This volume of the Supreme Court Cases (SCC), Part 5 of Volume 5, embodies a landmark case decided by the Supreme Court on voter’s right to know antecedents, rental compensation, jurisdiction of referral court, and more.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — S. 11 — Jurisdiction of Referral Court to examine the issue of arbitrability: Considering, inter alia, the tenability of S. 11 petition by a non-signatory, held, what is primordial is that it should be demonstrated prima facie before the Referral Court that the non-signatory is a veritable party. Further, the Referral Court under S. 11 is not deprived of its jurisdiction from examining whether the non-signatory is in the real sense a party to the arbitration agreement and the answer thereof will depend on the facts and circumstances of each case after examining the documents pertaining thereto, [Hindustan Petrolium Corpn. Ltd. v. BCL Secure Premises (P) Ltd., (2026) 3 SCC 711]
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Ss. 9 & 36(2) and S. 34 — Applications under, in proceedings challenging award under S. 34 — Simultaneous orders regarding — Permissibility of: There is no hard-and-fast rule that an application made earlier in point of time must be heard before an application made later in point of time. Hence, there was no error in the near simultaneous disposal of the same, [Sepco Electric Power Construction Corpn. v. Power Mech Projects Ltd., (2026) 3 SCC 701]
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Or. 41 Rr. 1(3) and 5 — Stay of execution: Law clarified on permissibility of grant of stay against execution of money decree in appeal, without imposing condition of deposit, [Lifestyle Equities C.V. v. Amazon Technologies Inc., (2026) 3 SCC 641]
Constitution of India — Art. 19(1)(a): Voter’s right to know antecedents including criminal past of a candidate, explained, [Poonam v. Dule Singh, (2026) 3 SCC 732]
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — Ss. 7 and 238-A — Limitation: Legal principles re valid acknowledgment of debt, explained, [IL & FS Financial Services Ltd. v. Adhunik Meghalaya Steels (P) Ltd., (2026) 3 SCC 794]
Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 — Ss. 27 and 28 — Acquisition of land — Compensation: “Rental compensation” in land acquisition proceedings is granted only when owner is completely deprived of its property’s use. Hence, that is what needs to be determined in each case, [Pradyumna Mukund Kokil v. Nashik Municipal Corpn., (2026) 3 SCC 753]
Specific Relief Act, 1963 — Ss. 10, 14 and 20 (as existed prior to Act 18 of 2018, before the effective dt. 1-10-2018) — Suit for specific performance of contract of sale of immovable property — Discretionary relief — Conduct and readiness: Scope of interference in second appeals, explained. Law clarified on maintainability of suit for specific performance without seeking declaratory relief, [Annamalai v. Vasanthi, (2026) 3 SCC 769]
