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 moreDr. B.C. Singh and his wife Dr. S.L. Singh, both Christians, jointly owned a property called Capel Cottage in Ranikhet. After Dr. S.L. Singh died childless, a distant relative, J.M. Utarid, who had been staying in an annexe of the property, refused to vacate, and Dr. Singh sued for possession, arguing Utarid was merely a licensee with no ownership claim. Utarid's side argued he was a co-owner, having inherited a 1/4th undivided share in Dr. S.L. Singh's property as her "kindred."
The Supreme Court examined the rules of intestate succession under the Indian Succession Act, 1925, which applies to Indian Christians, and found that Dr. S.L. Singh had left behind her husband and a real sister, Ida Utarid, but no children. Under Sections 33 and 47 of the Act, where an intestate leaves a spouse and siblings (but no children), the estate is split between the spouse (who gets half, plus his own pre-existing half-share, giving Dr. Singh 3/4th overall) and the siblings, and since a real sister (a "nearer kindred") existed, the law does not allow a more distant relative like the defendant to claim any share ahead of her. Since the defendant was only a distant kindred and not the nearest surviving relative, he had no ownership right at all, and the Court restored the First Appellate Court's decree allowing eviction, setting aside the High Court's reversal.
Under Indian succession law, closer relatives (like a sibling) take priority over more distant relatives in inheriting a deceased person's share of property: a distant relative cannot claim co-ownership simply by living on the property if a nearer heir exists, even if that nearer heir is a foreign national, since Indian succession law does not bar inheritance by non-citizens.
