Consumer Protection – Definition of Service – Appellant-company engaged in selling plots with promises of development and infrastructure – High Court held that such activities constituted 'service' under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Supreme Court affirmed that the company's obligations to develop the plots and provide infrastructure made it a 'service' provider and the Respondents were 'consumers' [Paras 1-7].

Legal Interpretation – Broad Definition – Consumer Protection Act, 1986 intended to be interpreted liberally in favor of consumers – Housing construction and related activities by private or statutory bodies deemed 'service' under the Act – Reference to established case law affirming this interpretation [Paras 3-7].

Nature of Transaction – Service and Sale – Transaction involved more than a simple sale of immovable property – Assurance of developed plots with specific amenities and approvals indicated provision of 'service' – Deficiency in such service accountable under consumer protection law [Para 7].

Relief for Consumers – In cases of refusal or delay in transferring title despite full payment, consumers entitled to compensation for harassment and mental agony, and direction for execution and delivery of title deeds [Para 8].

Decision – Appeals dismissed – High Court's decision upheld, affirming jurisdiction of consumer fora over the Appellant's activities [Para 10].

Criminal Law – Conviction and Sentence – Appellants convicted for murder and other offenses – Trial Court and High Court upheld convictions based on consistent eyewitness accounts, medical evidence, and motive – Supreme Court found no material contradictions or inconsistencies in key witnesses' statements – Conviction and life sentence upheld [Paras 1-13].

Credibility of Witnesses – Minor discrepancies do not undermine reliability – Statements of injured eyewitnesses (PW1 and PW2) supported by medical evidence – Supreme Court reiterated principle of reading witness statements in entirety, emphasizing overall consistency and reliability [Paras 12-13].

Medical Evidence – Consistency with Eyewitness Accounts – Multiple injuries on the deceased corroborated by medical reports – Eyewitness testimonies aligned with medical findings – Supreme Court rejected contention of inconsistency between medical evidence and witness statements [Paras 14-15].

Intention and Common Object – Culpable Homicide and Murder – Clear intent to kill established by the nature and extent of injuries, use of weapons, and premeditated assault – Supreme Court held that cumulative effect of injuries indicated intent to cause death, satisfying criteria under Section 300 IPC [Paras 18-22].

Doctrine of Altering Offense – No Justification for Reducing Charge – Supreme Court rejected plea to reduce conviction to Section 304 Part II IPC – Affirmed that collective assault with intent to kill warranted conviction under Section 302 IPC [Paras 19-23].

Decision – Appeal dismissed – Conviction and life sentence under Section 302 IPC upheld [Para 24].

Public Interest Litigation – Bio-safety of GMOs – Petitioners raised concerns over the release of GMOs affecting environment and human health – Sought establishment of a protocol for bio-safety examination and a ban on GMO release without proper scientific evaluation – Supreme Court directed formation of an Expert Committee to review and recommend protocols for risk assessment and safety studies [Paras 1-6].

Expert Committee – Formation and Terms of Reference – Supreme Court constituted a Technical Expert Committee to advise on the scientific evaluation and safety protocols for GMOs – Committee to include experts in biotechnology, environmental science, genetics, toxicology, and food safety – Directed to submit a report within three months, addressing whether a ban on open field tests of GMOs is necessary and recommending protocols and conditions for field trials [Paras 2-6].

Judicial Intervention in Scientific Matters – Acknowledged the limitations of judicial review in technical and scientific matters – Relied on expert committee's evaluation to inform judicial decisions on bio-safety concerns and GMO regulations [Para 2].

Interim and Final Reports – Committee to submit an interim report on the necessity of a ban on GMO field tests and final report on comprehensive safety protocols and recommendations – Hearing and consideration of reports from various stakeholders, including national and international experts, mandated [Paras 5-6].

Decision – Formation of Technical Expert Committee ordered – Terms of reference specified – Report submission within three months – Case adjourned to 6th August 2012 [Para 6].

