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 moreCivil Appeal Nos. 11153-11158 of 2018 were part of a consolidated batch of connected appeals heard and decided together by a common judgment, along with other appeals carrying different SLP numbers but the same respondent, the Special Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition). The appellants' land, with pomegranate trees standing on it, had been acquired for the Somashila/Telugu Ganga Project under notifications issued between 1990 and 1994, and the High Court had fixed compensation for the trees at Rs. 2,000 per pomegranate tree.
The Supreme Court noted that in an earlier, related case (Civil Appeal Nos. 11404-11405 of 2016) concerning the same project, it had already fixed compensation at Rs. 3,000 per pomegranate tree for a 1994 notification, in contrast to the Rs. 2,000 fixed by the High Court. Treating the present appellants' claims consistently, the Court held it would be just and reasonable to fix compensation uniformly at Rs. 3,000 per pomegranate tree for these appellants as well, along with all statutory benefits, but denied them statutory interest for the period of delay in approaching the courts. The appeals were disposed of with a direction that the enhanced compensation be paid within three months. In the connected lead appeal about lemon trees under a 1985 notification (Civil Appeal No. 11355 of 2018), the Court permitted the appellants to go back to the High Court and seek modification of its judgment, again without interest for the period of delay.
Where the same government project acquires similar crops/trees from multiple landowners under different notifications, the Supreme Court will apply a consistent, uniform compensation rate across similarly situated claimants rather than let identical trees be valued differently merely because claims reached the Court at different times, though claimants who delay approaching the courts may still lose out on interest for that delay period.
