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 moreIn October 2012, Deepak Singh (also known as Deepak Chauhan) was riding pillion on a motorcycle when it collided with a speeding, rashly-driven Scorpio coming from the wrong side. His friend, who was driving, died on the spot, and Deepak suffered grievous injuries. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded him about Rs. 7.09 lakh in compensation, which the High Court later enhanced to about Rs. 23.9 lakh. Dissatisfied with how his notional income was calculated, Deepak appealed further to the Supreme Court.
The dispute centred on what monthly "notional income" should be used to calculate compensation, since Deepak had no proven income at the time of the accident. The High Court had used minimum-wage rates for an unskilled worker. The Supreme Court disagreed, relying on its own precedent (Navjot Singh v. Harpreet Singh) involving a similarly-placed young claimant, and held that a flat minimum-wage figure understated the loss for a young claimant with future earning potential. Recomputing the award using a notional monthly income of Rs. 10,000 (with future prospects, permanent disability, medical expenses, and other standard heads factored in), the Court raised the total compensation to approximately Rs. 34.56 lakh with 7.5% annual interest from the date of filing the claim (excluding a 642-day delay period before the Supreme Court appeal was filed).
When a young accident victim has no proven income, courts should not automatically peg compensation to bare minimum wages: a more realistic notional income, guided by precedent for similarly situated claimants, should be used so the compensation genuinely reflects the loss suffered.
