Supreme court
Even 'Loan' Can Qualify As 'Deposit' Under MPID Act; Private Individual Can Be 'Financial Establishment' : Supreme Court
In a significant development, the Supreme Court on Friday (May 15) observed that even private persons can be categorized as a 'Financial Establishment' under the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (MPID) Act. This means that money advanced by an individual to a debtor with a promise to return with interest, then such money can be legally treated as a “deposit,” even if...
Supreme Court Quarterly Digest 2026 - Labour Law
Labour Law - Supreme Court Quarterly Digest Jan - Mar, 2026 Building and Other Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1996 (BOCW Act) and The Building and Other Construction Workers' Welfare Cess Act, 1996 (Cess Act) — Implementation and Levy: Held, that although the BOCW Act and Cess Act were enacted in 1996, they remained "dormant" in...
Lawyers Must Also Bring To Court's Notice Judgments Which Do Not Support Their Case : Supreme Court
In a significant observation on professional ethics and judicial discipline, the Supreme Court has said that lawyers have a duty to bring to the court's notice not only precedents that support their case but also those that go against them, stressing that both the Bar and the Bench share responsibility for ensuring consistency in the justice delivery system. A bench of Justice Sanjay Karol...
State Cannot Deny Benefits Under Final Order Merely Because Employees Delayed Seeking Its Implementation : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has held that the State cannot refuse to implement a judicial order that has attained finality merely because the beneficiaries approached the courts belatedly for its enforcement, stressing that the government, as a model employer, cannot take advantage of its own failure to comply with the law.A bench of Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Justice Vipul M. Pancholi allowed...
Supreme Court Quarterly Digest 2026 - Contract Law
Contract Law - Supreme Court Quarterly Digest Jan - Mar, 2026Construction of Documents — Literal Rule vs. Purposive Construction — Supreme Court emphasized that a contract must first be constructed in its plain, ordinary, and literal meaning - If the words are clear, the intention of the parties must be derived directly from the text. Reliance on the ex-post facto conduct of parties (such...
When Can Re-Assessment Be Opened U/s 147, 148 of Income Tax Act? Supreme Court Explains
While dealing with a tax case related to development of a housing project, the Supreme Court recently elucidated the position of law pertaining to reopening of assessments under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. A bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and KV Viswanathan referred to Section 147 (pre-2012) and Section 148 (pre-2006) of the IT Act and observed that power to reopen assessment is...
Co-Owner Is 'Landlord' Under Bombay Rent Act, Can Maintain Eviction Suit Without Exclusive Title: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has held that a co-owner of a property qualifies as a “landlord” under the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947, and is therefore entitled to maintain eviction proceedings even without exclusive title or formal partition of the tenanted premises. A bench of Justice Manoj Misra and Justice Manmohan set aside the Bombay High Court's decision that...
'Casual Approach' : Supreme Court Summons Rajasthan Top Officials For Non-Compliance With Orders Against Illegal Mining In Chambal
The Supreme Court on Thursday (May 14) came down heavily on the Rajasthan Government for its failure to adhere to the Court's earlier directions regarding curbing illegal sand mining in the National Chambal Gharial Sanctuary. The Court directed several senior Rajasthan bureaucrats, including the Additional Chief Secretary (Home), Principal Secretaries of Mining, Finance, Forest, and...
'Heinousness Of Crime Alone Not Ground To Deny Remission': Supreme Court Orders Release Of Madhumita Murder Case Convict After 22 Yrs
The Supreme Court on Friday (May 15) has held that the plea for remission of a convict cannot be rejected solely on the ground of the heinousness of the offence; instead, the decision on remission must be based on the holistic assessment of the prisoner's right to be released on fair and reasonable criteria.The Court made the observation, while quashing the Ministry Of Home Affairs (MHA)...