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 moreThe appellant had stood as guarantor for an educational loan and mortgaged his property to secure it. When the loan was not repaid, the bank classified the account as a non-performing asset, took symbolic possession, and put the mortgaged property up for e-auction under the SARFAESI Act after earlier auction attempts failed to attract bids. The appellant moved both the Debt Recovery Tribunal and the Allahabad High Court seeking to redeem the property by paying off the dues, depositing Rs. 7 lakh pursuant to a High Court order, but failed to deposit the remaining balance before the sale was confirmed and a registered sale deed was executed in favour of the auction purchaser.
The Supreme Court examined Section 13(8) of the SARFAESI Act, which protects a borrower's right to stop a sale only if the full dues (with costs and charges) are tendered before the sale/transfer date, relying on its earlier ruling in Mathew Varghese v. M. Amritha Kumar that this right of redemption survives only until a registered sale deed is executed. Since the appellant deposited only a partial amount (Rs. 7 lakh) and never paid the balance even after the High Court proceedings concluded, and since the sale deed had already been registered, the Court held his right of redemption had been validly extinguished. However, the Court directed the bank to refund the Rs. 7 lakh deposit with 9% annual interest, since the bank itself had agreed it was liable to return this amount. Subject to that refund direction, the appeal was otherwise dismissed.
Under the SARFAESI Act, a mortgagor's right to redeem a secured property by paying off the dues lasts only until the sale is completed through a registered sale deed: a partial payment or a mere expressed willingness to pay the rest is not enough to stop or unwind a completed sale, so full and timely payment of all dues is essential to preserve this right.
