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 large plantation property in Kerala changed hands through a series of leases and assignments over the 20th century, eventually leading to eviction and execution proceedings against persons claiming rights over part of the land. In an earlier execution application, the appellants had resisted eviction by claiming a right to remain in possession, but did not then raise any claim for compensation for improvements they had made to the land. They later tried to claim such compensation under the Kerala Compensation for Tenants Improvements Act, 1958, which the executing court and the Kerala High Court both rejected.
The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's view that the appellants' compensation claim was barred by "constructive res judicata": a legal rule that bars a claim which could and ought to have been raised earlier in the same proceedings but was not. The Court explained that under Order XXI Rules 97 to 103 of the Civil Procedure Code, all questions about a stranger's rights over decreed property must be resolved within the execution proceedings themselves, and a claim for improvement-compensation under the 1958 Act fell squarely within that scope. Since the appellants had failed to raise this claim during their earlier execution application, they could not now raise it afresh as a second, separate claim. The appeal was accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs.
If you are resisting eviction or defending your possession of property in execution proceedings, you must raise all related claims, including compensation for improvements, at that stage itself; courts will treat a claim held back for a later round as barred, even if it is otherwise genuine.
