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 plaintiff (appellant) filed a Commercial Summary Suit before the Bombay High Court to recover an admitted business liability of over Rs. 2.15 crore with interest. Instead of the defendant formally applying for "leave to defend" as required under Order XXXVII of the Civil Procedure Code, the defendant sought dismissal for non-compliance with the Commercial Courts Act's mediation requirement, and the matter went through mediation. The High Court then permitted the defendant to simply file a "reply" to the Summons for Judgment, without the defendant ever having applied for leave to defend: a step the plaintiff challenged as procedurally improper.
The Supreme Court explained the strict step-by-step scheme of Order XXXVII Rule 3 CPC: after summons for judgment, a defendant has ten days to apply for leave to defend by affidavit disclosing a genuine defence, and leave can only be refused if the defence is frivolous. Allowing a defendant to file a plain "reply" or "defence" without ever seeking leave effaces the fundamental distinction between an ordinary suit and a summary suit, defeating the purpose of the summary procedure meant for speedy recovery on negotiable/admitted claims. The Court set aside the High Court's order permitting a reply without leave, while clarifying that the defendant remains free to pursue its pending application (including one for condonation of delay in seeking leave) through the proper channel.
In a commercial summary suit, a defendant cannot bypass the mandatory requirement of formally seeking the court's leave to defend by disclosing a genuine defence; courts must preserve this procedural safeguard, which exists precisely to prevent summary suits from being converted into ordinary, prolonged litigation.