Criminal Law – Conviction for Murder – Appellant convicted for murder of his wife by setting her on fire – Conviction based primarily on dying declaration and corroborative witness statements – Supreme Court upheld the conviction and life sentence, rejecting the appellant's claims of fabrication and inconsistencies in prosecution evidence [Paras 1-14].

Dying Declaration – Admissibility and Credibility – Deceased's statement recorded by police constable treated as a dying declaration – Doctor certified the deceased was conscious and fit to make the statement – Dying declaration corroborated by eyewitness testimonies and medical evidence – Supreme Court affirmed that the dying declaration was a reliable piece of evidence [Paras 8-11].

Witness Credibility – Minor inconsistencies do not undermine reliability – Statements of key witnesses, despite minor discrepancies, were found consistent and credible – Supreme Court reiterated principle of reading witness statements in their entirety and emphasized overall consistency and reliability [Paras 12-13].

Medical Evidence – Consistency with Witness Accounts – Burn injuries on deceased and presence of kerosene corroborated by medical and forensic evidence – Supreme Court rejected the appellant's claims of inconsistency between medical evidence and witness statements [Paras 12-13].

Intent and Motive – Evidence of strained relationship and prior altercation – Testimonies indicated a quarrel between the appellant and deceased prior to the incident – Supreme Court found clear intent to cause death, affirming the conviction under Section 302 IPC [Paras 1-14].

Decision – Appeal dismissed – Conviction and life sentence under Section 302 IPC upheld [Para 14].

Criminal Law – Conviction and Sentences – Appeals against conviction for offenses under Sections 326 and 324 IPC arising from a violent village altercation – Trial Court and High Court upheld convictions based on witness testimonies and medical evidence – Supreme Court upheld the findings and sentences, rejecting claims of unreliable evidence and procedural inconsistencies [Paras 1-15].

Witness Credibility – Minor inconsistencies do not undermine reliability – Testimonies of eyewitnesses supported initial attack details – Supreme Court reiterated principle of reading witness statements in their entirety and emphasized overall consistency and reliability [Paras 7-12].

Dying Declaration – Admissibility and Corroboration – Deceased's statement recorded before death treated as dying declaration – Supported by eyewitness testimonies and medical evidence – Supreme Court affirmed that the dying declaration was a reliable piece of evidence [Paras 9-11].

Medical Evidence – Consistency with Witness Accounts – Injuries on deceased corroborated by medical and forensic evidence – Supreme Court upheld that medical findings supported the prosecution's case of assault leading to severe injuries [Paras 12-13].

Village Factions and Motive – Evidence of strained relations and prior altercations – Testimonies indicated ongoing factional disputes leading to the incident – Supreme Court found clear intent to cause harm, affirming the convictions [Paras 2-6].

Decision – Appeals dismissed – Convictions and sentences under Sections 326 and 324 IPC upheld [Para 15].

Trust Law – Conversion of Trust Petition into Civil Suit – Appeals against High Court decision rejecting conversion of Trust OP into a civil suit – Trust OP filed under various sections of the Trusts Act and CPC for restoration and tracing of trust properties – Supreme Court upheld the rejection, noting lack of statutory provision for such conversion in the Trusts Act [Paras 1-13].

Procedural Law – Nature of Trust Petitions and Civil Suits – Trust OP cannot be construed or equated to a suit under CPC – Final order in Trust OP is an 'order' not a 'decree' – Supreme Court emphasized distinction and statutory requirements for instituting a suit through presentation of a plaint [Paras 8-11].

Statutory Interpretation – Absence of Enabling Provision – Conversion of Trust OP to civil suit not permissible without specific statutory provision – Cited lack of such provision in the Trusts Act as a basis for upholding High Court's decision – Reiterated principle from P.A. Ahammed Ibrahim v. The Food Corporation of India [Paras 10-12].

Remedy and Relief – Filing Fresh Suit – Supreme Court clarified that rejection under Order VII Rule 11 does not bar filing of a fresh suit – Provided liberty to appellants to file a fresh suit in accordance with law [Para 13].

