SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next

Supreme Court Weekly Digest - 2025-11-16

Subject :

Supreme Court Weekly Digest

Supreme Today News Desk

Supreme(SC) 2025 0 1932
Supreme Court (23)

Govind VS State of Haryana

Murder – When eye-witness has turned hostile and has not supported prosecution case and no evidence of ‘last seen’ has been adduced, and alleged motive against appellant remains unproved, mere recover....

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 302 – Arms Act, 1959 – Section 25 – Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – Sections 25 and 27 – Murder – Life imprisonment – No independent witnesses have deposed anything to prove prosecution allegation against appellant – Case of prosecution against appellant is based on testimony of eyewitness, who has turned hostile a...


Supreme(SC) 2025 0 1926

Pankaj Shukla VS Deepak Chaturvedi

Divorce – It would serve no purpose to perpetuate a legal relationship when matrimonial ties have long ceased to exist in substance.

Headnote:

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Sections 13 and 25 – Divorce – Desertion by wife – Parties have been living separately since nearly seventeen years now – Family Court made efforts to bring about amicable settlement between parties, but same did not succeed – No matrimonial bond remains between them and neither party has any real intention to restore relationship – Respondent- husband has remarried – In...


Supreme(SC) 2025 0 1931

Dinesh Kumar Jaldhari VS State of Chhattisgarh

Aggravated sexual assault on girl child – Conviction and sentence – Medical evidence will take a backseat even if do not corroborate with ocular evidence, where ocular evidence is consistent and cogen....

Headnote:

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 – Sections 9(m) and 10 – Aggravated sexual assault on girl child – Conviction and sentence – Medical evidence will take a backseat even if do not corroborate with ocular evidence, where ocular evidence is consistent and cogent, later would be allowed to prevail – Fact that victim was in a frightened state upon seeing accused is a pointer in its...


Supreme(SC) 2025 0 1928

Poly Medicure Ltd. VS Brillio Technologies Pvt. Ltd.

Subject: Consumer Law – Consumer Protection Act

Keywords: consumer, commercial purpose, software, deficiency, consumer complaint, profit, personal use, juristic person, definition, liability

Consumer complaint – Maintainability – Commercial purpose – Identity of person making purchase, or value of transaction, is not conclusive to determine whether transaction or activity is for a commerc....

Headnote:

(A) Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Section 2(1)(d) read with Section 2(1)(m) [Consumer Protection Act, 2019 – Section 2(7) – Consumer complaint – Maintainability – Commercial purpose – Identity of person making purchase, or value of transaction, is not conclusive to determine whether transaction or activity is for a commercial purpose – What is to be seen...


Supreme(SC) 2025 0 1927

Union of India VS Indraj

Subject: Administrative Law – Employment Disciplinary Action

Keywords: Judicial review, Disciplinary authority, Misappropriation, Employment rules, Jurisdiction, Trust, Inquiry process, Reinstatement, Administrative tribunal, Penalty

Removal from Service – Mere deposit of embezzled amount will not absolve an employee of misconduct – Relationship of customer with Banker is of mutual trust.

Headnote:

Service Law – Removal from Service – Embezzlement of public money – [Gramin Dak Sevak (Conduct and Engagement) Rules, 2011] – During course of inquiry, respondent was given due opportunity of hearing – Defence assistance was also made available to respondent – Respondent cross-examined all departmental witnesses and did not lead any evidence in defence – While trying to explain discrepancies, resp...


Supreme(SC) 2025 0 1924

Sanjay Tiwari VS Yugal Kishore Prasad Sao

(1) Counter claim though can be based on different cause of action than that are put forth in suit, it should be one incidental or connected with that cause of action.
(2) Counter claim has necessa....

Headnote:

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 – Order VIII Rule 6A – Counter claim – Suit for specific performance – Counter claim though can be based on different cause of action than that are put forth in suit, it should be one incidental or connected with that cause of action and it has necessarily to be directed against plaintiff and cannot be directed against co-defendant – In present case, if co-defendants are...


Supreme(Online)(SC) 2025 9946

MOHAMMED RASAL.C & ANR. vs STATE OF KERALA & ANR.

Subject: Criminal Law – Appeals

Keywords: Special Leave, High Court, Three-Judge Bench, Hearing, Court Order, Legal Representation, Constitution, Case Listing, Judgment, Appeal

The Court determined that further examination by a three-judge bench is necessary.

Headnote:

This judgment concerns the petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 6588/2025 arising from a final judgment and order dated 11-03-2025 passed by the High Court of Kerala. The Court determined that the matter requires further examination by a Three-Judge Bench. It was stated that this case would be listed as soon as the Three-Judge Bench is constituted. The primary legal question framed was ...


Supreme(Online)(SC) 2025 9945

SURENDRA KOLI vs THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

Subject: Criminal Law – Appellate Jurisdiction

Keywords: curative petition, miscarriage of justice, evidentiary standards, confession, voluntariness, reliable evidence, capital punishment, acquittal, prosecution, judicial integrity

Curative petitions can correct judicial errors based on fundamental defects or miscarriages of justice, ensuring consistency across similar cases.

