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 bought a plot of land in West Bengal for a stated price of Rs. 5,21,000 under a registered sale deed. The respondent, who owned adjoining land, tried to exercise his statutory "right of pre-emption" (a neighbouring landowner's right to step into the buyer's shoes) under Section 8 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955, alleging the real price paid was only Rs. 2,50,000 and depositing only that lower sum plus 10%, with a request to pay any further amount later if a court inquiry found it necessary. The trial court and later the Calcutta High Court both sided with the respondent, allowing him to deposit less upfront and settle the balance after an inquiry into the true sale price.
The Supreme Court traced the history of pre-emption law, stressing that it is a "very weak right" which courts must construe strictly and narrowly. It held that Section 8(1) requires the full price stated in the sale deed, plus 10%, to be deposited at the time of filing the pre-emption application, within a strict, non-extendable time limit: the right does not even arise unless this is done. Allowing a pre-emptor to pay less and dispute the price afterward would turn a deliberately weak right into a strong, speculative one and would leave genuine buyers' sale prices open to endless second-guessing. The High Court's order was set aside, and the Court directed that the amount the respondent had deposited be refunded to him with any accrued interest, since he had failed to deposit the full price in time.
When a law gives a neighbour the right to "step into the shoes" of a property buyer by matching the price paid, that right is generally available only if the full stated price is deposited strictly within the time limit: a buyer cannot be kept in legal limbo by someone who simply disputes the price and pays less.
