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 consumers' association filed a complaint before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) on behalf of flat buyers of a residential project ("Lotus Panache"), seeking possession of flats and other reliefs against two linked companies that together marketed themselves as "The 3C Company." The NCDRC deleted one of the two companies, Three C Universal Developers Pvt. Ltd., from the case, reasoning that the buyers had not directly hired or dealt with it. The consumers' association appealed, arguing that under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016's definition of "promoter," an entity that actually constructs and develops a project can be jointly liable even if buyers' agreements were signed with a different, related company.
The Supreme Court held that at this preliminary stage, the material on record, including that the deleted company had formed the other company as a special-purpose vehicle for this very project and had jointly marketed it, made it impossible to conclude the deleted company had no connection with the project or was wrongly impleaded. The Court found no basis to remove it from the proceedings at this stage, allowed the appeal, set aside the NCDRC's deletion order, and restored the company as a party, while leaving all substantive rights and contentions open to be argued before the NCDRC when the complaint is finally heard.
A real-estate developer cannot escape a consumer complaint simply by arguing that buyers signed paperwork with only one group company, where companies market and structure a project jointly, both can be kept in the case to let the consumer forum decide actual liability on merits.
