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 sub-contract between the two companies contained a clause letting the Managing Director of the respondent company unilaterally nominate a sole arbitrator to resolve any disputes. When a dispute arose, the appellant sought to terminate that arbitrator's mandate before the Delhi High Court, arguing that a person who is himself ineligible to be an arbitrator (like a company's own Managing Director, who has a stake in the dispute) cannot be allowed to unilaterally pick someone else as arbitrator either. The High Court rejected this plea, relying on the law as it stood at the time.
By the time the appeal reached the Supreme Court, a Constitution Bench of the Court (in the CORE v. ECI SPIC SMO MCML case) had settled the law, confirming and expanding on the Court's earlier rulings in TRF Ltd. and Perkins Eastman: a unilateral arbitrator-appointment clause raises justified doubts about independence and impartiality and denies the other party equal say in the process. Applying this, the Supreme Court held that since the Managing Director himself was legally ineligible to be an arbitrator under Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, he could not nominate someone else as sole arbitrator either. It terminated the arbitrator's mandate and referred the matter to the Delhi International Arbitration Centre to appoint a fresh, neutral arbitrator.
A contract clause that lets only one side pick the arbitrator, especially through someone with a personal or corporate stake in the dispute, is now firmly invalid in Indian law; both parties are entitled to an equal say in choosing a neutral decision-maker.
