[ Supreme Court ]
A Division Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta reverses the Gauhati High Court, holding that Assam cannot deny regularisation to workers left out of its own 2005 Cabinet decision through clerical lapses, as such exclusion violates Article 14.
2026-05-22 · 9 min read
[ Supreme Court ]
A Supreme Court bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and K. Vinod Chandran reverses a High Court ruling that mandated demand drafts for out-of-state bidders, restoring the appellant's tender qualification.
2026-05-22 · 6 min read
[ Supreme Court ]
A Division Bench of the Supreme Court held that a partition decree incorporating auction directions is executable without a separate final decree, restoring stalled execution proceedings after more than a decade of litigation.
2026-05-19 · 7 min read
[ Supreme Court ]
A bench of Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and R. Mahadevan set aside Rs 25 lakh personal cost on a Tamil Nadu education official who acted on a then-valid government order restricting Group D recruitment.
2026-05-18 · 5 min read
[ Supreme Court ]
A Supreme Court bench of Justices S.V.N. Bhatti and Prasanna B. Varale remands a Kanpur eviction suit, holding that striking off a tenant's defence demands proper determination of the first date of hearing.
2026-05-18 · 7 min read
[ Supreme Court ]
A Supreme Court bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Vipul M. Pancholi holds that Mediclaim proceeds are contractual, not a double benefit against statutory MACT compensation.
2026-05-17 · 8 min read
[ Supreme Court ]
A bench of Justices Manmohan and Manoj Misra reversed the Bombay High Court, holding that a co-landlord's plaint adequately pleaded bona fide need and landlord status under the Bombay Rent Act.
2026-05-16 · 8 min read
[ Supreme Court ]
A Division Bench led by Justice J.B. Pardiwala holds that Sanand Properties' 35% share from Fortaleza Developers was gross revenue, not profit, and that both reassessment notices were validly issued.
2026-05-13 · 9 min read
[ Supreme Court ]
A Division Bench dismisses Dhanlaxmi Bank’s appeal, holding that a tripartite property transaction does not create a straightforward financial debt warranting CIRP under Section 7.
2026-05-12 · 7 min read
[ Supreme Court ]
A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma upheld APTEL's view that Indian Railways procures electricity for its own use and is therefore a consumer liable to pay cross-subsidy and additional surcharges under the Electricity Act.
2026-05-12 · 5 min read
[ Supreme Court ]
A bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan held that a suit founded on a disputed Will was, in substance, an attempt to enforce a benami transaction barred by statute, and directed the Central Government to take over the suit properties within eight weeks.
2026-05-10 · 10 min read