Work Highlights
At Sanjay RPK Law, professional excellence, client satisfaction, and quality of service remain central to all we do.
Few of the reported Landmark Judgments handled by our firm, in the Supreme Court :-
(1996) 11 SCC 113
SBI & Ors. vs Manganese Ore (India) Ltd and Anr.
Conditional letter of credit – liability of Bankers.
(1999) 2 SCC 375
SBI vs. Yasangi Venkateswara Rao.
Charging of compound Rate of interest – Mortgage – a matter of contract between parties, Courts cannot interfere – validity of S. 21-A of Banking Regulation act, upheld.
(1998) 5 SCC 1
Harshad Shantilal Mehta vs. Custodian and Ors.
Special Court (Trial of Offences Relating to Transaction in Securities). Act, 1992 – disbursement of properties attained of notified person.
(1999) 4 SCC 710
ICICI vs. GRAPCO Industries Ltd. and Ors.
DRT Act, Tribunal has jurisdiction to pass ex-party interim orders.
(1999) 8 SCC 436
Hindustan Construction co. ltd. vs. State of Bihar and Ors.
Bank Guarantee – when can court grant injunction against invocation; authority competent to invoke.
(2001) 4 SCC 424
Standard Chartered Bank vs. Custodian and Ors.
Special Court (Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions in Securities). Act claim for interest is to be distributed on the basis of priority contemplated u/s. 11(2)(b) – right of secured creditor.
(2001) 5 Scale 626
Steel Authority of India Ltd. & Ors. Vs. National Union Waterfront Workers and Ors.
Contract Labour (R & A) Act: There is no automatic absorption of contract labour, in case the contract labour in an establishment is abolished, only preference to be given.
(2001) 7 Scale 351
Central Bank of India vs. Ravindra and Ors.
Charging of Compound interest: There is nothing wrong in the parties
voluntarily entering into transactions, evidenced of compound interest and authorizing the creditor to capitalize the interest on remaining unpaid; principal sum adjudged would be the sum actually loaned plus the amount of interest on periodical rests.
(2001) 7 SCC 1
Steel Authority of India Ltd. vs. National Union Waterfront Workers
Contract Labour (R & A) Act scope of S. 10 – held does not imply the concept of automatic absorption of contract labour on issuance of abolishing notification – master and servant relationship, in case employed by contractor.
(2002) 1 SCC 367
Central Bank of India vs. Ravindra and Ors.
S. 34 CPC interest, principal sum, quantification of – capitalisation of
interest, can be determined on the basis of RBI Circulars.
(2002) 4 SCC 275
Union of India vs. Delhi High Court Bar Assn.
Recovery of Debt due to Banks and Financial Institution Act – validity of the Act upheld.
(2002) 4 SCC 275
Union of India & Anr., vs, Delhi High Court Bar Assn. and Ors.
Validity of DRT Act upheld.
(2002) 4 SCC 736
State Bank of Saurashtra vs. Ashit Shipping Services (P) Ltd.
Claim based on Indemnity Bond leave to defend should be granted.
(2003) 4 SCC 690
Daewoo Motors India Ltd vs. Union of India
Bank Guarantee, bank’s liability relevance of terms of the contract between the parties.
(2003) 2 SCC 721
Bank of India vs. O.P. Swarnakar
SBI VRS is contractual – terms and conditions upheld by the Supreme Court.
(2004) 4 SCC 311
Mardia Chemichals vs. Union of India .
Securitisation Act – validity upheld.
(2004) 7 SCC 271
General Manager (D&PB) and ORs. Vs. Kunti Tiwary and Anr.
Compassionate scheme framed by SBI, upheld – Bank was justified in taking into account terminal benefits paid to dependents, while determining financial condition of family.
(2005) 1 SCC 13
Ganesh Santa Ram Sirur vs. State Bank of India and Anr.
