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 moreBiswajit Sukul, claiming to be the landlord of a shop in Silchar, sued his tenant Deo Chand Sarda for arrears of rent and eviction, alleging the tenant stopped paying rent from August 1977. The Trial Court split the key tenancy issue into two parts, it held in the landlord's favour that a landlord-tenant relationship existed, but held in the tenant's favour that the tenant was not a defaulter, and on that basis dismissed the suit. The landlord's first appeal and subsequent High Court revision were both dismissed, including the First Appellate Court going on to re-examine and reverse the landlord-favourable finding on tenancy, even though the tenant had never cross-appealed that finding.
The Supreme Court held that the First Appellate Court had no jurisdiction to re-examine and reverse the finding on the existence of the landlord-tenant relationship, because the defendants (tenants) had never filed a cross-objection under Order 41 Rule 22 CPC challenging that specific finding: a party cannot get an unfavourable finding overturned in the other side's appeal without filing its own cross-objection. The High Court compounded this error by not noticing it. The Court therefore set aside both the High Court's and the First Appellate Court's judgments and remanded the case to the First Appellate Court, directing it to decide the landlord's appeal afresh but confined only to the issues that had actually been decided against the landlord (cause of action and the rent-default question), within six months, clarifying it had not examined the underlying merits itself.
In a civil appeal, if you want an adverse finding reversed, you must file your own appeal or cross-objection (under Order 41 Rule 22 CPC): you cannot get it undone simply by defending the other side's appeal, and appellate courts cannot exceed the scope of what is actually challenged before them.
