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 moreAsset Reconstruction Company (India) Ltd. (ARCIL), which had taken over a defaulting borrower's mortgaged Maharashtra property under the SARFAESI Act, allegedly agreed in a 2007 Private Treaty Agreement to sell the property to Excel Dealcomm for Rs. 7.5 crore, but ARCIL's board did not approve the deal and it fell through. Excel sued ARCIL in the Calcutta High Court for specific performance, seeking a court-ordered sale certificate for the property. A single judge allowed the suit to proceed in Calcutta, but a Division Bench of the same High Court reversed that, holding the agreement wasn't a concluded contract and the suit could not continue there. Excel appealed to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court held that although Excel's prayer did not explicitly ask for "possession," the relief it sought, a sale certificate under the SARFAESI Rules, inherently requires handing over possession of the property, making this legally a "suit for land" under Clause 12 of the Calcutta High Court's Letters Patent. Since the property was located in Maharashtra, Calcutta's jurisdiction over a suit for land was excluded. The Court also held that the parties' agreement contained a clause giving exclusive jurisdiction to the courts of Mumbai, which further ousted Calcutta's jurisdiction and need not be read narrowly. On these two findings, the Court held the Calcutta High Court correctly declined jurisdiction and dismissed Excel's appeal, leaving Excel free to pursue its claim in the proper forum (Mumbai).
A lawsuit seeking a remedy that necessarily involves transferring possession of property (even if "possession" isn't stated outright in the prayer) is treated as a "suit for land" that must be filed where the property is located, and a jurisdiction clause in a contract naming a specific city's courts will generally be enforced as the parties' clear intention, overriding a plaintiff's choice of a different, more convenient court.