Appellate Authority is competent to enhance the penalty in departmental appeal filed by delinquent employee – Service Rule Prohibiting bank manager to sanction loan to wife, was rule of integrity – held removal justified. Natural Justice personal hearing when not
(2005) 7 SCC 435
SBI vs. Bela Bagchi
Scope of Sec. 43 and 50 of SBI Act.
(2005) 10 SCC 682
Administrator of the SUUTI vs. Garware Polyster Ltd.
S. 391 Companies Act – maintainability, locus – circumstances warranting sanctioning of the scheme.
(2006) 5 SCC 319
State of U.P. and Anr. Vs. Uptron Employees Union
SICA – BIFR, powers do not extend to directing payment of wages to the workers of the Sick Industrial Company.
(2007) 1 SCC 97
SBI vs Ranjan Chemichals .
DRT – Counter Claim – such claim of company should be tried by the DRT where SBI’s recovery application was pending.
(2007) 2 SCC 453
Ramnath International Construction vs. UoI
Arbitration Act – grounds for setting aside award.
(2007) 2 SCC 282
Southern Petrochemichals Industries Corpn. Ltd. vs. Administrator of SUUTI.
UTI (Transfer of Undertaking) Act – specified company, administrator – status of and their capacity of sue – held both are entitle to sue as financial institution under the DRT Act.
(2007) 8 SCC 449
Prestige Lights vs. State Bank of India
Securitisation Act – representation by borrower u/s. 13(3a)
(2007) 13 SCC 262
Personnel Manager SBI vs. Krishna Grameena Bank EmployeesUnion
Employees of RRBs not entitled to cash allowance –claim parity with employees of SBI
(2009) 11 SCC 266
Chairman Ganga Yamuna Gramin Bank vs. Devi Sahai
(2009) 3 Scale 80
Chairman Ganga Yamuna Gramin Bank vs. Devi Sahai
Guidelines issued by NABARD not mandatory.
(2010) 10 SCC 1
ICICI Bank vs. Official Liquidator of APS Star Industries.
Validity of assignment of debts / NPA between banks inter se, upheld. Expanding scope of “banking business”.
(2012) 7 SCC 190
R.K. Mittal vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors.
Sealing of bank premises/ branches – directions issued to NOIDA for allotment of alternate site to banks and for removal of seal.
(2012) 7 SCC 190
R.K. Mittal vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors.
Sealing of bank premises/ branches – directions issued to NOIDA for allotment of alternate site to banks and for removal of seal.
(2013) 9 SCC 620
Standard Chartered Bank vs. V. Noble Kumar and Ors.
Borrower is not entitled to avail remedy of appeal under S. 17 of SARFAESI act.
(2014) 3 SCC 595
SBI vs. Gracure Pharmaceuticals Ltd.
Cause of Action in both suits being the same and plaintiff having omitted to seek certain relief in the first suit, he cannot file second suit seeking that same relief.
(2015) 4 SCC 770
Keshavlal Khemchand vs. UOI
Power of classification of Account of borrower as NPA is not arbitrary in nature. – words and phrases “NPA”
(2017) 6 SCC 770
Chilamkurti Bala Subhrahmanyam vs. Samanthapudi.
Sale not liable to be set aside as there were no material irregularities.
(2017) 16 SCC 777
SBI vs. Metta Chandra
(2018) 3 SCC 85
Authorised Officer vs. Matthew KC.
The High Court could not have directed the Bank to deposit Rs 25 lakhs in an interest earning deposit and the profits of the said deposit to enure to the benefit of the successful party. – matter relegated to Hight to be decided afresh.
(2018) 8 SCC 120
Authorised Officer vs. Allwin
(2018) 17 SCC 394
SBI vs. V. Ramakrishnan
Moratorium would not apply to personal guarantor of a Corporate Debtor.
(2019) 20 SCC 47
Authorised Officer Indian Bank vs. D. Visalakshi
The Guarantor cannot be allowed to approbate and reprobate, and more so in view of the unambiguous affidavit admitting the mortgage.
(2019) 4 SCC 17
Swiss Ribbons (P) Ltd. v. Union of India
Constitutional validity of the code was established.
(2019) 6 SCC 787
SBI vs. Jah Developers
Borrower has no right to legal representation before being declared wilful defaulter by in-house committee.
(2020) 20 SCC 125
Tripower Enterprises vs. SBI
(2021) 6 SCC 366
Asset Reconstruction Co. (India) Ltd. vs. Bishal Jaiswal
Acknowledgment of debt in balance sheet would attract section 18 of the Limitation Act in extension of time to file S. 7 Appeal.
(2023) 1 SCC 540
State Bank of India vs. Arvindra Electronics
No borrower, as a matter of right can pray for grant of benefit under the OTS Scheme.
(2023) 2 SCC 168
Varimadugu Obi Reddy vs. B. Sreenivasulu.
In the absence of efficacious alternative remedy being availed, there was no reasonable justification tendered by the respondent borrowers in approaching the High Court and filing writ application assailing order of the Tribunal dated 1-8-2019 under its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution without exhausting the statutory right of appeal available at its command.
(2023) 6 SCC 1
SBI vs Rajesh Agarwal
Master Direction on Fraud – Principles of Natural justice particularly the rule of Audi Alteram Partem has to be necessarily be read into the master directions. – Administrative Law, Natural Justice.
2023 SCC Online 517
State of Himachal Pradesh vs AJ Infrastructure
(2024) 2 SCC 637
SBI vs C. Natarajan
Forfeiture of Sale Price, not arbitrary – Auction Purchaser not found to be genuinely interested in proceeding with his part of obligations.
2024 SCC OnLine SC 943
State Bank of India Vs. Devendra Kumar Sinha and Others
There being a mortgage and the loan amounts recoverable, the appellant is entitled to proceed under the SARFAESI Act. The liability of the guarantor is joint and several with the principal debtor.
(1999) 4 SCC 458
Electronics Corporation of India Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Secretary, Revenue Department Govt. of Andhra Pradesh and Ors.
Art. 285, does not apply when the property that is to be taxed is not of
UOI but of a distinct, separate legal entity – taxing statute retrospectivity.
(1999) 6 SCC 237
M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India
Article 32 and 226 natural and scope of court’s discretion.
(1999) 6 SCC 80
Food Corporation of India vs. Sub-Collector Naraspur and Ors.
Food corporation of India cannot claim exemption from levy of tax under Article 285.
(2001) 1 SCC 298
VST industries vs. VST Industries Workers Union and Anr.
Private person, amenability of writ jurisdiction.
(2003) 2 SCC 673
Onkar Lal Bajaj and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Anr.
Art. 14 –discretionary power – manner of exercise of allotment of retail
outlet by dealer selection board
(2004) 6 SCC 254
Kusum Ingots & Alloys Ltd. vs. Union of India and Anr.
Situs of cause of action – not confined to the place of seat of legislature.
(2005) 8 SC 428
State Bank of India vs. K.C. Thakaran and Ors.
Maintainability of writ Petition – effect of delay/ latches – writ whether
(2005) 10 SCC 674
M. Ramakrishnan vs. HPCL
Art. 136 – interference with interim/ interlocutory orders.
(2006) 7 SCC 241
Jindal Stainless ltd. vs. State of Haryana and ors.
Article 301 – permissibility of compensatory taxes
(2011) 4 SCC 602
Aruna Ramachandra Shanbaug vs. Union of India.
(2011) 12 SCC 749
Ankur Filling Station vs. HPCL and anr.
Nature and scope of judicial review – applicability of public law. maintainable against a private party, held no.
(2015) 13 SCC 233
Rishi Kiran Logistics (P) Ltd. vs. Board of Trustees of Kandla Port Trust.
(2015) 15 SCC 657
Madras Bar Association vs. Union of India and ors.
Tribunalisation in India. Held – Tribunals are not Courts.
(2017) 2 SCC 528
SBI vs. Santosh Gupta.
