Insights
In a significant judgment impacting India’s energy sector and the interpretation of indirect tax laws, the Supreme Court of India has held that the supply of natural gas from the KG-D6 basin in Andhra Pradesh to buyers in Uttar Pradesh constitutes an inter-State sale under Section 3(a) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (CST Act). Consequently, the State of Uttar Pradesh cannot impose Value Added Tax (VAT) on such transactions. The decision came in the case of:
The independence of the Election Commission of India (ECI) has once again come under intense judicial scrutiny. In a significant hearing before the Supreme Court, serious constitutional concerns were raised regarding the composition of the selection committee responsible for appointing the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners (ECs) under the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023. The matter, titled Dr. Jaya Thakur v. Union of India, has become one of the most important constitutional cases concerning electoral democracy and institutional independence in recent years. The bench comprising Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma examined whether the 2023 legislation undermines the constitutional requirement of maintaining an independent Election Commission by allowing the executive to dominate the appointment process.
The Supreme Court of India, in a significant judgment strengthening the principles of criminal jurisprudence and fair trial, has ruled that the testimony of a hostile witness cannot be selectively used only for convicting an accused person. Such testimony can equally be relied upon to discredit the prosecution case and support acquittal when it appears credible and trustworthy. In the case of Talari Naresh v. State of Telangana, a Bench comprising Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice N. V. Anjaria acquitted the appellant who had earlier been convicted for murder and offences under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
In a landmark judgment reaffirming constitutional values of equality and dignity within marriage, the Supreme Court of India recently held that a wife’s decision to pursue her professional ambitions cannot be treated as matrimonial cruelty merely because it may hurt the sentiments of the husband or his family. The decision came in the case of Ann Saurabh Dutt v. Lieutenant Colonel Saurabh Iqbal Bahadur Dutt, where the Court strongly criticized the “archaic” and “feudalistic” mindset that expects women to sacrifice their careers and individuality after marriage.
The Supreme Court of India, in a significant judgment concerning the delicate relationship between the judiciary and the legal fraternity, recently closed the contempt proceedings initiated against senior advocate Yatin Narendra Oza while simultaneously emphasizing the indispensable need for mutual respect between the Bench and the Bar. In YATIN NARENDRA OZA V. SUO MOTU, HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AND ANR., the Court observed that the judiciary and the legal profession are “two wheels of the chariot of justice,” and any friction between them has the potential to weaken public confidence in the justice delivery system itself.
MANJULA & ORS. V. D.A. SRINIVAS The Supreme Court of India, in a significant ruling in Manjula and Others versus D.A. Srinivas, reaffirmed the foundational legal principle that no individual can benefit from his own wrongdoing. Interpreting Section 25 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (“HSA”), the Court held that a person accused of murdering the deceased cannot claim inheritance rights over the deceased’s property, even in cases of testamentary succession through a Will.
In a significant judgment impacting the electricity and infrastructure sectors, the Supreme Court of India, in INDIAN RAILWAYS V. WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED & ORS., ruled that Indian Railways is a “consumer” under the Electricity Act, 2003, and not a “deemed distribution licensee.” Consequently, the Railways are liable to pay Cross-Subsidy Surcharge (CSS) and Additional Surcharge while procuring electricity through open access.
In a significant ruling strengthening procedural efficiency in commercial litigation, the Supreme Court of India has elaborated the scope and application of summary judgment under Order XIII-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC). The judgment underscores that courts must not hesitate to dispose of commercial disputes at the threshold where claims or defences lack real substance. By doing so, the Court aims to curb unnecessary trials, reduce judicial backlog, and ensure timely resolution of commercial disputes.
Land ownership disputes in India often revolve around revenue records, mutation entries, pahanies, jamabandi records, and tax receipts. In a significant judgment delivered on May 6, 2026, the Supreme Court of India once again clarified an important legal principle: revenue records are merely fiscal documents and do not confer ownership or title over land.
The Supreme Court, in a significant judgment delivered on May 6, 2026, clarified the legal consequences of a decree-holder’s failure to comply with conditions imposed in a decree for specific performance under Section 28 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. In HABBBAN SHAH v. SHERUDDIN, the Court held that when a buyer fails to deposit the balance sale consideration within the time stipulated by the decree, the decree becomes inexecutable and the contract stands rescinded. Importantly, the Court further clarified that a separate application by the judgment-debtor seeking rescission is not mandatory. The judgment was delivered by a Bench comprising Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice S. V. N. Bhatti.
In a significant development for insolvency jurisprudence and real estate regulation, the Supreme Court of India, in ALPHA CORP DEVELOPMENT PRIVATE LIMITED V. GREATER NOIDA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, reaffirmed the doctrine that the corporate veil can be lifted in insolvency proceedings where group companies function as a single economic unit. The judgment, delivered by a bench comprising Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice Alok Aradhe, addresses a long-standing tension between corporate separateness and economic reality, particularly in complex real estate insolvencies involving layered corporate structures.