Decision – Appeals disposed of – Trust OP cannot be converted to a civil suit – Liberty granted to file fresh suit – No order as to costs [Para 13].

Criminal Law – Conviction and Sentence – Appellant convicted for murder of his stepmother by stabbing her multiple times – Conviction based on eyewitness account, corroborative testimonies, and medical evidence – Supreme Court upheld the findings and sentence, rejecting claims of unreliable evidence and procedural inconsistencies [Paras 1-28].

Eyewitness Credibility – PW-1, the brother of the deceased, witnessed the accused fleeing the scene with a knife – His testimony was found reliable and corroborated by other evidence – Supreme Court reiterated principle that sole reliable witness's testimony can suffice for conviction [Paras 9-12, 17].

Confessional Statement – Admissibility and Recovery – Appellant's confession led to recovery of the murder weapon and blood-stained shirt – Supreme Court held that recovery under Section 27 of the Evidence Act was valid and supported conviction [Paras 13-20].

Medical Evidence – Consistency with Witness Accounts – Injuries on deceased matched the account given by eyewitnesses and medical reports – Supreme Court upheld the trial court's reliance on medical evidence to corroborate prosecution's case [Paras 19-22].

Intention and Motive – Evidence of strained relationship and financial disputes between appellant and deceased – Multiple injuries on vital parts indicated clear intent to kill – Supreme Court found motive and intent sufficiently established [Paras 2-6, 19-22].

Decision – Appeal dismissed – Conviction and life sentence under Section 302 IPC upheld [Para 28].

Consumer Protection – Jurisdiction of MRTP Commission – Petitioners challenged the MRTP Commission's order directing Respondents to handover possession of an industrial plot – MRTP Commission's order reviewed and recalled as it exceeded interim relief scope – Supreme Court upheld the review, citing jurisdiction limitations and the requirement for final adjudication on such matters [Paras 1-8].

Interim Orders – Scope and Modification – MRTP Commission's interim order directing possession handover challenged and recalled on review – Supreme Court affirmed that interim relief cannot grant final relief sought in complaints – Jurisdictional challenges to be resolved during final adjudication [Paras 5-7].

Timeliness of Review Applications – MRTP Act allows amending or revoking orders "at any time" – Review application not bound by 30-day limitation – Supreme Court upheld MRTP Commission’s jurisdiction to entertain and decide review application without time constraint [Para 6].

Final Relief and Jurisdiction – MRTP Commission's capacity to order possession handover debated – Supreme Court deferred decision, directing final adjudication to address jurisdictional validity [Para 7].

Decision – Special Leave Petitions dismissed – MRTP Commission's review decision upheld – No costs awarded [Para 8].

Land Acquisition – Interest on Solatium – Appeal regarding entitlement to interest on solatium granted under Land Acquisition Act – Reference Court awarded compensation and solatium but did not include interest on solatium – Supreme Court upheld the appellants' entitlement based on established precedent and directed payment within three months [Paras 1-8].

Interest on Solatium – Precedent and Legal Position – Supreme Court referenced its decision in Sunder v. Union of India and further clarified in Gurpreet Singh v. Union of India that interest on solatium is payable even if not explicitly awarded by the Reference Court – Execution courts can apply this ratio to pending executions [Paras 6-7].

Case Summary – Facts and Timeline – Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act issued on October 30, 1963 – Declaration under Section 6 made on January 16, 1969 – Compensation awarded on September 17, 1986 – Reference Court enhanced compensation on June 1, 2001, including solatium but excluding interest – Appellants filed for execution and interest on solatium during pending proceedings following Supreme Court's ruling in Sunder [Paras 3-4].

Judicial Clarification – Applicability and Limits – Supreme Court emphasized interest on solatium can be claimed in pending executions and not closed cases – Directed application of the principle from the date of Sunder judgment [Para 6].

Decision – Appeal allowed – Respondents directed to pay interest on solatium within three months as per the law laid down in Gurpreet Singh [Para 8].