State of Jammu & Kashmir has no vestige of sovereignty outside the Constitution of India and its own Constitution, which is subordinate to the Constitution of India. It is therefore wholly incorrect to describe it as being sovereign in the sense of its residents constituting a separate and distinct class in themselves. – Notices issued by Banks u/s 13 of SARFAESI Act are valid and can be proceeded.
(2017) 10 SCC 638
Karmanya Singh Sareen and Anr. Vs. Union of India and Ors.
Whatsapp/Facebook Privacy case. Privacy policy of whatsapp amounts to infringement of the right to privacy guaranteed under Article 21.
(2018) 3 SCC 797
Justice K.S. Puttaswammy (Retd.) and Anr. Vs. Union of India and Ors.
In a 9 judge bench decision right to privacy of the bank was upheld.
(2020) 20 SCC 100
Vijay Mallya vs. SBI
(2021) SCC Online SC 396
Lalit Kumar Jain vs. Union of India and Ors.
Notification 2019 which has notified the provisions of IBC w.r.t personal guarantors was upheld.
(2022) SCC Online SC 1067
SBI vs. Ajay Kumar Sood.
Structuring of judgments – In a manner such that the “Issue, Rule, Application and Conclusion” are easily identifiable. The well-renowned “IRAC” method generally followed for analysing cases and structuring submissions can also benefit judgments when it is complemented by recording the facts and submissions
(2024) 5 SCC 1
SBI vs. Assn. for Democratic Reforms
(2024) 4 SCC 115
Vishal Tiwari (Adani Group Investigation) v. Union of India
The power of this Court to enter the regulatory domain of SEBI in framing delegated legislation is limited. The court must refrain from substituting its own wisdom over the regulatory policies of SEBI. The scope of judicial review when examining a policy framed by a specialised regulator is to scrutinise whether it violates fundamental rights, any provision of the Constitution, any statutory provision or is manifestly arbitrary
(2006) 13 SCC 753
Hotel & Restaurant Association and Anr. Vs. Star India (P) Ltd. and Ors.
Commercial Subscriber – Hotel & Restaurants – TRAI has brought jurisdiction, role of regulator varied.
(2007) 4 SCC 656
Star India (P) Ltd. vs. Sea TV Network Ltd. and Anr.
Cable television – interconnect agreement – telecommunication law
(2008) 10 SCC 556
TATA services ltd. vs. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. and Ors.
Assessee defecate charges – purpose – regulator can impose restrictions and create differences.
(2012) 5 SCC 275
Avishek Goenka vs. Union of India and anr.
Subscriber verification – prepaid mobile telecommunication service – issue in realm of policy /regulatory matters.
(2014) 3 SCC 222
BSNL vs. TRAI
Power of TRAI u/s 36 is wide and pervasive – there is no restriction on TRAI to make regulations to carry out the purposes of the Act. – regulators are subordinate legislation hence could be challenged before the HC and not the TD’s Act.
(2014) 3 SCC 304
TRAI vs. BSNL
Section 11(1)(ii) referred to larger bench – whether TRAI Act would prevail over the licenses issued under the telegraph Act.
(2014) 6 SCC 1
Assn. of Unified Tele Services Providers vs. Union of India
(2015) 4 SCC 309
Cellular Operators Assn. of India and Ors. vs. TRAI.
Ninth amendment to telecom consumer protection regulation 2015 was held to be violative of Article 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution.
(2019) 2 SCC 104
Star India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Deppt. Of Industrial Policy and Promotion and Ors.
TRAI Act conceived in public interest – regulate the term regulate is elastic enough – bouquet. TRAI Act must prevail to the extent of any inconsistency over the Copyright Act. – Discounts on bouquet are rightly capped.
(2019) 2 SCC 521
Competition Commission of India vs. Bharti Airtel Limited and Ors.
Jurisdiction of TRAI & CCI – TRAI is the appropriate authority – dispute involving POI is to be resolved by TRAI & not CCI.
