Supreme Court Weekly Round-Up: November 03, 2025 To November 09, 2025

Reports/JudgmentsArbitration | Objections To Arbitral Award Execution Maintainable Only If Decree Is Void Or Without Jurisdiction: Supreme CourtCause Title: MMTC Limited v. Anglo American Metallurgical Coal Pvt. LimitedCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 1060The Supreme Court (November 3) ruled against the stalling of the enforcement of an arbitral award at the execution stage, reiterating that the objections against the execution of an award lie in a narrow compass, such as only when a decree is inherently void or passed without jurisdiction.A bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and KV Viswanathan upheld the Delhi High Court's decision dismissing Appellant-MMTC's objections under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure and its application under Order XXI Rule 29 seeking a stay on enforcement of a multi-million-dollar arbitral award in favour of Respondent-Anglo American Metallurgical Coal Pvt. Ltd.Relying on Electrosteel Steel Limited (Now M/s ESL Steel Limited) vs. ISPAT Carrier Private Limited, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 491, the Court held that belated allegations of fraud and collusion cannot be invoked to reopen or obstruct the enforcement of an arbitral award that has already been upheld up to the Supreme Court.Supreme Court Sets Aside HC Order To Remove Unauthorised Constructions In Gurugram; Remands For Fresh Decision After Hearing OwnersCause Title: Gaurav Kohli & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Ors.Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 1061The Supreme Court set aside the Punjab & Haryana High Court's order, which directed the removal of unauthorized and illegal constructions in Gurugram's DLF City, noting that such a sweeping direction without affording an opportunity of hearing to the owners who were not impleaded in the suits can't be issued.Instead, the Court restored the Writ Petition before the High Court with a direction to all the affected owners to seek impledment in the proceedings within two weeks from the date of uploading of the order, i.e, up to November 11. The Court said that the State authorities are at liberty to give wide publicity to this order for impleading the affected persons in the PIL.A bench of Justices JK Maheshwari and Vijay Bishnoi heard the appeal filed against the High Court's order passed in Februaryin a PIL giving sweeping directions for the removal of the illegal and commercial use of residential premises in Gurugram. The High Court directed the authorities to take action within two months under Section 15 of the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Act, 1975 (HDRUA Act).MV Act | Private Bus Operators Cannot Ply On Inter-State Routes Overlapping With Notified State Transport Routes: Supreme CourtCause Title: U.P. State Road Transport Corporation Through Its Chief General Manager v. Kashmiri Lal Batra & Ors.Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 1062The Supreme Court has held that private operators cannot be granted stage-carriage permits on inter-State routes under reciprocal transport agreements if any portion of those routes overlaps a notified intra-State route reserved for State transport undertakings under Chapter VI of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.A Bench of Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Augustine George Masih set aside the order of the Gwalior Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, which had directed recognition of permits granted to Madhya Pradesh's private bus operators under the Inter-State Reciprocal Transport (IS-RT) Agreement between the Transport Departments of Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh, for the routes which overlaps with routes exclusively operated by UP State Road Transport Corporation.The legal battle stemmed from an IS-RT Agreement from 2006 between Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh. The agreement allowed private operators to ply on certain routes (Schedule A), while others (Schedule B) were reserved for the Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (MPSRTC).'Surfaces Of Highways Smoother Than Ever Before': Supreme Court Hails India's Progress In Road Transport InfrastructureCause Title: U.P. State Road Transport Corporation Through Its Chief General Manager v. Kashmiri Lal Batra & Ors.Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 1062The Supreme Court has lauded the remarkable transformation of India's road transport network, observing that the country has made “sincere and serious attempts to revolutionise travel” and achieved a “quantum leap” in infrastructure development over the years.It cannot be disputed that the nation has made substantial progress in road transport, the Court remarked.While reflecting on the evolution of road transport, the Court noted that India has moved far beyond its “humble beginnings” and now boasts an intricate network of highways that connect even the remotest villages to nearby cities and towns, ensuring genuine “last-mile connectivity.”Biometric Attendance System Not Illegal Merely Because Employees Weren't Consulted Before Its Introduction: Supreme CourtCase: Union of India v. Dilip Kumar Rout and Others | Civil Appeal No....

Supreme Court Weekly Round-Up: November 03, 2025 To November 09, 2025

Amisha Shrivastava

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Supreme Court Weekly Round-Up: November 03, 2025 To November 09, 2025

Amisha Shrivastava

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers