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 moreThis appeal arose out of a dispute over advertising claims: People Interactive (operator of a rival matrimonial website) had filed a complaint against Bharat Matrimony.com before the erstwhile MRTP Commission (later the Competition Commission of India) over statements Bharat Matrimony made about a "Limca Book of Records" certification for the highest number of documented online marriages. While the civil appeal was pending before the Supreme Court, the two companies amicably resolved their dispute and filed a Joint Memo of Settlement in 2014.
Under the settlement, Bharat Matrimony.com agreed to use only the specific language actually certified by Limca Records (and not make any contrary claim), and to use an agreed form of words, "Featured in the Limca Book of Records, for record number of documented marriages online", in its marketing. In exchange, People Interactive agreed to withdraw its complaint before the Competition Commission, and both parties agreed to give up all further claims against each other on this subject and to bear their own costs. The Supreme Court simply recorded the settlement and disposed of the appeal in its terms, with no order as to costs. Because this is a consent disposal, the Court did not render any independent finding or reasoning on the underlying merits of the advertising dispute.
Parties to a commercial dispute pending even at the Supreme Court can settle on their own terms, and courts will readily dispose of the case by recording and giving effect to that settlement rather than adjudicating the underlying merits: a useful, faster route than fighting a case to a final judgment.
