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 moreJaipur Udyog Ltd. (JUL), which ran a cement factory at Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan, and a jute mill at Kanpur, was declared a "sick industry" by the BIFR in 1987. A rehabilitation scheme was sanctioned in 1992 under which Gannon Dunkerley & Co. Ltd. (GDCL) took over management, but GDCL repeatedly failed to implement the scheme or pay the workmen's dues over more than three decades, while the units remained shut and litigation bounced between the BIFR, AAIFR, the Rajasthan High Court and this Court. Various labour unions (including the petitioner Bhartiya Mazdoor Sangh) sought payment of wages and dues owed to the workmen and enforcement of an arbitral award on those dues rendered by a retired judge appointed by the Supreme Court, while a connected contempt petition alleged that GDCL and JUL's management had violated the Court's earlier orders, including by improperly selling company assets.
After reviewing the decades-long history, including GDCL's conduct, its unauthorised changes to a subsidiary's shareholding, its sale of scrap and mill assets without Court permission, and its financial status. The Supreme Court invoked its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to bring the long-pending litigation to a comprehensive close rather than let it continue indefinitely. It directed that the workmen's outstanding dues be calculated and paid; ordered an inventory and valuation of JUL's and its subsidiary JAIL's remaining assets, to be sold as needed to fund those dues and reimburse GDCL's legitimate contributions; set aside GDCL's unauthorised sale of scrap from the Sawai Madhopur unit (while leaving its earlier sale of the Kanpur Jute Mill and other JAIL properties undisturbed); rejected takeover proposals from two prospective investors (M/s Frost Realty LLP and M/s Dickey Asset Management) as premature without a proper asset valuation, ordering refund of their deposited amounts; and gave directions on houses/flats occupied by former workers. The Court appointed a retired High Court Chief Justice as a Court Administrator to oversee compliance, valuation, and disbursement, and disposed of the writ petition and the connected contempt petition, with a compliance report due within six months.
Where a company's insolvency/rehabilitation proceedings drag on for decades leaving workers unpaid, the Supreme Court can use its Article 142 powers to cut through the procedural deadlock directly (ordering asset valuation, sale, and distribution to workers under court-supervised administration) rather than leaving the matter to indefinitely churn through regulatory and appellate forums.