(2018) 17 SCC 394
SBI vs. V. Ramakrishnan.
The Moratorium u/s 14 of the Act will not apply to the Personal Guarantor to the Corporate Debtor.
(2019) 4 SCC 17
Swiss Ribbons (P) Ltd. vs. Union of India.
Since equality is only among equals, no discrimination results if the Court can be shown that there is an intelligible differentia which seperates two kinds of creditors so long as there is some rational b/w the creditors so differentiated, with the object sought to be achieved by the legislation.
(2019) 5 SCC 410
Jai Balaji vs. SBI.
An advance copy of the appeal cannot be treated as service of notice as stipulated under R. 48 of the NCLAT rules
(2021) 6 SCC 366
Asset Reconstruction Co. (India) Ltd. vs. Bishal Jaiswal.
An acknowledgment of debt in the balance sheet would amount to extension of time to file a S. 7 Appeal.
(2021) SCC Online SC 396
Lalit Kumar Jain vs. Union of India and Ors
The liquidation processes apply to corporate guarantors whereas insolvency resolution and bankruptcy processes apply to personal guarantors who cannot be subjected to liquidation.
(2022) SCC Online SC 1339
Axis Bank vs. Vidarbha
(2022) SCC Online SC 1385
S.S. Engineers vs. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation
An Operational Creditor can only trigger the CIRP process, when there is an undisputed debt and a default in payment thereof. However, if the debt is disputed, the application of the Operational Creditor for initiation of CIRP must be dismissed.
(2022) 5 SCC 661
Bank of Baroda vs. MBL Infrastructures.
Objective behind S. 29-A, held, is to avoid unwarranted and unscrupulous elements to get into the resolution process while preventing their personal interests to step in.
2022 SCC Online SC 1958
M.K. Rajagopalan vs. Dr. Periaswamy Palani Gounder and Anr.
(2023) 1 SCC 286
SBI vs. Vibha Agro
Permission to seek amendment of S. 7 Application so as to incorporate case based on the acknowledgment as contained in the balance sheets of Respondent.
(2024) 6 SCC 435
Dilip B. Jiwarjka vs. Union of India
Comparative analysis of Part II and Part III of IBC – Constitutional Validity
(2024) 8 SCC 1
SBI vs. Murari Lal Jalan & Florian Fritsch Consortium
Hon’ble Supreme Court reversed the Order of NCLAT permitting SRA to adjust amount deposited as Performance Bank Guarantee for meeting its Financial Obligation under the Resolution Plan.
1995 Sup. 2 SCC 13
Election Commission of India vs. State Bank of India Staff Assn Local Head Office Unit, Patna.
Services of Bank employees cannot be requisitioned for election duty.
(1996) 4 SCC 119
State Bank of India Scheduled castes/Tribe Employees’ Welfare Association vs. State Bank of India.
Reservation – Maximum limit of Reservation for SC/ ST – Lapsing of vacancies.
(1996) 4 SCC 378
State Bank of India Staff Association and Anr. Vs. State Bank of India and Ors.
Trade Unions Act: Ineligibility of retired employee to negotiate with the management.
(1997) 7 SCC 550
Chief General Manager, State Bank of India and Anr. Vs. Bijoy Kumar Mishra
Probationer – Deemed confirmation. In the absence of express order of confirmation, the employee cannot be deemed to have been confirmed.
(1998) 8 SCC 30
V. Kasturi vs. Managing Director, SBI Bombay and Anr.
Pension Rules – Prospective amendment, earlier employees cannot get the benefit of amendment.
(1999) 4 SCC 759
SBI and Ors. Vs. T.J. Paul
Misconduct: Sanctioning of Bank loans – Negligence – Gross Misconduct, Proof of actual loss not necessary.
(1999) 8 SCC 44
State of Haryana and Anr. Vs. Kamal Singh Saharwat and Ors.
Pay scale – Teachers masters in Haryana School whether automatically entitled to lecturer’s pay scale.
