Real judgements, distilled
Court judgements broken down into the case type, how the decision played out, and the lesson worth remembering, with the full judgement available as a PDF.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1094
An older qualification must still satisfy the eligibility rules governing the appointment sought. Here, the certificate's early date did not secure reinstatement, and rejection of eligibility should not be confused with a conclusive finding that the certificate was forged.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1095
A party benefiting from a conditional stay must meet its deposit requirement or face enforcement. The additional ₹15 crore deposit secures the pending dispute; it does not settle the land's final compensation or amount to an immediate payment to the landowners.
Criminal Appeal · 2026 INSC 1093
An alleged attempt to kill does not become a lesser offence simply because the victim avoided a fatal injury. Restoring this charge means the accusation must be tried; it does not establish that the accused is guilty.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1090
For the assessment in this case, assistance reducing ordinary manufacturing costs was taxable even though the government wanted to encourage industry. The purpose and actual operation of the particular subsidy mattered more than its general development label.
Criminal Appeal · 2026 INSC 1091
Proof that someone caused a serious injury does not by itself prove the additional ingredients of robbery. A court can substitute a lesser offence supported by the evidence; the sentencing reduction here depended on Appa's particular circumstances.
Special Leave Petition (Civil) · 2026 INSC 1092
Someone challenging an election must ensure that the personal-presentation requirement is met and can be proved. Merely entering the court building does not establish compliance, and a filing defect can end the challenge before the election allegations are examined.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1088
An employee who retires on 30 June may be entitled to the increment that falls due on 1 July after completing a year of service. Authorities that delay paying the amounts due must pay interest after the deadline set by the court.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1089
Recruitment must follow the qualifications stated in the advertisement and the governing Recruitment Rules. A court will not override a merit-based eligibility decision made under those rules merely because the candidate concerned was higher in the written test.
Writ Petition (Criminal) · 2026:DHC:8797
A person who occupied property only because of employment has no independent right to remain once the employment and decree end. Even when a petition fails, courts can make practical arrangements to let a person recover personal belongings.
14543 more judgements for members
You're seeing the newest cases. Log in — it's free — to keep scrolling, search by name or judge, and filter by court or legal area.
Log in to see moreALD Automotive, a vehicle-leasing company registered under the Tamil Nadu VAT Act, 2006, routinely received the original tax invoices for its vehicle purchases late because the paperwork was tied up with vehicle registration at the Regional Transport Authority. Section 19(11) of the Tamil Nadu VAT Act required dealers to claim Input Tax Credit (a tax-paid-on-purchase offset) either within the same financial year or within 90 days of purchase, whichever was later. Because its invoices routinely arrived after this window, the company's Input Tax Credit claims were repeatedly rejected by the tax authorities, and this appeal (along with dozens of similarly-affected companies' tagged appeals) challenged the validity and strictness of that time limit after the Madras High Court upheld it.
The Supreme Court held that Input Tax Credit is not a dealer's absolute right but a statutory concession granted by the legislature on specific conditions, and such conditions, including time limits, must be strictly complied with to claim the benefit. Surveying its own precedents (including Jayam and Company and M.K. Agro Tech), the Court reiterated that how much tax credit to give and under what conditions is purely a legislative choice that courts should not dilute. It held that the word "shall" in Section 19(11) made the time limit mandatory, not merely directory, and that there was no statutory power given to any tax authority to extend this period on a case-by-case basis for genuine hardship. Finding the Madras High Court's reasoning correct, the Supreme Court dismissed all the tagged appeals, while noting dealers retained the separate right to pursue statutory appeals/objections in cases where assessments had already been finalized.
Tax credits and similar statutory benefits are concessions, not entitlements: if a tax law sets a strict deadline for claiming a benefit, businesses must build their internal paperwork processes around that deadline, because courts will not read in a power to grant case-by-case extensions that the statute itself does not provide.
