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
Specific relief act, 1963

ANAND NARAYAN SHUKLA versus JAGAT DHARI

Dismissal of an appeal for non-prosecution does not merge the trial court decree into an appellate order; permitting deposit in execution proceedings to test bona fides does not preclude a Section 28 application; courts exercising Section 28 must consider all relevant circumstances and balance equities, and may rescind the contract or grant extension on terms including compensation; because the lower courts failed to apply these principles, their orders were set aside and the matter remitted for fresh consideration.

Source excerpt

  • Rescission of the contract
  • Doctrine of merger
  • Delay in deposit of the balance sale consideration
  • Suit for specific performance of an agreement for sale
  • Execution and registration of sale deed
  • Dismissal of the appeal for non-prosecution
Read case analysis
Arbitration and conciliation act, 1996

ANKHIM HOLDINGS PVT. LTD. & ANR. versus ZAVERI CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.

The High Court exceeded its jurisdiction under Section 15(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by declaring the arbitral proceedings held between 17.03.2022 and 25.08.2022 to be a nullity on account of the moratorium under Section 14 IBC; instead the proper course was to appoint a substitute arbitrator who would continue the proceedings and prior orders of the tribunal are not rendered invalid solely by change in composition under Section 15(4); accordingly the part of the High Court order declaring those proceedings nullity was set aside and transactions were declared valid under…

Source excerpt

  • Substitute arbitrator
  • Moratorium under section 14 ibc
  • Nullity of proceedings
  • Section 15(2) arbitration act
  • Minimal judicial intervention
  • Third-party rights
Read case analysis
Inter-state river water disputes act, 1956

THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU versus THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR

Negotiations under the statutory framework had not produced a mutually acceptable outcome and the plaintiff-State insisted on adjudication; accordingly, under the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956 and the precedent in T.N. Cauvery, the Central Government was directed to issue notification and constitute a Water Disputes Tribunal within one month to adjudicate the Pennaiyar River water dispute.

Source excerpt

  • Pennaiyar river water sharing
  • Construction of check dam/diversion
  • Statutory negotiation process
  • Constitution of water disputes tribunal
Read case analysis
Prevention of corruption act, 1988

A. KARUNANITHI versus THE STATE REPRESENTED BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

Accused No.2 could not be convicted because there was no evidence he demanded the bribe, no proof of connivance and he was not charged with abetment; Accused No.1's conviction was upheld as both demand and receipt of illegal gratification were proved, but his sentence was reduced to the statutory minimum of one year for each offence due to the long delay and the small amount involved.

Source excerpt

  • Demand and acceptance of illegal gratification
  • Trap
  • Marked currency notes
  • Phenolphthalein test
  • Reduction of sentence
  • Absence of charge of abetment
Read case analysis
Penal code, 1860

SUKHDEV YADAV @ PEHALWAN versus STATE OF (NCT OF DELHI) & OTHERS

Where a superior court (High Court or Supreme Court) has imposed life imprisonment by explicitly fixing it as a finite term of actual imprisonment (here, twenty years) without consideration of remission, upon completion of that specified term the convict has completed the sentence and is entitled to be released forthwith if not wanted in any other case; the convict is not obliged to apply for remission and the Sentence Review Board cannot override the judicially determined sentence.

Source excerpt

  • Life imprisonment
  • Fixed-term life sentence without remission
  • Remission of sentence
  • Release on completion of sentence
  • Parole
  • Furlough
Read case analysis
Prevention of corruption act, 1988

M SAMBASIVA RAO versus THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

The Supreme Court held that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt the demand and acceptance of the bribe in the trap; material contradictions and serious lapses in trap and investigative procedure rendered the conviction unsafe, and the High Court erred in reversing the Trial Court's acquittal; therefore the acquittal was restored and the appellant was acquitted.

Source excerpt

  • Demand-and-trap proceedings
  • Evidentiary standard for corruption offences
  • Criminal conspiracy
  • Protection under article 20(3)
  • Presumption in appeals against acquittal
  • Procedure of mediators and chemical tests
Read case analysis
Securitisation and reconstruction of financial assets and enforcement of security interest act, 2002

PNB HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED versus SH. MANOJ SAHA & ANR

The High Court erred in entertaining the revisional petition under Article 227 despite the appellate remedy under section 18 of SARFAESI; the 1st respondent failed to prove a pre-existing tenancy by independent documentary possessory evidence as required for oral/unregistered tenancies, and such tenancies do not subsist beyond one year from issuance of the s.13(2) notice, therefore the High Court's order restoring possession was set aside and status quo maintained pending disposal of the securitization application.

Source excerpt

  • Tenant of secured asset
  • Unregistered tenancy agreement
  • Symbolic and physical possession under sarfaesi
  • Restoration of possession/status quo ante
  • Onus of proof for oral tenancies
  • Tenant in sufferance
Read case analysis
Indian penal code, 1860

SAKHAWAT AND ANR. versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

Where three of four material eyewitnesses had admittedly filed affidavits during bail proceedings exonerating the appellants and the Investigating Officer failed to file counter-affidavits or to carry out further investigation (including not recording supplementary statements or sending affidavits for expert examination), and the prosecution suppressed those affidavits, the prosecution failed to carry out a fair investigation; in those circumstances it was unsafe to uphold convictions based largely on the testimony of the informant, and the convictions were set aside and appellants acquitted.

Source excerpt

  • Murder
  • Fair investigation
  • Affidavits by eyewitnesses
  • Suppression of evidence
  • Bail
  • Life imprisonment
Read case analysis
Arbitration and conciliation act, 1996

M/S GAYATRI PROJECT LIMITED versus MADHYA PRADESH ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED

Where an arbitral award has been rendered under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 but the M.P. Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983 would otherwise apply, an award will not be set aside solely on the ground of lack of jurisdiction if no objection under Section 16(2) was raised at the relevant stage; although jurisdictional pleas may be raised in Section 34 proceedings in certain circumstances, such pleas are subject to waiver principles and the requirement to show strong and sufficient reasons for failure to raise them earlier, and L.G. Chaudhary (II) and Lion Engineering are reconc…

Source excerpt

  • Jurisdiction
  • Waiver
  • Section 16(2)
  • Section 34
  • Applicability of state arbitration statute
  • Conflict of precedents
Read case analysis
Narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985

HARPREET SINGH TALWAR @ KABIR TALWAR versus THE STATE OF GUJARAT TH. NATIONAL INVESTIGATING AGENCY

Bail was denied because the prosecution has, by way of meetings abroad, transfer of documents through intermediaries, alleged fabrication of invoices, use of multiple firms linked to the appellant, telephonic contacts with co-conspirators, protected witness statements and circumstantial linkages, met the threshold of prima facie satisfaction under Section 43D(5) UAPA; additionally, the ongoing nature of the trial, the large scale of the alleged smuggling, the risk of witness tampering or elimination and the possibility of flight risk weighed against granting regular bail, subject to the appel…

Source excerpt

  • Bail
  • Regular bail
  • Pre-trial detention
  • Witness tampering
  • Flight risk
  • Criminal conspiracy
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.