(1999) 9 SCC 268
State Bank of India and Ors. Vs. Luther Kondhpan
Departmental Enquiry: Personal hearing, not required – effect Non supply of documents.
(2000) 6 SCC 504
State Bank of India and Ors. Vs. Harbans Lal
Award Staff employee can be suspended before issuing charge sheet.
(2001) 1 SCC 73
State Bank of India vs. Ram Chandra Dubey and Ors.
Jurisdiction of Labour Court u/s. 33-C (2).
(2001) 3 SCC 574
Gujarat Agricultural University vs. Rathod Labhu Bechar and Ors.
Regularisation of daily rated labourers.
(2001) 6 SCC 106
Shitla Sharan Srivastava and Ors. Vs. Govt. of India and Ors.
Claim of gratuity as provided under Rules of SBI.
(2002) 7 SCC 168
Regional Manager and Disciplinary Authority, State Bank of India, Hyderabad and Anr. Vs. S. Mohammed Gaffar.
Gross or minor misconduct Para 521 of Sastri Award.
(2003) 7 SCC 488
Mishra Dhatu Nigam Ltd. and Ors. Vs. M. Venkatiah and Ors.
Regularisation of canteen workers
(2003) 11 SCC 607
Chairman, State Bank Officers Association and Anr. Vs. All Orissa State Bank Officers Association and Anr.
Rights of minority unrecognized trade Unions – there is no common law right in the union to represent individual grievances of its members.
(2004) 7 SCC 27
State Bank of India and Ors. Vs. R.B. Sharma
Criminal and departmental proceedings can go on simultaneously, except if both are based on same set of facts and evidence is common in both.
(2004) 7 SCC 271
General Manager (D&PB) and ORs. vs. Kunti Tiwary
(2005) 1 SCC 13
Ganesh Santa Ram Sirur vs. State Bank of India
(2005) 8 Scale 211
State Bank of India vs. K.C. Tharakan
Discharge from service justified, in case an unsubstantiated compliant is made to outsiders, regarding the conduct of his superior officer.
(2005) 10 SCC 792
Bank of Baroda vs. Ghemarbhai Harjibhai Rabari
Employer employee relationship – Burden of prove.
(2005) 11 SCC 508
State Bank of India vs. Akeel Ahmed Bank
Compassionate appointment – penury
(2006) 1 SCC 530
Regional Manager, SBI vs. Rakesh Kumar Tiwari.
Sec. 25H, 25T of ID Act – Unfair Labour Practice
(2006) 5 SCC 153
D.C. Aggarwal vs. State Bank of India and Anr.
Extension in service – Criteria – Bias – Promotion to TEGS VII – employee dying during pendency of proceeding, claim of promotion even otherwise cannot be accepted.
(2006) 7 SCC 212
SBI and Ors. Vs. Ramesh Dinkar Punde
Departmental Enquiry – not permissible for the High Court to re-appreciate the evidence considered by Inquiry Officer, Disciplinary authorities.
(2006) 8 SCC 776
P.D. Agrawal vs. State Bank of India and Ors.
Non observance of principles of natural justice, vitiates the order only when real prejudice caused to employee.
(2006) 10 SCC 311
SBI and Ors. Vs. Santosh Kumar Sharma
Special Allowance – such allowance payable only to staff of maintenance section – Appeal filed by bank allowed.
(2007) 4 SCC 778
SBI and anr. Vs. Somvir Singh
Compassionate Appointment – apart from the scheme, dependent has no special or additional right to appointment on compassionate ground.
(2007) 8 SCC 264
M.P. State Coop. Bank Ltd., Bhopal vs. Nanuram Yadav and Ors.
Irregular appointments – how to be dealt with, summarized in 8 points
(2008) 8 SCC 92
SBI and Ors. Vs. S.N. Goyal
Delinquent Employees not entitled to copies of correspondence between the disciplinary authority and CVC/CVO – Disciplinary authority entitled to change its decision on punishment, after considering the views of CVC/CVO.
