Judges Archives

Supreme Court settles definition of wages under Employees’ State Insurance Act: ESI Corporation vs. Gnambigai Mills Ltd. (2005)

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 19th July 2005 Citation: [Not Available in Source] Judges: S.N. Variava and Dr. AR. Lakshmanan In a dispute concerning contributions to the Employees’ State Insurance Corporation (ESIC), the Supreme Court of India addressed whether certain payments made to employees, initially termed as ‘ex-gratia’ in a compromise, should be considered as […]

Supreme Court settles definition of wages under Employees’ State Insurance Act: ESI Corporation vs. Gnambigai Mills Ltd. (2005) Read Post »

Title: Supreme Court affirms title by adverse possession in property dispute: Tej Narain vs. Shanti Swaroop Bohre (2004)

September 28, 2004 / Adverse Possession, Ashok Bhan, Judges, Limitation Act, Limitation Act with Article 65, Property Law, S.H. Kapadia

Date of the Judgment: 28/09/2004 Citation: Where available, provide the case citation in the Indian Supreme Court (INSC) format. Judges: Ashok Bhan and S.H. Kapadia Can continuous possession of a property for over 12 years grant ownership, even without legal title? The Supreme Court addressed this critical question in the case of Tej Narain vs.

Title: Supreme Court affirms title by adverse possession in property dispute: Tej Narain vs. Shanti Swaroop Bohre (2004) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Murder Conviction Based on Eyewitness Testimony: Ram Kishan vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2004)

September 10, 2004 / Code of Criminal Procedure, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 161, Dr. AR. Lakshmanan, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 149, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 323, Judges, K.G. Balakrishnan

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 10/09/2004 Judges: K.G. Balakrishnan and Dr. AR. Lakshmanan Can eyewitness testimony alone be sufficient to uphold a murder conviction, even when there are challenges to the medical evidence? The Supreme Court of India addressed this critical question in the case of Ram Kishan & Ors. vs. State of Uttar Pradesh.

Supreme Court Upholds Murder Conviction Based on Eyewitness Testimony: Ram Kishan vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2004) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles maintainability of civil suits in labour disputes: B.S. Bharti vs. I.B.P. Company Limited (25 August 2004)

August 25, 2004 / A.K. Mathur, Civil Suits, Industrial Disputes, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 2-A, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 2(k), Judges, Labour Law, N. Santosh Hegde, S.B. Sinha, Termination of Employment

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 25 August 2004 Judges: N. Santosh Hegde, S.B. Sinha, A.K. Mathur When can an employee bypass industrial dispute mechanisms and directly file a civil suit against their employer? The Supreme Court of India addressed this critical question in B.S. Bharti vs. I.B.P. Company Limited, a case concerning the termination of

Supreme Court settles maintainability of civil suits in labour disputes: B.S. Bharti vs. I.B.P. Company Limited (25 August 2004) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles retrenchment compensation issues in Industrial Dispute: Krishna Bahadur vs. M/s Purna Theatre & Ors (25 August 2004)

August 25, 2004 / Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 25-F(b), Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 25-G, Judges, N. Santosh Hegde, S.B. Sinha, West Bengal Industrial Disputes Rules with Rule 77A

Date of the Judgment: 25 August 2004 Citation: Where available, provide the case citation in the Indian Supreme Court (INSC) format. Judges: N. Santosh Hegde & S.B. Sinha Can an employer’s failure to strictly comply with the legal requirements for retrenching an employee be excused if the employer acted in good faith? The Supreme Court

Supreme Court settles retrenchment compensation issues in Industrial Dispute: Krishna Bahadur vs. M/s Purna Theatre & Ors (25 August 2004) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles the validity of gift deed concerning unborn children under Transfer of Property Act: F.M. Devaru Ganapati Bhat vs. Prabhakar Ganapathi Bhat (2003)

December 19, 2003 / A.R. Lakshmanan, Judges, Transfer of Property Act, 1882, Transfer of Property Act, 1882 with Section 13, Transfer of Property Act, 1882 with Section 20, Y.K. Sabharwal

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 19th December 2003 Case: F.M. Devaru Ganapati Bhat vs. Prabhakar Ganapathi Bhat Judges: Y.K. Sabharwal, J. and Dr. A.R. Lakshmanan, J. Can a gift deed executed in favor of a minor, with a stipulation that unborn children will jointly hold the property, be considered valid under the Transfer of Property

Supreme Court settles the validity of gift deed concerning unborn children under Transfer of Property Act: F.M. Devaru Ganapati Bhat vs. Prabhakar Ganapathi Bhat (2003) Read Post »

Supreme Court sets aside High Court order due to delay in challenging land acquisition: Haryana State Handloom vs. Jain Shool Society (2003)