Headnote:

(A) Constitution of India - Articles 129, 137, 142, 145 - Curative jurisdiction - Recognized to prevent abuse of process and to cure gross miscarriage of justice - Essential element being a fundamental defect in the previous decision or violation of natural justice. (Paras 2, 3, 10, 12) (B) Criminal Law - Principles of Evidence - Confessions admitted under Section 164 CrPC questioned for voluntari...


Supreme(SC) 2025 0 1917

Kapadam Sangalappa VS Kamatam Sangalappa

Objection to execution of compromise decree – In execution petition, primary onus lies on decree-holder to show that judgment debtor has wilfully disobeyed conditions of decree.

Headnote:

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 – Section 47 – Objection to execution of compromise decree – In execution petition, primary onus lies on decree-holder to show that judgment debtor has wilfully disobeyed conditions of decree – However, in present case, no evidence has been led by appellants to show that possession of idols ever passed to respondents – When any fact is especially within knowledge of any ...


Supreme(SC) 2025 0 1904

Riyas VS P. N. Shinosh

Permanent disability suffered in motor accident – 40% is to be added towards future prospects while awarding compensation.

Headnote:

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Sections 168 and 173 – Permanent disability suffered in motor accident – Total compensation of Rs. 1,73,000/- together with 7% interest awarded by Tribunal – Additional compensation of Rs. 5,75,883/- awarded by High Court – Injured minor was 14 years of age – High Court rightly applied multiplier of 15 – Assessment of monthly income of Rs. 3,620/- is reasonable – 40% is ...


Supreme(SC) 2025 0 1901

MITC Rolling Mills Private Limited VS Renuka Realtors

Subject: Civil Law – Commercial Law

Keywords: rejection of plaint, appealable decree, commercial courts act, civil procedure code, mandatory mediation, legal remedies, court jurisdiction, final adjudication, high court error, plaintiff's rights

(1) Rejection of plaint – Order rejecting plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC decides lis finally and would tantamount to a decree within meaning of Section 2(2) CPC.
(2) Construction of Proviso – P....

Headnote:

(A) Civil Procedure Code, 1908 – Order VII Rule 11 – Commercial Courts Act, 2015 – Section 13(1A) – Rejection of plaint – Not undertaking mandatory Pre-Institution Mediation and Settlement (PIMS) – Order rejecting plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC decides lis finally and would tantamount to a decree within meaning of Section 2(2) CPC – Decree passed by a Commercial Court at level of a District Ju...


Supreme(SC) 2025 0 1906

K. S. Manjunath VS Moorasavirappa @ Muttanna Chennappa Batil, Since Deceased by His LRs.

Subject: Contract Law – Specific Performance

Keywords: Agreement to Sell, specific performance, unilateral termination, determinable contract, bona fide purchasers, readiness and willingness, notice, constructive knowledge, legal obligations, remedies

Court ruled that unilateral termination of an Agreement to Sell is impermissible unless contract is determinable, specifically enforcing original vendees' rights due to continuous readiness and notice....

Headnote:

(A) Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Sections 16(c) and 19(b) - Contractual obligations - Notice of termination of Agreement to Sell (ATS) not valid as ATS was non-determinable - Subsequent purchasers held not to be bona fide buyers due to actual and constructive notice of prior agreement - Original vendees able to demonstrate readiness and willingness to perform their obligations under ATS. (Paras 4, ...


Supreme(SC) 2025 0 1902

Akula Narayana VS Oriental Insurance Company Limited

Subject: Insurance Law – Motor Vehicle Insurance

Keywords: insurance liability, compensation, policy breach, pay and recover, third party, joint liability, additional premium, vehicle occupancy, statutory policy, court ruling

Breach of Motor Insurance Policy – Pay and Recover Principle can be followed.

Headnote:

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Section 149 – Motor Insurance Policy – Breach of – Exemption of Insurer from liability to pay compensation – Where contract of insurance is not disputed, even on breach of insurance conditions, Supreme Court had allowed recovery of compensation from Insurer by giving right to Insurer to recover the same from vehicle owner – Pay and Recover Principle has been consistently...


Supreme(SC) 2025 0 1905

R. Rajendran VS Kamar Nisha

Subject: Family Law – Legitimacy and DNA Testing

Keywords: legitimacy, DNA testing, presumption, non-access, privacy, evidence, burden of proof, marriage, court order, intrusion

The statutory presumption of legitimacy under Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act remains unrebutted unless non-access is conclusively proven; thus, DNA testing is unwarranted.

Headnote:

(A) Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 112 - Presumption of legitimacy of a child born during the continuance of a valid marriage - DNA testing ordered by High Court for criminal investigation deemed unwarranted as presumption remains unrebutted - No evidence of non-access provided. (Paras 22-24, 35, 59) (B) Privacy - Court examined the balance between the right to privacy and the necessity of DN...


Supreme(SC) 2025 0 1903

Nandkumar @ Nandu Manilal Mudaliar VS State of Gujarat

Subject: Criminal Law – Homicide

Keywords: culpable homicide, intent, murder, septicemia, injury, appeal, conviction, Indian Penal Code, mens rea, altercation

Murder – Unintentional homicide is not murder under Section 302, IPC.

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 302 and 504 – Murder and intentional insult – Life imprisonment – Where two ingredients namely that infliction of bodily injury on deceased was caused intentionally and secondly that it was sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature, are satisfied, offence would amount to murder – There may be circumstances which may emerge from facts and evidence of ...


Breaking News

View All
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top