akbar vs. State of Kerala (2018) Date of the Judgment: 26 October 2018 Citation: Civil Appeal No(s). 10786-10787 of 2018, Civil Appeal No(s). 10788-10796 of 2018 Judges: Kurian Joseph, J., A.M. Khanwilkar, J. Can a High Court remand a land acquisition compensation case back to the
Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Murder Case Due to Contradictory Evidence: State of Rajasthan vs. Madan (2018) INSC 881 LEGAL ISSUE: Assessment of evidence in a criminal appeal against acquittal, particularly when relying on child witnesses and circumstantial evidence. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: State of Rajasthan vs. Madan @ Madaniya [Judgment Date]: 25 October
Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Double Murder Case: Sk. Khabir vs. State of West Bengal (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the conviction of the accused for murder based on the testimony of related eye-witnesses and corroborated by medical evidence is valid. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law Case Name: Sk. Khabir vs. State of West Bengal [Judgment Date]:
Supreme Court Upholds Findings on Oral Gift in Property Dispute: Sheikh Yakub vs. Sakinabi (2018) Date of the Judgment: July 11, 2018 Citation: Not Available Judges: Justice Kurian Joseph and Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul. Can an oral gift of property be considered valid without sufficient evidence? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this question
Supreme Court upholds findings on oral gift: Sheikh Yakub vs. Sakinabi (2018) Read Post »
Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Double Murder Case: Ganapathi vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Admissibility of evidence from related witnesses and a child witness in a murder case. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Ganapathi & Anr. vs. The State of Tamil Nadu Judgment Date: 27 March 2018 Date of the Judgment: 27
Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Evidence Destruction Case: State of Maharashtra vs. Dinesh (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the testimony of a sole eyewitness, who remained silent for a prolonged period after witnessing a crime, is sufficient for conviction. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: State of Maharashtra vs. Dinesh Judgment Date: 07 February 2018 Date of
LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an elderly and illiterate plaintiff can be allowed to present their evidence through a commission at their residence. CASE TYPE: Civil Case Name: Prasadi Devi vs. Nagar Palika Sawai Madhopur Judgment Date: 13 November 2017 Date of the Judgment: 13 November 2017 Citation: 2017 INSC 987 Judges: R.K. Agrawal, J., Abhay Manohar
Can a contractor claim additional payments for work when there’s a discrepancy in government-prescribed rates? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this question in a civil appeal concerning a construction contract. The court upheld the High Court’s decision, which had rejected certain claims made by a contractor for extra work. This case clarifies how
