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
Family law

P. ANJANAPPA (D) BY LRS versus A.P. NANJUNDAPPA & ORS.

The Court held that Ex.D-15 (09.11.1956) and Ex.D-16 (14.09.1967), being duly proved registered release deeds supported by consideration and corroborated by subsequent conduct, validly severed plaintiff no.2 and defendant no.3 from the coparcenary; that the unregistered palupatti (Ex.D-17 with Ex.D-17(a)) is admissible for collateral purposes to prove severance of joint status as from 11.02.1972 and to explain subsequent separate possession and enjoyment; and on that basis the partitionable pool is Schedule A and items 1–16 of Schedule C, with shares fixed (plaintiff no.1 8/21, defendant no.5…

Source excerpt

  • Partition
  • Joint family property
  • Registered release deeds
  • Palupatti (partition deed)
  • Collateral evidence
  • Severance of coparcenary
Read case analysis
Civil procedure

MALLEESWARI versus K. SUGUNA AND ANOTHER

The High Court exceeded its jurisdiction in the review by reappreciating evidence and overturning earlier findings as if sitting in appeal; because the impugned review order went beyond correcting an apparent error on the face of the record, it was set aside and the earlier CRP order of 23.09.2022 was restored, with directions to the Trial Court to proceed expeditiously.

Source excerpt

  • Review jurisdiction
  • Order 47 rule 1 cpc
  • Section 114 cpc
  • Hindu succession (amendment) act, 2005
  • Pendente lite transferee
  • Estoppel
Read case analysis
Civil procedure

SAROJ SALKAN versus HUMA SINGH & ORS.

The appeal was dismissed because Order XII Rule 6 CPC empowers the court to dismiss the suit or pass judgment on admitted facts even on its own motion; the prior declaratory decrees (Suits II, III and IV) and admitted pleadings established that the appellant and respondent no.6 had accepted the father as owner and were ousted from the properties, those decrees were not and could have been timely challenged and therefore bind the parties, the proviso to amended Section 6 applies as partitions were recognised before 20-12-2004, and the challenge to title of C-38 Anand Niketan is barred by limit…

Source excerpt

  • Partition
  • Order xii rule 6 cpc
  • Order vii rule 11 cpc
  • Judgment on admissions
  • Limitation
  • Estoppel
Read case analysis
Property law

RAJENDRA KUMAR BARJATYA AND ANOTHER versus U.P. AVAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD & ORS.

The High Court's order directing demolition of commercial shops illegally constructed on a plot earmarked for residential use was correct and is confirmed: unauthorized constructions erected without sanctioned plan/approval are liable to be demolished notwithstanding long occupation or registration; notices and opportunities had been given to the original allottee, appellants as buyers were bound by caveat emptor, and delay/laches or administrative failures do not vest a right to continue illegal constructions; authorities must carry out demolition and initiate criminal and departmental actio…

Source excerpt

  • Illegal/unauthorized constructions
  • Demolition
  • Completion/occupation certificate
  • Regularisation
  • Doctrine of caveat emptor
  • Estoppel
Read case analysis
Constitutional law

ABHIMEET SINHA & ORS. versus HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA & ORS.

Prescription of reasonable minimum qualifying marks for viva voce as part of judicial recruitment is permissible and not inconsistent with this Court’s acceptance of aspects of the Shetty Commission in All India Judges (2002); where statutory Rules prescribe cut-offs those Rules govern (and were valid here: Clause 11 Bihar Rules, 1951 and Rule 8(3) Gujarat Rules, 2005 as amended were upheld); the Bihar and Gujarat selection processes were not vitiated on the facts (moderation and corrective steps by Patna High Court were bona fide and within available powers); non-consultation with the State…

Source excerpt

  • Viva voce qualifying marks
  • Shetty commission recommendations
  • All india judges (2002)
  • Article 14
  • Article 16
  • Article 234
Read case analysis
Service law

THE GENERAL MANAGER, M/S BARSUA IRON ORE MINES versus THE VICE PRESIDENT UNITED MINES MAZDOOR UNION AND ORS.

The Supreme Court held that respondent no.3 was rightly retired in terms of the date of birth reckoned as 27.12.1948; the belated change to 12.03.1955 was barred by the respondent's own prior declaration, delay, and estoppel, and the Competent Authority's determination was just and reasonable; consequently the CGIT Award and the High Court judgment upholding it were set aside.

Source excerpt

  • Superannuation
  • Date of birth
  • Discrepancy in date of birth
  • Estoppel
  • Back wages
Read case analysis
Service law

DR. MRS. SUMAN V. JAIN versus MARWADI SAMMELAN THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS

In the absence of any statutory, contractual or constitutional bar and lacking prior consent or an agreement making the resignation irrevocable, a prospective resignation (25.03.2003 effective 24.09.2003) could be withdrawn before its effective date; the management's unilateral acceptance by letter dated 08.04.2003 phrased as 'final, binding and irrevocable' did not preclude withdrawal; applying the principles in Gopal Chand Misra and Srikantha S.M., the rejection of the withdrawal was set aside and the appellant's service was to be regularized from 24.09.2003 to 01.10.2007 for pensionary pur…

Source excerpt

  • Prospective resignation
  • Withdrawal of prospective resignation
  • Effective date of resignation
  • Intimation of resignation
  • Acceptance of resignation
  • Vinculum juris
Read case analysis
Constitutional law

CHANDIGARH HOUSING BOARD versus TARSEM LAL

Because there was no Presidential notification under Article 342 specifying any Scheduled Tribe for the Union Territory of Chandigarh, the Chandigarh Housing Board could not lawfully make reservation or confer rights to Scheduled Tribe applicants by advertisement; accordingly the respondent, though a Scheduled Tribe in Rajasthan, could not claim ST status or allotment in Chandigarh on that basis, and the judgments below awarding allotment were set aside.

Source excerpt

  • Article 342
  • Presidential notification
  • Scheduled tribes recognition
  • Migration and entitlement to reservation
  • Allotment of houses
  • Estoppel
Read case analysis
Consumer protection

EXPERION DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED versus HIMANSHU DEWAN AND SONALI DEWAN AND OTHERS

Dismissal by this Court of the appellant's appeals in Pawan Gupta by non-reasoned orders does not create a binding precedent under Article 141 and operates only as res judicata inter partes; it does not preclude the National Commission from re-examining claims in other allottees' cases where different evidence (such as architect certificates and reports) has been placed on record. The complaints in the present matters are not barred by limitation because the cause of action arose when the appellant compelled payments without furnishing particulars and when conveyance deeds were executed (2018…

Source excerpt

  • Limitation
  • Cause of action
  • Doctrine of merger
  • Res judicata
  • Acquiescence
  • Estoppel
Read case analysis
Industrial law

THEIR WORKMEN THROUGH THE JOINT SECRETARY (WELFARE), FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA EXECUTIVE STAFF UNION. versus EMPLOYER IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF THE FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA & ANR.

The management of FCI, having voluntarily implemented the Tribunal Award and absorbed the workmen in regular service (by office orders and corrigendum) and having allowed the workmen to avail benefits for over two decades, is estopped from thereafter challenging the Award; accordingly the Division Bench’s modification quashing regularization was set aside and the Single Judge’s order and the Tribunal Award were restored (subject to specified observations).

Source excerpt

  • Reinstatement
  • Regularization
  • Acquiescence
  • Estoppel
  • Approbate and reprobate
  • Contempt
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.