Customs – Classification of Goods – Dried pomegranate seeds (Anardana) classified under Heading 1209 as seeds, not under Heading 0813 as dried fruit – CESTAT's classification upheld based on the common parlance test and policy conditions in the Import Policy – Revenue's contention rejected due to insufficient evidence to reclassify Anardana under a different heading [Paras 1-3, 25].

Common Parlance Test – Interpretation of Taxing Statutes – Words in taxing statutes should be construed according to their commonly accepted meaning in trade and popular sense – Common parlance test applied to determine that Anardana is not considered a dried fruit but a spice or medicinal seed [Paras 12-13, 19].

Import Policy – Influence on Classification – Policy condition attached to sub-heading 1209.99.00 of the Import Policy supports classification of Anardana under Heading 1209 – Import Policy's correlation with sub-heading 1209.99 considered valid in the absence of specific exclusion or inclusion in the Customs Tariff Act [Paras 21-22].

Decision – Appeals dismissed – Classification of Anardana under Heading 1209 upheld – CESTAT’s decision affirmed – Suggested Revenue to consider a policy decision on classification of Anardana to avoid future litigation [Paras 26-28].

Civil Procedure – Setting Aside Ex-parte Decree – High Court set aside ex-parte judgment and decree without considering delay of 1522 and 2345 days in filing petitions to set aside the decree – Supreme Court held that High Court erred in exercising Article 227 jurisdiction where statutory remedy of appeal was available – High Court’s decision set aside; ex-parte decree and trial court’s orders on delay restored [Paras 6, 7.1, 7.2].

Jurisdiction – High Court’s Exercise of Supervisory Power – High Court should not entertain petitions under Article 227 when specific remedy of appeal exists – Exercise of supervisory jurisdiction by High Court critiqued for bypassing available appellate remedies under CPC [Paras 7, 7.1, 7.2].

Delay in Legal Proceedings – Condonation – Trial Court’s refusal to condone significant delays in filing petitions to set aside ex-parte decree upheld – High Court’s failure to address justification of trial court’s refusal noted as a critical oversight [Paras 6.1, 6.2, 7.2].

Decision – Appeals allowed – High Court’s order set aside – Ex-parte judgment and decree and trial court’s orders on condonation of delay restored – No order as to costs [Paras 8].

Criminal Law – Evidence of Hostile Witness – Even the evidence of a hostile witness can be considered to the extent it supports the case of the prosecution – Prosecution established motive through the deposition of a hostile witness who testified to the accused's harassment of the deceased – High Court's failure to consider this aspect constituted a serious error [Paras 7, 7.1].

Circumstantial Evidence – Recovery of Weapon – Recovery of the knife in three pieces from the crime scene, identified by the shopkeeper (PW-9) as sold to the accused, established a crucial link in the chain of evidence – High Court erred in observing that the prosecution failed to prove this link [Paras 7.1].

Incriminating Material – DNA Evidence and Injury – Blood-stained Loi recovered at the instance of the accused matched the blood of the deceased and the accused – Injury on the accused's finger corroborated by medical testimony (PW-20) – High Court's dismissal of DNA evidence on non-germane grounds was unjustified [Paras 7.2, 7.3].

Decision – Appeals allowed – High Court's order of acquittal set aside – Trial Court's conviction and sentence restored – Accused to surrender to undergo the sentence imposed by the Trial Court [Paras 8, 8.1, 9].

Arbitration – Counter-claim – Claims not notified before invoking arbitration – Counter-claim of a party cannot be dismissed solely on this ground – Clauses 26.1 and 26.2 should be interpreted pragmatically to require parties to attempt amicable settlement before arbitration – Entire subject matter, including counterclaims, forms the subject of arbitration if not resolved amicably [Paras 13, 13.4].

Dispute Resolution – Interpretation of Clauses – Clause 26.1 and 26.2 of the EPC contract emphasize attempts to resolve disputes amicably before arbitration – Disputes include claims and counterclaims if unresolved by conciliation – High Court and Arbitral Tribunal erred in excluding counterclaim for not following conciliation procedure [Paras 12-13.5].

Procedural Compliance – Section 23(2A) – Counterclaims must fall within the scope of the arbitration agreement – Failure to notify counterclaims does not negate jurisdiction if they arise from the same transaction – Section 23(2A) aims to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and ensure comprehensive resolution [Paras 4.6, 13.5].

Decision – Appeal allowed – High Court and Arbitral Tribunal's orders set aside – NHAI permitted to file counterclaim – Arbitral Tribunal directed to consider counterclaim along with the statement of claim and defense on merits – Delay period excluded for computing the period for passing of the award [Paras 14].

Civil Procedure – Setting Aside Ex-parte Decree – On setting aside the ex-parte decree, the parties are restored to their original positions at the time of passing the ex-parte decree – Defendants who failed to file a written statement can still participate in the suit proceedings and cross-examine witnesses – High Court's observation that reopening the suit would be futile due to the absence of a written statement is incorrect [Paras 3, 3.1].

