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 tenant occupying a shop premises in Delhi since 1989 faced an eviction petition filed by his landlady, who claimed the premises were bona fide required for her son's sanitary-and-hardware business. The Additional Rent Controller and the Delhi High Court both found that no other suitable vacant premises were available to the landlady's family and ordered eviction. The tenant appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that several alternative properties owned by the landlady's husband or his company could have accommodated the son's business instead.
The Supreme Court examined each alternative property the tenant pointed to and found, on the concurrent factual findings of the lower courts, that none was actually suitable or available: some were already occupied by family-run businesses, one was not owned by the person claimed, and others were outside the relevant market area. Relying on its earlier ruling in Anil Bajaj & Anr. v. Vinod Ahuja (2014), the Court held that a landlord is entitled to choose which of her properties to use for her son's business and cannot be dictated to by the tenant as to which premises should be used instead. Finding no infirmity in the concurrent findings of fact, the Court dismissed the appeal but granted the tenant time until 31 March 2017 to vacate, on filing the usual undertaking.
In a bona fide requirement eviction case, a tenant cannot defeat eviction merely by pointing to other properties owned by the landlord's family: the landlord has the right to choose which of her own properties suits the purpose, and courts will respect that choice once the claimed requirement and unsuitability of alternatives are proved as facts.