(2009) 10 SCC 680
Shipra Sengupta vs. Mridul Sengupta and Ors.
Terminal benefits payable on death of employee – held despite nomination in mother’s favour, wife being class I heir, entitled to 55% share.
(2009) 8 SCC 475
Blemished service record – not entitled for compassionate appointment
(2009) 10 SCC 584
Ashok K. Jha and ors. Vs. Garden Silk Mills Limited and Anr.
Bombay Industrial Relation Act – transfer of workers from one department to other within same establishment.
(2009) 11 Scale 552
Shipra Sengupta vs. Mridul Sengupta
Nomination in PF records of the Bank – as against will of deceased Employee
(2009) 15 SCC 335
Gujarat Agricultural University vs. all Gujarat Kamdar Karamchari Union
Doctrine of no work no pay – entitlement of backwages.
(2011) 2 SCC 316
State Bank of India vs. Bidyut Kumar Mitra
Test of prejudice – pleading and proof necessary.
(2011) 11 SCC 355
State Bank of India vs. Hemant Kumar
Ex parte enquiry well justified – principle of natural justice cannot be stressed to appoint where thy render in-house proceeding unworkable.
(2012) 13 SCC 142
Avinash Sadashiv Bhosale vs. UOI
Conduct of Criminal Trial was in hands of prosecuting agency and once FIR was registered Bank had little or no role to play.
(2013) 2 SCC 740
SBI vs. Narendra Kumar Pandey
Dismissal order passed by enquiring authority after full enquiry in compliance with Service Rules, where charges against delinquent officer were found to be proved was justified.
(2013) 3 SCC 607
SBI vs. Palak Modi
(2013) 11 SCC 67
State Bank of India vs. Mohd. Abdul Rahim
Grant of Backwages is not automatic on reinstatement and such entitlement has to be judged in the context of totality of cases.
(2014) 12 SCC 106
State Bank of Patiala vs. Ram Niwas Bansal
Order of reinstatement for completion of enquiry also does not confer any benefit or delinquent beyond his date of superannuation.
(2014) 13 SCC 474
State Bank of India vs. Pritam Singh Bedi
(2014) 15 SCC 739
State Bank of India vs. Surya Narain Tripathi
If an employer points out that financial arrangement made for family subsequent to death of employee is adequate, members of family cannot insist that one of them ought to be provided a comparable appointment.
(2017) 11 SCC 503
Bharath Electronic Workers Union vs. BEL
(2018) 17 SCC 305
State Bank of Patiala vs. Kamal Nain Singh
(2019) 5 SCC 600
SBI vs. Sheo Shankar
(2022) 5 SCC 612
Bank of Baroda vs. G. Pilani
(2023) 3 SCC 203
SBI vs. Kamal Kishore Prasad
Continuation of disciplinary proceedings after attaining the age of super annuation – Rule 19(3) of SBIOSR.
2023 SCC Online SC 753
State Bank of India and Ors. Vs. Shyam Sundar Adhikari
No Re-instatement of Temporary employee, compensation granted.
2023 SCC Online SC 1064
SBI vs AGD Reddy
Scope of judicial review against a departmental enquiry is very limited.
(2002) 6 SCC 437
Pradeep Anand vs. ITC Ltd. & Ors.
Arbitration Act S. 34 and 18 – S. 30 grounds for setting aside the award.
(2003) 6 SCC 503
HPCL vs. Pinkcity Midway Petroleums
Arbitration and Conciliation Act – objection regarding applicability of arbitration clause, must be raised before Arbitrator
(2003) 10 SCC 375
Mysore Cements Ltd. vs. Svedala Barmac Ltd.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act S. 73, 74, 76, 36 – settlement agreement.
(2008) 10 SCC 240
Supri advertising and entertainment pvt. ltd. vs. Anahita pandole and ors.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act – appointment of arbitration by court u/s. 11(6) – terms of the agreement must be adhered to and be given effect to as closely as possible.
