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 moreA contract conductor working for APSRTC in Nizamabad district was terminated after a departmental enquiry; his departmental appeal was dismissed, but in a later departmental review the Regional Manager re-engaged him on contract. After re-engagement, he went to the High Court seeking continuity of service (and consequential benefits) covering the gap between his original termination and re-engagement. The Single Judge, relying solely on an unrelated earlier batch decision concerning differently-placed workers, granted this; a Division Bench affirmed it.
The Supreme Court, in materially identical terms to its companion APSRTC cases decided the same day, held that the Single Judge had mechanically applied directions meant for a batch of workers in different circumstances (several terminated without any enquiry) without examining that here a full enquiry had actually proved the misconduct and had never been challenged. It reiterated that continuity of service cannot be granted unless the termination order itself is set aside, and that neither the termination nor the fresh re-engagement had been put in issue here. The appeal was allowed, both High Court orders were set aside, and the employee's seniority was directed to run only from the date of his fresh contractual appointment.
An employee's seniority and service benefits run from the date of a fresh appointment, not from an earlier terminated spell of service, unless the termination itself was legally challenged and set aside; relief crafted for one batch of workers cannot be mechanically extended to another without examining each person's own facts.
