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 family business dispute between the appellant and his father was referred to arbitration, and a 2010 arbitral award was passed in the appellant's favour. The award was recognised by courts in Dubai and Singapore against the father, but remained unsatisfied. After the father's death, the appellant sought to execute the award in the Bombay High Court against the father's estate, represented by the father's brother (the appellant's uncle) as executor of the father's will. The uncle and other relatives resisted execution, and when a Single Judge directed that execution proceed and notice be issued under Order 21 Rule 22 CPC, they successfully got a Division Bench of the High Court to stay those orders through Letters Patent Appeals, without giving reasons for admitting the appeals.
The Supreme Court held that the respondents, having been arrayed in the execution proceedings only as legal representatives/executors of the deceased father's will, could not be treated as strangers or third parties entitled to challenge the award's validity: the Arbitration Act is a self-contained code that restricts such collateral challenges. It therefore held the Letters Patent Appeals were not maintainable and that the Division Bench erred in admitting them without reasons and staying the execution. The Court quashed the Division Bench's stay orders and restored the execution proceedings, but also directed that the legal representatives must first be issued a formal notice under Order 21 Rule 22(1) CPC (which had not yet been issued) and be given a genuine opportunity to raise objections under Order 21 Rule 23(2) CPC, unprejudiced by the Single Judge's earlier observations.
When a decree or arbitral award is sought to be executed against the legal heirs/representatives of a deceased judgment-debtor, the law guarantees them a mandatory notice and a real chance to object before execution proceeds, but that safeguard operates within the execution process itself, and cannot be used to launch a separate appellate challenge to the underlying award's validity.