(2009) 2 SCC 486
OM Construction Company vs. Ahmedabad Municipal Corpn and Ors.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act – eligibility to approach Chief Justice u/s. 11(5).
(2011) 1 SCC 529
Govind Impex Ltd. vs. Income Tax Deppt.
(2011) 12 SCC 749
Ankur filling Station vs. HPCL and Anr.
Arbitrator exercised jurisdiction not vested in him – maintainability of writ when alternative remedy under Arbitration Act available.
(2012) 11 SCC 713
Mangal Amusement Park vs. State of MP.
As entire parcel of land of about 7 acres was not utilized, there was nothing wrong in State Government deciding it to retain it as an open parcel of land and to change land use thereof from commercial to a regional park.
(2014) 14 SCC 102
Sri Ram Builders vs. State of M.P.
Payment of entire rent would not entitle lessee to automatic renewal of lease when renewal was subject to consent of lessor.
(2014) 15 SCC 601
Sunita Gupta vs. Union of India.
No principles of Natural Justice violated – Petitioner concealed important facts at time of presenting application form and interview – selection rightly cancelled.
(2015) 7 SCC 387
Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. vs. Punjab State Electricity Regulatory Commission
No interference will be justified particularly when what has been allowed is as per the CERC norms – excessive loss reflected inefficiency and must therefore be eliminated.
(2015) 11 SCC 483
Gujarat Mineral Development Corporation vs. Sarojbhen Gordhanbhai Patel
(2018) 3 SCC 405
Indore Development Authority vs. Shyam Verma
(2018) 3 SCC 412
Indore Development Authority vs. Shailendra.
Literal construction / interpretation of words and phrases – “Paid”, “tendered” and “deposited”.
(2018) 17 SCC 729
Hindustan Petroleum Corporation vs. Union of India.
Defective transactions – Error of Law – Error of Law – Words and Phrases “Overcharge” “illegal realization”
(2019) 10 SCC 373
M. Srikant vs. State of Telangana.
(2019) 11 SCC 674
Common Cause vs. UOI.
environmental clearance with retrospective effect
(2019) 6 SCC 189
DCIT vs. T. Jayachandran.
Income Tax Assessment proceedings
(2020) 8 SCC 395
Indore Development Authority vs. Manoharlal
(2020) 17 SCC 528
Reliance Communication Ltd. vs. SBI.
Contempt of Court
(2023) 1 SCC 162
State Bank of India vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax.
Leave Travel Concession is exempted from income only when it is availed entirely for domestic travel within India.
2023 SCC Online SC 232
Indore Development Authority vs. Burhani Grih Nirman Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit Sneh Nagar and Others.
Release of Land – Not Arbitrary and not with an object of undue favour to those persons whose lands have been released.
2024 SCC Online SC 2877
Bank of Rajasthan vs. Commissioner of Income Tax.
The question is whether a deduction of the broken period interest can be claimed.
2024 SCC Online SC 987
HPCL vs. Dharamnath Singh
when a dealership agreement is to be cancelled, it has to be so done strictly in consonance with Rules/Guidelines framed in that regard.
2024 SCC Online SC 803
All India Bank Officers’ Confederation v. Central Bank of India
When it comes to uniform approach, the laws relating to fiscal or tax measures enjoy greater latitude than other statutes. The Legislature should be allowed some flexibility in such matters and this court would be more inclined to give judicial deference to legislative wisdom.
(2024) 2 SCC 375
Batliboi Environmental Engineers Ltd. vs. Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. Ltd.
The sum of money awarded to the party who has suffered the injury, should be the same quantum as s/he would have earned or made, if s/he had not sustained the wrong for which s/he is getting compensated.
2024 SCC Online SC 3190
HPCL Bio-Fuels Ltd. vs. Shahaji Bhanudas Bhad
Arbitration Act – Application u/s 11(6) is not a suit and would not be governed stricto-sensu by Order 23 Rule 1 of the CPC.
