Thursday, 23, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 
S. DHANASEKARAN vs. COMMANDANT & ANR.

Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 901 SC

Headnote :

Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949 Section 11(1) Dismissal from Service - The appellant, a constable in the CRPF, was dismissed from service due to allegations of misconduct and misbehavior. The appellant argued that the inquiry was conducted in Hindi, a language he did not understand. However,...
JYOTHIR. R vs. SUNISHA N.S.

Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 902 SC

Headnote :

MBBS Course - Admission through Sports Quota - For the admission to the M.B.B.S course under the Sports Quota, the final Rank List published by the Commissioner of Entrance Examinations will determine the positions of candidates for admission by the authorities. Hence, the appellant\'s request to co...
HARI SINGH vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 903 SC

Headnote :

A. Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 302; Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 161; Evidence Act, 1872 Section 32 - Second Dying Declaration Recorded by Investigating Officer - In cases where the injured person\'s condition is critical and their blood pressure is unrecordable, the statement should no...
VANI AGRO ENTERPRISES vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 904 SC

Headnote :

IMPORTANTDishonour of cheque - The Cr.P.C. does not allow for the consolidation of separate cases arising from the same notice.A. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 219 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138 Consolidation of cases - Permissibility - Four cheques issued to the respondent all...
LAXMINATH vs. THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 905 SC

Headnote :

Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 302 - Murder of son by father - Witness statements indicated a dispute regarding construction work. The discrepancies between the testimonies of the deceased\'s wife and daughter are not enough to undermine the credibility of the witnesses on key points. Although two...
M/S MAYAVTI TRADING PVT. LTD vs. PRADYUAT BED MURMAN

Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 906 SC

Headnote :

IMPORTANTIn the appointment of an arbitrator, the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court/High Court is limited to verifying the existence of an arbitration agreement.According to Section 11(6A) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (amended in 2015) - the appointment of an arbitrator falls under...
EX. SEPOY SURENDRA SINGH YADAV vs. CHIEF RECORD OFFICER

Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 907 SC

Headnote :

IMPORTANTNo restrictions on departmental action following exoneration in Summary Court Martial.According to Section 44 of the Army Act, 1950 and Rule 13 of the Army Rules, 1954 - Departmental proceedings - There are no restrictions on departmental actions after exoneration in a Summary Court Martial...
FR. ISSAC MATTAMMEL COR EPISCOPA vs. ST. MARYS ORTHODOX SYRIAN CHURCH

Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 908 SC

Headnote :

IMPORTANTOrders issued by High Courts that contradict the law established by the Supreme Court constitute a breach of the judgment and order - As Kerala is part of Indian Territory, all parties involved are required to comply accordingly.According to Article 141 of the Constitution of India, 1950, t...
K. SREEDHAR RAO vs. UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE SECRETARY

Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 909 SC

Headnote :

IMPORTANTRetired Acting Chief Justice is not eligible for pension benefits equivalent to those of a retired Chief Justice of a High Court.According to Article 32 of the Constitution of India, 1950, and Rule 2 of Part I of the First Schedule of the 1954 Act, it has been determined that the petitioner...
RAI BAHADUR NARAIN SINGH SUGAR MILLS LTD vs. MANGEY RAM

Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 910 SC

Headnote :

IMPORTANTThe Labour Court lacks the authority to first determine the entitlement of workers and then calculate the benefits based on that determination.According to Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the Labour Court does not have the jurisdiction to initially assess the entitlemen...
PRABHASH KUMAR SINGH vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR (NOW JHARKHAND)

Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 911 SC

Headnote :

Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 302 Murder - Conviction - The accused shot the victim at close range, and the post-mortem report, along with the testimony of the autopsy surgeon, confirmed that the gunshot caused the death. There is a clear eyewitness account of the incident, and none of the eyewitn...
M/S EXL CAREERS vs. FRANKFINN AVIATION SERVICES PVT. LTD.

Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 912 SC

Headnote :

Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 7, Rule 10 and Rule 10A - Return of plaint - When a plaint is returned under Order 7, Rule 10 and Rule 10A, should the trial in the Court where the plaint is subsequently filed commence anew, or should it continue from the stage at which the plaint was returned? - D...
PRITI KUMARI vs. STATE OF BIHAR

Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 913 SC

Headnote :

IMPORTANTCourts located in the area where the wife has sought refuge also possess the authority to hear complaints regarding offenses under Section 498A of the IPC.Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Sections 177 and 178; Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 498A - Harassment - Jurisdiction - Courts in the loc...
PRATIMA DEVI vs. ANAND PRAKASH

Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 914 SC

Headnote :

IMPORTANTA maintenance order should only be suspended for very exceptional circumstances.According to Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Granting a stay on maintenance - The husband or father is obligated to support his wife and child - Unless there are very exceptional reasons, a ma...
Amiruddin vs. State (Delhi Admn.)

Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 915 SC

Headnote :

Indian Penal Code, 1860 Sections 302 and 304 Part II - Culpable homicide - Conviction - The deceased received only a single blow to the back, which penetrated and severed the aorta. Had the blow missed the aorta, it is likely that the deceased would have survived. There is no evidence suggesting tha...
BHUPINDER SINGH vs. JOGINDER SINGH

Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 916 SC

Headnote :

CRUCIALObtaining leave is an essential requirement to file a suit under section 92 of the CPC.Civil Procedure Code, 1908 Section 92 - Legal Action Against Public Charities - It has been determined that a suit cannot be initiated without first securing the Court\'s leave.[Paragraph 10]
DR. SWAPAN KUMAR BANERJEE vs. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL

Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 917 SC

Headnote :

IMPORTANTA wife who has been divorced by her husband on the grounds of desertion is entitled to seek maintenance. The fact that she did not file a maintenance petition during the ongoing matrimonial proceedings does not prevent her from filing such a petition at a later time.A. Criminal Procedure Co...
SANKALP RECREATION PRIVATE LTD. vs. UNION OF INDIA

Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 918 SC

Headnote :

Legal Issue.[Paragraph]
STATE OF UP vs. VINOD KUMAR KATHERIA

Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 919 SC

Headnote :

Termination of service - Right to a hearing - Employee working as lekhpal in the revenue department dismissed for allegedly issuing false certificates and making fraudulent entries in revenue records - No comprehensive inquiry was conducted by the Inquiry Officer - The High Court correctly overturne...
STATE OF GOA vs. DR. ALVARO ALBERTO MOUSINHO DE NORONHA FERREIRA

Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 920 SC

Headnote :

According to Section 32 of the Goa, Daman and Diu Land Revenue Code, 1968, the issue of conversion fee arises only when a decision is made to issue a Sanad. Thus, the relevant date for determining the conversion charge is the date on which the decision to grant the Sanad is made. The appellant corre...
HEMKUNWAR BAI vs. SUMER SINGH

Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 921 SC

Headnote :

IMPORTANTWitnesses are not required to know the contents of the document.Evidence Act, 1872 Section 68 - Will and Sale Deed - Proof of Execution - The executant created two sale deeds in favor of her nephews and executed a will for the remaining property in favor of another nephew. The plaintiff fil...
PANDURANG SITARAM JADHAV vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS DAIRY MANAGER

Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 923 SC

Headnote :

Section 28 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971.[Paragraph]
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IDRC

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter