Res Judicata Principle Applies To Different Stages Of Same Proceedings As Well : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court recently observed that the principle of res judicata not only applies to different sets of proceedings but also to different stages of the same proceedings. Holding thus, the bench comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan upheld the Kerala High Court's finding which had dismissed the Appellant's Order I Rule 10 CPC application objecting impleadment of a legal heir...

Legal Heir Impleaded After Order 22 Rule 4 Enquiry Can't Be Deleted Later Invoking Order 1 Rule 10 CPC : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court recently clarified that while the power to add or remove parties under Order I Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) can be exercised at any stage of the proceedings, this does not entitle a party to raise objections to impleadment of a legal heir at a later stage if the parry had sufficient opportunity to raise objections at the stage of Order XXII Rule 4. The...

Killing Civilian With Official Guns In Plain Clothes Not Part Of Police Duty; S.197 CrPC Sanction Not Needed To Prosecute : Supreme Court

"The cloak of official duty cannot be extended to acts intended to thwart justice," the Court observed quoting an earlier precedent.

S. 66 Railways Act | Railways Can Impose Penalty For Misdeclared Goods Even After Delivery : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court recently ruled that the penalty for misdeclared goods can be imposed by the Railways post-delivery of consignments/goods under Section 66 of the Railways Act, 1989 (“Act”). The bench comprising Justices Sanjay Karol and PK Mishra set aside the Gauhati High Court's ruling which held that penal charges cannot be levied after delivery of goods. Instead, the Supreme Court...

S.387 IPC |Actual Property Delivery Not Required; Offence Committed When Person Put In Fear Of Death/Grievous Injury : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court recently observed that the offence under Section 387 of the Indian Penal Code doesn't require actual delivery of property; instead, putting a person in fear of death/grievous hurt for the purpose of extortion is sufficient. Holding thus, the bench comprising Justices Sanjay Karol and Manoj Misra set aside the Allahabad High Court's decision, which had quashed the summons...

Preventive Detention Can't Be A Substitute For Bail Cancellation : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court recently set aside the preventive detention under the Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 (KAAPA). The Court emphasized that the extraordinary power of preventive detention must be exercised sparingly and strictly in line with constitutional safeguards, reaffirming the principle that the liberty of an individual cannot be curtailed lightly.The judgment...

2025 LiveLaw (SC) 679 | MAHNOOR FATIMA IMRAN vs M/S VISWESWARA INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD

Click the below links for the report and the judgment :Unregistered Sale Agreement Doesn't Confer Title, Cannot Give Protection From Dispossession : Supreme CourtIf Original Sale Agreement Is Unregistered, Registration Of Subsequent Instrument Won't Confer Title : Supreme...

'No Inference Of Guilt From Mere Act Of Hiding Dead Body' : Supreme Court Acquits Youth In Murder Case Over Accidental Gunshot

Though the Court acquitted him of the murder charge, his conviction for causing the disappearance of evidence was sustained.

If Original Sale Agreement Is Unregistered, Registration Of Subsequent Instrument Won't Confer Title : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court recently ruled that when the original sale agreement remained unregistered, then it cannot result in a valid title merely on the ground that a subsequent transaction based on the said unregistered sale deed was registered. The bench comprising Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and K Vinod Chandran heard the case where the Respondent claimed ownership and protection from...

Unregistered Sale Agreement Doesn't Confer Title, Cannot Give Protection From Dispossession : Supreme Court

Observing that an unregistered sale agreement does not confer valid title upon the person, the Supreme Court recently refused to grant protection from dispossession to a person who sought title and possession based on an unregistered sale agreement. The bench comprising Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and K Vinod Chandran heard the case where the respondents (purchasers) claimed ownership based on...

2025 LiveLaw (SC) 677 | Greater Mohali Area Development Authority (GMADA) v. Anupam Garg & Ors

Click the links here to read the reports and the judgment:Developer Not Liable To Pay Homebuyer's Bank Loan Interest For Delay In Flat Delivery : Supreme CourtHomebuyer's Right To Compensation For Delayed Flat Delivery : Supreme Court Explains...

Homebuyer's Right To Compensation For Delayed Flat Delivery : Supreme Court Explains Principles

In a recent judgment in Greater Mohali Area Development Authority (GMADA) v. Anupam Garg & Ors., the Supreme Court clarified that while developers must refund the principal amount with interest to aggrieved homebuyers in cases of delay or non-delivery, they cannot be held liable for paying interest on the personal loans taken by buyers to finance their homes.In the decision, the Court...