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 moreThe appellants, a couple from Bengaluru, booked an apartment in a residential project (IREO Rise, Mohali) in 2010 and paid nearly the entire sale price, over Rs. 57 lakh out of about Rs. 60 lakh, but never received possession. After the developer went through insolvency proceedings, the appellants say they submitted their claim form in January 2019, and in any case resubmitted it by email in February 2020 after the resolution professional invited homebuyers to resubmit due to incomplete records; their claim was verified and formally listed among admitted financial creditors in April 2020. Despite this, the NCLT and NCLAT treated their claim as "belated" (filed after the Committee of Creditors approved the resolution plan) and limited them to only a 50% cash refund rather than possession of the flat.
The Supreme Court set aside the NCLAT and NCLT orders and directed the resolution applicant to execute the conveyance deed and hand over possession of the apartment within two months. It held that once a claim has been duly verified by the resolution professional and formally included in the published list of financial creditors, it cannot later be treated as if no claim had ever been filed: the plan's own clause for "belated/unverified" claims (entitling only a reduced refund) applies to claims that were never verified or communicated, not to claims like the appellants' that were fully processed and accepted. The Court emphasized that homebuyers who had paid almost their entire life savings toward a home should not be reduced to mere refund claimants once their claim was officially recognized in the insolvency process.
In an insolvency resolution process, a homebuyer (or any creditor) whose claim has been formally verified and published in the official list of creditors is entitled to the full treatment promised for verified claims under the resolution plan. It cannot later be downgraded to the harsher terms meant for late or unverified claims.
