Esheria India Case Law
Sign in
India Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

India Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
0 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter India case law

Results update automatically as you type.

India decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Criminal procedure

SACHIN versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Where an appeal is filed by an accused against conviction and sentence, the appellate court exercising appellate jurisdiction cannot, while affirming conviction, exercise suo motu revisional jurisdiction to enhance the sentence; enhancement of sentence is permissible only in an appeal filed by the State, victim or complainant (or by revisional petition in appropriate circumstances) and only after the accused has been given opportunity to show cause. Consequently the High Court and Special Court orders enhancing sentence were erroneous and set aside; the original sentence was restored and the…

Source excerpt

  • Enhancement of sentence
  • Appeal against conviction
  • Revisional powers
  • Pocso act sentencing
  • Reformatio in peius
  • Natural justice
Read case analysis
Civil procedure

S. NARAHARI AND ORS versus S.R. KUMAR AND ORS.

Order XLVII Rule 7 CPC precludes filing a Special Leave Petition against an order passed in review; however, the question whether liberty granted by this Court to approach the High Court in review (and dismissals of SLPs by non-speaking orders) revives the remedy of filing a subsequent Special Leave Petition raises important questions about merger, res judicata and Article 141 and must be decided by a larger bench; accordingly the matter is referred to the Chief Justice for constitution of a larger bench.

Source excerpt

  • Order xlvii rule 7 cpc
  • Special leave petition
  • Review
  • Doctrine of merger
  • Article 141 constitution of india
  • Maintainability of appeal
Read case analysis
Tax law

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX – I, CHANDIGARH versus M/S. ABC PAPERS LIMITED

The appellate jurisdiction of a High Court under Section 260A is determined by the territorial situs of the Assessing Officer who passed the assessment order and is not altered by an administrative transfer of the 'case' under Section 127 of the Income Tax Act; accordingly, Sahara India Financial Corporation Ltd. and Aar Bee Industries Ltd. are overruled to the extent they held otherwise.

Source excerpt

  • Section 260a
  • Section 127
  • Jurisdiction of high court
  • Transfer of cases under section 127
  • Income tax appellate tribunal jurisdiction
Read case analysis
Civil procedure

SATYENDER AND ORS. versus SAROJ AND ORS

The High Court's decree in favour of the plaintiffs insofar as it granted declaration and possession in respect of Killa Nos. 21//3/2 and 7//13 is set aside because the plaintiffs failed to prove title/possession and the mere absence of a defendant counter-claim on those plots does not entitle plaintiffs to a decree; concurrently, the High Court was correct to reject the defendants' counter-claim in respect of Killa Nos. 6//18 and 23 because under Order VIII Rule 6A CPC a counter-claim must be against the plaintiff's claim and the plaintiffs had not claimed those plots; additionally, in Harya…

Source excerpt

  • Counter-claim
  • Order viii rule 6a cpc
  • Section 100 cpc
  • Section 41 punjab courts act
  • Second appeal
  • Burden of proof
Read case analysis
Securities law

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA versus MEGA CORPORATION LIMITED

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal: the Tribunal's findings on the facts (that the advertisements and alleged manipulations were not proved) stand and do not raise questions of law under Section 15Z warranting interference; however the Tribunal's general observation asserting a right to cross-examination in all cases was set aside and the specific legal question on a right to cross-examine was left open for determination in an appropriate case.

Source excerpt

  • Scope of section 15z appeal
  • Pfutp regulations (regulations 3 and 4)
  • Alleged market manipulation and account manipulation
  • Principles of natural justice and disclosure
  • Right to cross-examination
Read case analysis
Civil procedure

SATYA PRAKASH DWIVEDI versus MUNNA ALIAS CHANDRABHAN YADAV AND OTHERS

The High Court was not justified in exercising its power under Order XLI Rule 33 CPC to reduce the Tribunal's award from Rs.5,42,633 to Rs.3,26,833 in an appeal filed by the claimant seeking enhancement when the Insurance Company had not challenged the Tribunal's finding on disability; accordingly the Tribunal award of Rs.5,42,633 dated 01.07.2017 is restored and the Insurance Company directed to pay that amount with 7% interest per annum from the date of filing the claim petition until actual payment within three months.

Source excerpt

  • Order xli rule 33 cpc
  • Appellate interference with unassailed decrees
  • Compensation computation
  • Functional disability assessment
Read case analysis
Customs law

S.C.R.COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, BANGALORE-1 versus M/S MOTOROLA INDIA LTD.

Where an appeal from CESTAT concerns only whether an assessee breached conditions of an exemption notification (an inter se factual dispute) and does not directly and proximately involve determination of rate of duty, valuation for assessment, classification or coverage under the exemption, such appeals are maintainable under Section 130 before the High Court and not under Section 130E before the Supreme Court; the High Court's contrary view was set aside and matters remitted for de novo consideration.

Source excerpt

  • Section 130
  • Section 130e
  • Maintainability of appeal
  • Exemption notification compliance
Read case analysis
Criminal law

MUSHTAK HUSSEIN versus THE STATE OF BOMBAY

The trial judge's directions that the jury should 'piece together' a jigsaw puzzle by using their ingenuity and resorting to speculative reasoning constituted a material misdirection that likely caused the jury to convict on conjecture; on review of the whole record the Supreme Court found that no reasonable tribunal could have convicted the appellant on the evidence and accordingly set aside the jury verdict and acquitted the appellant.

Source excerpt

  • Misdirection in charge to jury
  • Failure of justice
  • Standard of appellate review of jury verdicts
  • Summary dismissal of appeals
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

India decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.