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 moreBrooke Bond India Limited (later amalgamated into Hindustan Lever Limited) ran a tea factory at Dharwad, Karnataka that enjoyed a five-year sales-tax exemption as an incentive for setting up in that location. Tax authorities noticed that the Dharwad unit's "tax-exempt" tea was sold at the same retail price as similar tea made at the company's non-exempt units (which did carry a tax component), and concluded from this price parity that the company must secretly be collecting sales tax on the exempt goods too, which would disqualify it from the exemption under the relevant notification. This was the third round of litigation between the same parties over the same exemption, after the company had already won two earlier rounds before the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court held that charging a uniform all-India retail price (marked "inclusive of all taxes" as required by the Standards of Weights and Measures Rules) does not by itself prove that tax was actually collected on exempt goods: that is a question of fact to be proved from the dealer's actual invoices and accounts, not inferred merely from price parity with non-exempt products. The Tribunal and High Court had both found as fact, based on thousands of invoices and price circulars, that the company had not separately collected or shown any tax component on the Dharwad tea, and the Court saw no reason to disturb that concurrent factual finding. It distinguished the precedents the tax department relied on (Amrit Banaspati, C. Venkatagiriah, T. Stanes) as dealing with materially different facts, and held a uniform pricing policy across exempt and non-exempt units is a legitimate business decision, not evidence of disguised tax collection.
A business can lawfully charge the same retail price for tax-exempt and taxable versions of the same product without losing its tax exemption, so long as its books and invoices genuinely show no tax was collected: price parity alone is not proof of tax evasion.
