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 moreWorkers who had long handled coal and iron ore cargo at Chennai Port sought regularization of their jobs; a 1995 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between their association and the Port Trust set out membership and work-allocation rules and provided that any dispute under the MOU would go to arbitration. After cargo handling largely shifted to Ennore Port under earlier court directions, 90 workers filed a fresh writ petition claiming decades of service with Chennai Port Trust and sought regularization; the Single Judge dismissed it, but a Division Bench of the Madras High Court partly allowed their appeal and issued compliance directions against the Port Trusts.
The Supreme Court held that whether a particular worker was actually employed by the Port Trust (or by a contractor), and whether he was entitled to regularization, are disputed questions of fact that cannot be fairly resolved in writ jurisdiction: they need a fact-finding body that can take evidence. Since the MOU itself (Clause 31) provided for disputes to be referred to an Arbitral Tribunal, the Court held the writ petition should never have been entertained on merits and that the parties should instead use the arbitration route. The Court allowed the appeals, set aside both the Division Bench and Single Judge orders, dismissed the underlying writ petition, and granted the workers and Port Trusts liberty to have an Arbitral Tribunal appointed (by consent or through court) to decide a specific list of questions the Court itself framed (e.g., whether an employer-employee relationship existed, membership status under the MOU, and entitlement to regularization). It directed the arbitration to be completed within six months given the case's age and the number of workers affected.
Where a contract or agreement contains its own dispute-resolution clause (such as an arbitration clause), and the underlying dispute turns on contested facts, courts may decline to decide the merits in writ jurisdiction and instead direct the parties to use that agreed mechanism.
