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
Administrative law

YOGESH MADHAV MAKALWAD versus THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

The pre-Independence school entry of 10 October 1943 recording the appellant's grandfather as Koli Mahadev, appearing in the same ink and handwriting (no scope for interpolation), carries greater probative value; the affinity test is not a determinative litmus test given migration and modernisation; therefore the Scrutiny Committee's invalidation of the caste claim and the High Court's upholding of that invalidation were unsustainable and the appellant is held to belong to the Koli Mahadev Tribe.

Source excerpt

  • Scheduled tribe certificate
  • Confiscation and invalidation of caste certificate
  • Scrutiny committee review
  • Pre-independence document probative value
  • Affinity test
Read case analysis
Hindu law

TIRITH KUMAR & ORS. versus DADURAM & ORS.

The Hindu Succession Act, 1956 does not apply to members of Scheduled Tribes absent a Central Government notification under s.2(2); the parties were members of the notified Sawara tribe and no de-notification was produced, so the High Court correctly held HSA inapplicable and, because Mardan died in 1951 (prior to HSA, 1956), correctly applied Sections 5 and 6 of the Central Provinces Laws Act, 1875 and the principles of justice, equity and good conscience to grant a portion of the property to Mardan's daughters and their descendants; the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal.

Source excerpt

  • Application of the hindu succession act, 1956 to scheduled tribes
  • Notified scheduled tribe (sawara)
  • Justice, equity and good conscience under central provinces laws act, 1875
  • Right of survivorship for female tribals
Read case analysis
Education

PRIYA PRAMOD GAJBE versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

The pre-Constitutional birth record from 10.03.1924 showing the caste as 'Mana' has the highest probative value and cannot be discarded (a later entry showing 'Mani' is plausibly a writing error); the Affinity Test cannot be treated as a litmus test and should not be the sole ground to reject the claim; there is no area restriction for the Mana tribe in the Presidential Order for Maharashtra. Therefore the orders invalidating the claim were quashed and the appellant is declared to belong to 'Mana' Scheduled Tribe, with a validity certificate to be issued within one month.

Source excerpt

  • Scheduled tribe certification
  • Social status certificate
  • Affinity test
  • Reservation in education
Read case analysis
Tribal law

MAH. ADIWASI THAKUR JAMAT SWARAKSHAN SAMITI versus THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

The Supreme Court held that under the 2000 Act and the ST Rules the Competent Authority conducts a summary, prima facie inquiry and may issue a caste certificate, but the certificate becomes conclusive only after the Scrutiny Committee conducts a detailed inquiry and validates it; the Scrutiny Committee is vested with quasi-judicial powers and must record reasons when refusing or when referring a case to the Vigilance Cell; referral to the Vigilance Cell (and hence conduct of affinity test) is permissible only when the Scrutiny Committee is not satisfied with documentary evidence, and the aff…

Source excerpt

  • Affinity test
  • Caste certificate verification
  • Caste scrutiny committee
  • Vigilance cell
  • Quasi-judicial function
  • Burden of proof
Read case analysis
Service law

R SUNDARAM versus THE TAMIL NADU STATE LEVEL SCRUTINY COMMITTEE & ORS.

The Supreme Court held the impugned High Court orders liable to be set aside because the scrutiny of the appellant's community certificate was subject to an inordinate unexplained delay of 19 years, principles of natural justice were violated (appellant was not given effective notice or opportunity to be heard and to cross-examine), the respondents failed to discharge the burden of proving the certificate false, and therefore the community certificate must be presumed genuine; accordingly the appellant was entitled to the withheld post-retirement benefits with 6% simple interest from due date…

Source excerpt

  • Community certificate verification
  • Post-retirement benefits
  • Natural justice (audi alteram partem)
  • Delay in scrutiny
  • Right to pension
Read case analysis
Constitutional law

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. versus KESHAO VISHWANATH SONONE & ANR.

The High Court lacked jurisdiction to reclassify or to admit evidence to alter entries in the Presidential Scheduled Tribes Order; Gond Gowari remained a continuing Scheduled Tribe entry and the High Court was wrong to hold Gond Gowari extinct before 1911 or to declare Gowari to be Gond Gowari; the appeals are allowed and the High Court judgment is set aside, but admissions and employments secured on the basis of ST certificates issued between 14.08.2018 and the date of this judgment are protected as a matter of equity.

Source excerpt

  • Article 342
  • Scheduled tribes classification
  • Presidential orders
  • Judicial review of executive classification
  • Caste certificate validity
  • Affinity test
Read case analysis
Land law

ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER REVENUE AND versus AKHALAQ HUSSAIN AND ANOTHER

The Supreme Court held that the exchange deed dated 16.03.1994 was void because (a) the transfer contravened s.157-B of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 which bars transfer by a member of a Scheduled Tribe to persons not belonging to Scheduled Tribe, (b) no declaration under ss.143-144 was produced so the land was agricultural within s.3(14), and (c) s.161 mandates prior permission of the Assistant Collector (and would have required refusal here because rental value difference exceeded 10%); therefore the exchange is void and liable to be set aside and the High Court ju…

Source excerpt

  • Exchange of land under u.p. za & lr act
  • Restrictions on transfer by members of scheduled tribes (s.157-b)
  • Requirement of prior permission for exchange (s.161)
  • Change of land nature to abadi (ss.143-144)
  • Vesting consequences of void transfers (ss.166-167)
  • Limitation issues
Read case analysis
Civil procedure

SHRI WESTARLY DKHAR & ORS. versus SHRI SEHEKAYA L YNGDOH

Rule 28 of the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills Autonomous District (Administration of Justice) Rules, 1953 provides a right of appeal from all decisions, including interim orders, of Subordinate District Council Courts, irrespective of the technicalities required by the Code of Civil Procedure. Only the spirit of the Code applies, not its letter. Therefore, the appeal against the ex parte injunction was maintainable, and the High Court erred in applying the strict requirements of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Source excerpt

  • Appeals from district council courts
  • Applicability of civil procedure code in tribal areas
  • Ex parte injunctions
Read case analysis
Constitutional law

EWANLANGKI-E-RYMBAI versus JAINTIA HILLS DISTRICT COUNCIL AND ORS.

The exclusion of Christians from contesting for the office of Dolloi does not violate Articles 14, 15, and 16 of the Constitution of India. The restriction is not solely on the ground of religion but on account of the fact that a Christian cannot perform the indigenous religious functions required by the office, which is part of the tribal custom. The exclusion is reasonable and not arbitrary; Section 3(1) of the Act and the relevant notification are constitutionally valid.

Source excerpt

  • Customs and indigenous practices
  • Exclusion based on religious functions
  • Validity of tribal customs
  • Articles 14, 15, 16 of constitution
Read case analysis
Customary law

KOCHAN KANI KUNJURAMAN KANI versus MATHEVAN KANI SANKARAN KANI

The Kanikkar tribe is not governed by any particular custom regarding inheritance, and different families follow different customs; the respondent failed to prove the pleaded custom governing inheritance by Marumakkathayam law.

Source excerpt

  • Proof of custom
  • Marumakkathayam law
  • Makkathayam law
  • Kanikkar tribe
  • Family custom
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.