Skip to content
Home » 31 Latest Supreme Court Case Laws Reported in Judgements Today 2022 Volume 1

31 Latest Supreme Court Case Laws Reported in Judgements Today 2022 Volume 1

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Section 21 (b) – Requirement of leading detailed evidence could not be a ground to shut the doors of any forum created under the Act. Sunil Kumar Maity v. State Bank of India, JT 2022 (1) SC 414

PSC Recruitment – Decisions made by expert bodies, including the Public Services Commissions, should not be lightly interfered with, unless instances of arbitrary and mala fide exercise of power are made out. State of Uttar Pradesh v. Atul Kumar Dwivedi, JT 2022 (1) SC 360

Specific Relief Act, 1963 – Merely averring that the plaintiff was waiting with the balance consideration and believed that the defendant would clear the encumbrance is insufficient to prove that the plaintiff was willing to perform his obligations under the contract. Shenbagam v. KK Rathinavel, JT 2022 (1) SC 344

Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 – Banking Regulation Act, 1949 – S. 35 A – Companies Act, 1956 – Ss. 441, 531 – Fraudulent Preference – Power of the Reserve Bank to give directions – Commencement of winding up by tribunal. Small Industries Development Bank of India v. M/s SIBCO Investment Pvt. Ltd., JT 2022 (1) SC 323

Repatriation of Prisoners Act, 2003 – Ss. 12 & 13 – Transfer into India – Determination of prison and issue of warrant for receiving transfer in India. Union of India v. Shaikh Istiyaq Ahmed, JT 2022 (1) SC 304

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 378 – How to deal with, decide and dispose of the criminal appeal against an acquittal – Principles. Geeta Devi v. State of U.P., JT 2022 (1) SC 281

Service Law – Departmental Proceedings – Requirement of Handwriting Expert – Test of criminal proceedings cannot be applied to departmental proceedings. Indian Overseas Bank v. Om Prakash Lal, JT 2022 (1) SC 262

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Section 34 (4) – Under guise of additional reasons and filling up the gaps in the reasoning, no award can be remitted to the Arbitrator, where there are no findings on the contentious issues in the award. I Pay Clearing Services Pvt. Ltd. v. ICICI Bank Ltd., JT 2022 (1) SC 248

Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 – The power of judicial review of an order transferring an Original Application pending before a Bench of the Tribunal to another Bench under Section 25 of the Act can be judicially reviewed only by a Division Bench of the High Court within whose territorial jurisdiction the Bench passing the same, falls. Union of India v. Alapan Bandyopadhyay, JT 2022 (1) SC 236

Electricity Duty Act, 2016 (Maharashtra) – Charitable education institutions registered under the provisions of the Societies Registration Act and/or under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, are not entitled to any exemption from levy/payment of the electricity duty on or after 08.08.2016 i.e. from the date on which the Maharashtra Electricity Duty Act, 2016 came into effect. State of Maharashtra v. Vile Parle Kelvani Mandal, JT 2022 (1) SC 222

Bail – While elaborate reasons may not be assigned for grant of bail or an extensive discussion of the merits of the case may not be undertaken by the court considering a bail application, an order de hors reasoning or bereft of the relevant reasons cannot result in grant of bail. In such a case the prosecution or the informant has a right to assail the order before a higher forum. Manoj Kumar Khokhar v. State of Rajasthan, JT 2022 (1) SC 208

Custody of Child – Whether the Court while dealing with custody of minor child can compel one of the parents to move from one country to another ? Vasudha Sethi v. Kiran V. Bhaskar, JT 2022 (1) SC 191

Constitution of India – Article 226 – Fresh Assessment. State of Andhra Pradesh v. S. Pitchi Reddy, JT 2022 (1) SC 189

Penal Code, 1860 – Section 498A – When an offence has been committed by a woman by meting out cruelty to another woman it becomes a more serious offence. If a lady does not protect another lady, the other lady would become vulnerable. Meera v. State by the Inspector of Police, JT 2022 (1) SC 169

Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 – Demand of money for construction of a house can be treated as a dowry demand. State of Madhya Pradesh v. Jogendra, JT 2022 (1) SC 156

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Ss. 34 & 37 – An award can be set aside only if the award is against the public policy of India, if the award is found to be contrary to, (a) fundamental policy of Indian Law; or (b) the interest of India; or (c) justice or morality; or (d) if it is patently illegal. Haryana Tourism Ltd. v. M/s Kandhari Beverages Ltd., JT 2022 (1) SC 153

Constitution of India – Article 227 – Supervisory jurisdiction is not to correct every error of fact or even a legal flaw when the final finding is justified or can be supported. M/s Garment Craft v. Prakash Chand Goel, JT 2022 (1) SC 146

Consumer Protection Act 1986 – Failure to obtain the occupation certificate is a deficiency in service for which the builder is liable. Samruddhi Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. v. Mumbai Mahalaxmi Construction Pvt. Ltd., JT 2022 (1) SC 135

Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002 – Assets Reconstructing Company (ARC) – A writ petition against the private financial institution under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the proposed action/actions under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act can be said to be not maintainable. Phoenix ARC Pvt. Ltd. v. Vishwa Bharati Vidya Mandir, JT 2022 (1) SC 113

Penal Code, 1860 – Section 34 – Essence & Scope of. Jasdeep Singh @ Jassu v. State of Punjab, JT 2022 (1) SC 96

Service Law – If a regular promotion is offered but is refused by the employee before becoming entitled to a financial upgradation, she/he shall not be entitled to financial upgradation only because she has suffered stagnation. Union of India v. Manju Arora, JT 2022 (1) SC 65

Labour Law – Disciplinary Proceedings – Industrial Court cannot give much stress on the acquittal of the workman by the criminal court. Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation v. Dilip Uttam Jayabhay, JT 2022 (1) SC 59

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Once an application u/s. 11(6) of the Act has been filed for appointment of an Arbitrator before the High Court, the respondents forfeited their right to appoint an Arbitrator and the High Court alone holds jurisdiction to appoint an Arbitrator in exercise of power under Section 11(6) of the Act. M/s Durga Welding Works v. Chief Engineer Railway Electrification, JT 2022 (1) SC 56

Election Law – Village Panchayats Act, 1959 (Maharashtra) – Ss. 10 A (2), 14 B (1), 16 (2) – Disqualification by State Election Commission – Disability from continuing as member – Divisional Commissioner had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal against the order of the Collector under Section 14B(1). Shobhabai Narayan Shinde v. Divisional Commissioner, JT 2022 (1) SC 47

Service Law – Defence Representative – Not permitting the delinquent officer to be represented through ex-­employee of the Bank in the departmental enquiry cannot be said to be in any way in breach of principles of natural justice and / or it violates any of the rights of the delinquent officer. Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank (RMGB) v. Ramesh Chandra Meena, JT 2022 (1) SC 38

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Ss. 14 r/w. 11 & 15 – Neutrality of Arbitrators.Ellora Paper Mills Limited v. State of Madhya Pradesh, JT 2022 (1) SC 25

Land Law – Whether the land transaction in favour of the appellant -­ original defendant was illegal and in violation of Section 42 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 and Section 13 of the Rajasthan Colonization Act, 1954 being a person belonging to Scheduled Caste of State of Punjab ? Bhadar Ram v. Jassa Ram, JT 2022 (1) SC 14

Education – National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) – Economically Weaker Section (EWS) – Validity of the EWS criteria as recommended by the Pandey Committee. Neil Aurelio Nunes v. Union of India, JT 2022 (1) SC 11

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – S. 37 – Where two views are possible, the Court cannot interfere in the plausible view taken by the arbitrator supported by reasoning. UHL Power Company Ltd. v. State of Himachal Pradesh, JT 2022 (1) SC 1

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 1 Average: 5]