Participation in Proceedings – No Written Statement – Defendants not permitted to file a written statement after multiple opportunities but allowed to participate in the suit and cross-examine witnesses – High Court erred in holding that the absence of a written statement renders the reopening of the suit futile [Paras 3.1, 4].

Restoration of Suit – Appellate Court’s Findings – First Appellate Court correctly found sufficient cause for setting aside the ex-parte decree – High Court failed to consider these findings and incorrectly dismissed the appeal on procedural grounds [Paras 3, 3.1].

Decision – Appeals allowed – High Court's order set aside – First Appellate Court's order restoring the suit upheld – Defendants allowed to participate in proceedings but not to file written statement – No order as to costs [Paras 4].

Criminal Law - Last Seen Theory - When the last seen theory is found to be not true, there must be more concrete and clinching evidence to implicate the accused. [Paras 12-14]

Criminal Law - Motive - Circumstantial Evidence - In cases of circumstantial evidence, motive assumes significance. Though the motive may pale into insignificance in a case involving eyewitnesses, it may not be so when an accused is implicated based upon circumstantial evidence. [Paras 13, 15]

Criminal Law - Conviction - Mere Suspicion - No one can be convicted on the basis of mere suspicion, however strong it may be. The conduct of an accused must be looked at in its entirety. [Paras 15-16]

Evidence Act 1872 - Section 27 - Dead body found - Recovery of material in the form of a firearm - Doubts were raised by PWs 1 and 2 pointing the finger of suspicion at the accused, a friend of the deceased. Upon securing the accused, the recovery of the firearm was made. Both the observation Mahazar along with the sketch and the recovery Mahazar under Section 27 of the Act were signed by the police officers, with the latter signed by PW2 as well. The lack of independent witnesses' signatures raised questions. [Paras 16-17]

Decision - Appeal allowed - The order of conviction rendered by the High Court was set aside, restoring the acquittal by the trial court. The evidence presented did not form a complete chain unerringly pointing to the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt. [Paras 20-24]

Constitutional Law - Transfer of Writ Petitions - The Supreme Court examined the feasibility of transferring writ petitions challenging the Payment of Bonus (Amendment) Act, 2015, pending before various High Courts to the Supreme Court. It emphasized the need to have the benefit of High Court judgments before addressing the issues at the Supreme Court level​​.

Retrospective Effect - The writ petitions challenge the retrospective effect of the amendments to the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965, and the linkage of bonus calculations to minimum wages set by appropriate governments​​.

Decentralized Adjudication - The Supreme Court underscored that the variance in minimum wages across states requires jurisdictional High Courts to address specific state-related issues. The transfer to one High Court or the Supreme Court would not be practical for these varied and localized issues​​.

Decision: Transfer petitions dismissed - The Supreme Court declined to transfer the writ petitions to itself or any single High Court. It vacated all interim stay orders and directed the respective High Courts to expedite the hearings and dispose of the pending writ petitions with reasonable priority​​.

Environmental Law - Environmental Clearance - Ecologically Sensitive Area - Appellant challenged the environmental clearance granted to Ultratech Cement Limited for limestone mining on grounds of ecological sensitivity, lack of consent from private landholders, and adverse environmental impacts. The clearance was challenged under Section 16 of the NGT Act​​ .

Natural Justice - Composition of NGT Bench - Single Member Bench - The NGT's dismissal of the applications for restoration and condonation of delay was deemed null and void due to the improper constitution of a single member bench. The Supreme Court highlighted the requirement of equal numbers of judicial and expert members on the bench as per Section 4(4)(c) of the NGT Act​​ .

Limitation Period - Environmental Clearance - The period of limitation for challenging the environmental clearance was calculated from the date of publication of the clearance, not from individual knowledge. The NGT Act does not permit condonation of delay beyond 90 days​​ .

Decision - Appeals allowed - The Supreme Court set aside the impugned order of the NGT dated 16 July 2021, and the original order dated 29 January 2018. The matter was remitted to the NGT for fresh disposal. All rights and contentions of the parties, including the issue of limitation, were kept open​​ .

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Compensation - Loss of Love and Affection - Loss of love and affection is comprehended within loss of consortium and should not be awarded as a separate head. The Constitution Bench in Pranay Sethi recognized only three conventional heads under which compensation can be awarded: loss of estate, loss of consortium, and funeral expenses​​.

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Calculation of Compensation - Pecuniary Loss - The Tribunal's methodology of basing the deceased's notional income on her husband's income was upheld. The High Court's approach of using her last drawn salary, three years prior to the accident, was deemed inappropriate​​.

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Deduction for Personal Expenses - The proper deduction for personal living expenses is one-third of the income, as per the precedent set in Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation​​.

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Future Prospects - An addition of 40% to the notional income for future prospects was mandated, as the deceased was below 40 years of age​​.

Decision - Appeal allowed - The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's reduction of the pecuniary loss compensation and quantified it to be Rs. 44,10,000. The award for loss of love and affection was subsumed under loss of consortium, with Rs. 40,000 awarded for each appellant, totaling Rs. 1,60,000. The total compensation amount, including funeral and medical expenses, was determined to be Rs. 46,17,350, payable within two months, with an interest rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim till payment​​.