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 respondents (plaintiffs) claimed to be the absolute owners of about 3 acres of land in Kurnool district, tracing their title to a 1945 partition deed and registered sale deeds from 1985 and 1996, and alleged the land originally formed part of a "personal inam" grant. The Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board (the appellant) had, in 1999, allotted the same land to another party for construction of an Edgah (a place for religious/Islamic congregational prayer), which the respondents challenged as illegal. The Wakf Tribunal ruled in favour of the Wakf Board, finding the land to be Wakf property, but the Andhra Pradesh High Court, exercising revisional jurisdiction, reversed that finding and decreed the suit in favour of the respondents based on evidence of standing crops indicating their possession.
The Supreme Court held that a 2007 District Judge's report showing compound walls, minarets, and other features of an Edgah on the land supported the Wakf Board's case that the property was used for religious purposes, whereas the High Court's inference of possession based merely on standing crops ignored the legal character of that possession and other admissible evidence. The Court found the land to be "service inam" land attached to a religious institution, carrying the character of Wakf property, and held the respondents had failed to establish valid title or lawful possession. It further held that the High Court, in its limited revisional jurisdiction, had improperly re-appreciated the entire evidence and substituted its own findings for the Tribunal's, disregarding key evidence like the 1945 partition deed recitals and a witness's admissions, and wrongly shifting the burden of proof onto the Wakf Board. The Court set aside the High Court's judgment and restored the Tribunal's original decree in favour of the Wakf Board, allowing the appeal with no order as to costs.
A High Court exercising limited revisional jurisdiction should not re-weigh the entire evidence and substitute its own factual findings for those of a specialized tribunal (like a Wakf Tribunal); and physical features of land use, such as structures indicating religious use, can outweigh possession claims based merely on cultivation when determining whether property qualifies as Wakf land.