October 29, 2003 / H. K. Sema, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, Land Acquisition Act with Section 17, Land Acquisition Act with Section 18, Land Acquisition Act with Section 4, S. N. Variava

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 29th October 2003 Citation: Appeal (civil) 2744 of 2002 Judges: S. N. Variava J, H. K. Sema Can a delay of 22 years in filing a writ petition challenging a land acquisition be excused if the land was not used for its intended purpose? The Supreme Court addressed this critical

Supreme Court sets aside High Court order due to delay in challenging land acquisition: Haryana State Handloom vs. Jain Shool Society (2003) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Amendment Act on Seniority of Orissa Administrative Service Officers: Prafulla Kumar Das vs. State of Orissa (2003)

October 7, 2003 / B.N. Agrawal, Dr. A.R. Lakshmanan, Judges, Orissa Administrative Service Rules, Orissa Administrative Service, Class-II (Appointment of Officers Validation) Act, 1987, Orissa Administrative Service, Class-II (Recruitment) Rules, 1959, R.C. Lahoti, Recruitment, S.B. Sinha, Seniority, Service Law, V.N. Khare

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 07/10/2003 Judges: V.N. Khare (CJI), R.C. Lahoti, B.N. Agrawal, S.B. Sinha, Dr. A.R. Lakshmanan. In cases concerning government service, seniority disputes often arise from the complex interplay of recruitment rules, merger of services, and legislative amendments. The Supreme Court of India addressed such a dispute in Prafulla Kumar Das and

Supreme Court Upholds Amendment Act on Seniority of Orissa Administrative Service Officers: Prafulla Kumar Das vs. State of Orissa (2003) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles the requirement of passing the Accounts Test for Senior Assistant post: S.P. Badrinath vs. Govt. of A.P. (2003)

September 16, 2003 / Andhra Pradesh Ministerial Service Rules, 1966, Brijesh Kumar, Judges, Promotion, S.B. Sinha, Seniority, Service Law, V.N. Khare

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 16/09/2003 The Supreme Court of India addressed the question of whether passing the Accounts Test is a mandatory requirement for promotion to the post of Senior Assistant in the Andhra Pradesh government services. This issue arose in the context of the Andhra Pradesh Ministerial Service Rules, 1966, and its applicability

Supreme Court settles the requirement of passing the Accounts Test for Senior Assistant post: S.P. Badrinath vs. Govt. of A.P. (2003) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Ban on Imported Ivory Trade to Protect Wildlife: Indian Handicrafts Emporium & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors. (27 August 2003)

August 27, 2003 / Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 19(1)(g), Fundamental Rights, Judges, S.B. Sinha, Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 with Section 49-C, Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 with Section 63, Y.K. Sabharwal

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 27 August 2003 Citation: Appeal (civil) 7533 of 1997, Indian Handicrafts Emporium & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors. Judges: CJI, Y.K. Sabharwal & S.B. Sinha Can a previously legal trade be banned to protect endangered species? The Supreme Court of India deliberated on this question while examining the

Supreme Court Upholds Ban on Imported Ivory Trade to Protect Wildlife: Indian Handicrafts Emporium & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors. (27 August 2003) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Official Secrets Act Case: Govt. of NCT of Delhi vs. Jaspal Singh (08 August 2003)

August 8, 2003 / Doraiswamy Raju, H. K. Sema, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 10, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 30, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 120B, Judges, Official Secrets Act, 1923, Official Secrets Act, 1923 with Section 3, Official Secrets Act, 1923 with Section 5, Official Secrets Act, 1923 with Section 9

Date of the Judgment: 08 August 2003 Citation: Where available, provide the case citation in the Indian Supreme Court (INSC) format. Judges: Doraiswamy Raju, J. and H. K. Sema, J. Can possessing a classified document, even without proof of communication to another party, be sufficient to establish guilt under the Official Secrets Act? The Supreme

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Official Secrets Act Case: Govt. of NCT of Delhi vs. Jaspal Singh (08 August 2003) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles classification of electric fans under Central Excise Act: Khaitan Electrical Ltd. vs. Collector of Central Excise (06 August 2003)

August 6, 2003 / B.N. Srikrishna, Central Excise Act, 1944, Central Excise Act, 1944 with Tariff Item No. 33, Classification of Goods, Excise Duty, G.P. Mathur, Judges, S. Rajendra Babu

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 06 August 2003 Citation: 2003 Supp(2) SCR 268 Judges: S. Rajendra Babu, B.N. Srikrishna, G.P. Mathur Are ‘multi-purpose’ electric fans, capable of being used as both table and cabin fans, to be classified based on their primary design and intended use? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in

Supreme Court settles classification of electric fans under Central Excise Act: Khaitan Electrical Ltd. vs. Collector of Central Excise (06 August 2003) Read Post »