Supreme Court Judgments

Forfeiture ordered by the NCLT for failure to comply with extended payment timelines in liquidation sales is valid and not governed by contractual penalty principles

M/s Shri Karshni Alloys Private Limited v. Ramakrishnan Sadasivan (2025 INSC 1411)

Supreme Court upholds forfeiture ordered by the NCLT for failure to comply with extended payment timelines in liquidation sales, holding that such forfeiture is not governed by contract law principles.

Section 36(1)(viii) Deductions Are Limited to Income Directly Derived from Long-Term Finance, Supreme Court Holds

National Cooperative Development Corporation v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

Supreme Court rules that deductions under Section 36(1)(viii) of the Income Tax Act are available only for income directly derived from long-term finance, excluding dividends, short-term deposit interest, and service charges earned as a nodal agency. Legal Judgment Explainer

Supreme Court Quashes FIR in Property Dispute Where SC/ST Act Ingredients Are Not Disclosed and Allegations Are Inherently Unbelievable

Amal Kumar & Ors. v. The State of Jharkhand & Anr.

In Amal Kumar v. State of Jharkhand (2025 INSC 1402), the Supreme Court quashed an FIR under the SC/ST Act, finding no dispossession or public-view caste abuse.

Resignation entails forfeiture of past service and bars pension, but does not defeat statutory gratuity and leave encashment

Ashok Kumar Dabas (Dead Through Legal Heirs) v. Delhi Transport Corporation (2025 INSC 1404)

Supreme Court holds that resignation results in forfeiture of past service and bars pension, but does not affect statutory gratuity and leave encashment payable under independent legal regimes.

Arbitration Cannot Be Forced Upon A Non-Signatory In Absence Of Clear Consent Or Legal Nexus, Supreme Court Reiterates

Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. v. BCL Secure Premises Pvt. Ltd. (2025 INSC 1401)

Supreme Court reiterates that arbitration cannot be imposed on a non-signatory without clear consent, setting aside Bombay High Court order and clarifying limits of Section 11 jurisdiction under the Arbitration Act.

Supreme Court upholds municipal tax revision, emphasizing local governance autonomy

Akola Municipal Corporation and Anr. vs. Zishan Hussain Azhar Hussain and Anr.

The Supreme Court affirms the Akola Municipal Corporation's authority to revise property taxes, highlighting the importance of local governance and fiscal autonomy.

Termination for Non-Payment of Arbitral Fees Ultimately Flows from Section 32(2), but Court May Still Direct Appointment of a Substitute Arbitrator in Appropriate Cases

Harshbir Singh Pannu and Anr. v. Jaswinder Singh

The Supreme Court clarifies that termination of arbitral proceedings for non-payment of fees is referable to Section 32(2), yet in exceptional circumstances a substitute arbitrator may be appointed to resolve the dispute.

Salil Mahajan v. Avinash Kumar & Anr.

Salil Mahajan v. Avinash Kumar & Anr.

Supreme Court sets aside grant of anticipatory bail where the High Court failed to consider the need for custodial interrogation and relevant investigative material, reiterating limits on mechanical bail orders in serious economic offences.

Criminal conviction cannot be sustained where prosecution evidence is inconsistent, uncorroborated, and fails to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt

Dadu @ Ankush & Anr. v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Anr. (2025 INSC 1395)

Supreme Court acquits accused after finding prosecution evidence inconsistent and uncorroborated, reiterating that conviction must rest on proof beyond reasonable doubt.

Conviction Cannot Rest on Improved Eyewitness Testimony When Accused Is Not Named in the Earliest Version, Supreme Court Holds

Govind Mandavi v. State of Chhattisgarh (2025 INSC 1399)

Supreme Court acquits murder accused, holding that conviction cannot rest on belatedly improved eyewitness testimony when the accused was not named in the earliest report and forensic evidence is inconclusive.

Supreme Court clarifies nomination validity in GPF distribution

Smt. Bollamalathi vs. B. Suguna and Ors.

The Supreme Court clarifies the rules regarding General Provident Fund nominations in Smt. Bollamalathi vs. B. Suguna, emphasizing the importance of valid nominations.

Excepted or prohibited claim clauses in contracts bind arbitral tribunals, and their applicability must be determined strictly from the parties’ agreement

State of Jharkhand v. The Indian Builders Jamshedpur (2025 INSC 1388)

Supreme Court holds that excepted or prohibited claim clauses in contracts bind arbitral tribunals and refers the issue to a larger Bench for authoritative clarification.