Skip to main content

Top 10 Judgments Published in All India Reporter Supreme Court 2018

1. Jagdish v. Mohan, AIR 2018 SC 1347


Motor Accident Claims - the measure of compensation must reflect a genuine attempt of the law to restore the dignity of the being.

2. State of Himachal Pradesh v. Pardeep Kumar, AIR 2018 SC 1345

Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Ss. 20 & 29 - No independent witnesses - contraband article was produced before the trial court in a torn condition - Held, independent witnesses is not an indispensable requirement and such non-examination is not necessarily fatal to the prosecution case - No suggestion was given to the witnesses who had taken the samples to the laboratory that the contraband parcel has been tampered with - the grounds on which the High Court have reversed the findings of conviction of the accused ought not to be accepted.

3. Essar Bulk Terminal Limited v. State of Gujarat, AIR 2018 SC 1330

The present appeal involves a challenge to a notification dated 18th January, 2016, issued under Section 5 of the Indian Ports Act, 1908, by which the State Government of Gujarat expanded the port limits of Hazira port.

4. Upendra Singh v. State of Bihar, AIR 2018 SC 1315


Service - Law pertaining to Regularisation - Discussed.

5. Pralhad Shankarrao Tajale v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2018 SC 1313

Procedural laws should not be construed like a penal provision to punish the parities as far as possible.

6. Singh Ram v. Nirmala, AIR 2018 SC 1290

Motor Vehicles Act 1988 - S. 166 - Claim for Compensation - Owner did not depose in evidence and stayed away from the witness box. He produced a licence which was found to be fake. Another licence which he sought to produce had already expired before the accident and was not renewed within the prescribed period. It was renewed well after two years had expired. The appellant as owner had evidently failed to take reasonable care since he could not have been unmindful of facts which were within his knowledge. In the circumstances, the direction by the Tribunal, confirmed by the High Court, to pay and recover cannot be faulted.

Judgment Link : http://bit.ly/2q3VNPN

7. Rajeshwar Mahto v. Alok Kumar Gupta, AIR 2018 SC 1267

Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 - S. 17B - Subsistence Allowance - Object & Scope of - Termination Order - Legality and correctness of - Held, An order passed under Section 17-B of Act does not merge with the final order passed in the appeal and being an independent order, it remains alive for enforcement.

8. H.V. Nirmala v. R. Sharmila, AIR 2018 SC 1264

In order to prevail the last Will over the earlier one, the reference of revocation of the earlier Will was necessary in the later Will.

9. Akhilesh Singh v. Lal Babu Singh, AIR 2018 SC 1240

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - O. 41 R. 27 - Admission of additional evidence by Appellate Court - Even if, execution of sale deeds was not denied, the Appellate Court before which any statement in sale deeds is relied ought to have given an opportunity to lead evidence in rebuttal or to explain the admission.

10. Union Public Service Commission v. Manoj Kumar Yadav, AIR 2018 SC 1233

The Appellant is aggrieved by the judgment of the High Court by which the results of the main written examinations of Combined State / Upper Subordinate Service (Backlog / Special Recruitment) Examination, 2004 and Provincial Civil Service (P.C.S.) Examination, 2004 were quashed.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

500+ Supreme Court of India Judgments on Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 with Head Notes & Citations

1. Mallamma (dead) By Lrs. Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. [07-04-2014] 

Presumptions are the Bats of the Law, Flitting in the Twilight, but Disappearing in the Sunshine of Actual Facts [ORDER]

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 -  Section 138 -  failure on the part of the complainant to produce his account statement and absence of entry in accounts maintained by him regarding loan advanced to the accused, does show that there was no material to support the basic facts on which the entire case of the complainant was based. Sufficient material was available on record    whereby the defence of the accused became probable. In such a situation, the presumption under the provisions of the Act ceased to operate and the burden fell upon the complainant to prove his case, which he failed to do by placing on record cogent evidence.

When Magistrate may Dispense with Personal Attendance of Accused [SC Judgment] | First Law

Criminal Procedure Code, 1972 - Ss. 205 & 317 - Magistrate may dispense with personal attendance of accused - Provision for inquiries and trial being held in the absence of accused in certain cases - Discussed.