Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
India decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Supreme Court reconsidered maintenance, enhanced the wife’s monthly support to Rs.30,000 and the children’s to Rs.1,50,000 total, and held PF/ESPP deductions are not compulsory.
The Court found that unauthorised felling of trees in the Delhi Ridge and the deliberate non-disclosure during court proceedings amounted to wilful disobedience and criminal contempt under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971; however, applying proportionality and considering overriding public interest in completion and use of CAPFIMS, the Court closed contempt proceedings and imposed restorative and supervisory measures including afforestation, ecological restoration under an independent Committee, periodic compliance reporting, environmental fees by responsible officials, and de…
Source excerpt
The Supreme Court held that the NCLAT's broad observations in paragraph Nos. 32 and 34—that if the corporate debtor is an MSME promoters need not compete with other resolution applicants—were an incorrect generalization of the Tribunal's decision in Bafna's case. Bafna is limited to exceptional circumstances (e.g. settlements before constitution of the CoC or under Section 12A). Consequently the Resolution Professional was justified in inviting other proposals, putting them to e-voting before the CoC and declaring the results; paragraph Nos. 32 and 34 of the impugned judgment were set aside,…
Source excerpt
On the facts the deposits were made voluntarily to avail benefits under notifications which were in force at the time; there was no adjudication declaring the notifications or the demand illegal, and a subsequent notification itself granted exemption to a category of institutional plots; therefore appellants were not entitled to pendente lite interest or compensation and the High Court's refusal to award interest and its disposal of the contempt petition (where refund purged contempt) was not interfered with.
Source excerpt
The petitioner was not allocated the coal block through the Screening Committee Route or the Central Government Dispensation Route but obtained the lease following the State Government’s independent statutory process under the MMDR Act and the MC Rules; therefore the petitioner is not a beneficiary of the flawed allocation process identified in the prior judgments and is not liable to pay the additional levy of Rs.295 per metric tonne; the Union of India’s demands are quashed and the contempt petition is dismissed.
Source excerpt
On the basis of record material and established authority, the Court found that Perry gave solemn undertakings and filed affidavits containing false or non-disclosed material facts, obtained orders on that basis, removed the child from Indian jurisdiction, and thereafter acted contumaciously; such conduct amounted to criminal contempt and contempt for violating express undertakings, and warranted recalling earlier orders and initiation of contempt proceedings, with Perry held guilty under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Source excerpt
Where a public authority validly closes or terminates a scheme and that closure is not challenged, applicants have no inherent right to insist that their applications be considered under the old scheme; consideration must be under the prevailing scheme unless there is an express provision to the contrary. Further, suppression of material facts (such as subsequent allotment and payments) during pendency of equitable proceedings disentitles the party to relief. The High Court erred in directing consideration under the old scheme and in the contempt orders.
Source excerpt
The three Reliance Companies wilfully defaulted on their unconditional undertakings to pay INR 550 crore to Ericsson within the prescribed time limit, substituted them with conditional undertakings linked to asset sale, and failed to pay, thus committing contempt of court; the contempt needs to be purged by payment as ordered, failing which imprisonment will follow.
Source excerpt
The High Court wrongly convicted the appellant for criminal contempt without proper charges, failing to test the authenticity of contemporaneous records supporting the appellant's affidavit; contempt proceedings require formal charges and proof beyond reasonable doubt. The evidence provided by the appellant was not properly considered, and therefore, the conviction and orders were set aside.
Source excerpt
WPL is entitled to interest at 6% per annum on its entire investment, inclusive of share capital. Only profits earned by WPL during the arrangement should be deducted from the refund; losses, particularly those incurred due to compliance with Supreme Court directions to pay workmen, are not to be deducted. The Official Liquidator's actions do not constitute contempt, given adherence to audit and Court directions.
Source excerpt
Explore more
