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 dispute arose from the respondent's attempt to get a construction licence for land adjoining the appellant's property, which the appellant opposed on the ground that the construction would block an access pathway. After a series of appeals under the Goa Panchayat Raj Act, the parties reached a settlement recorded by the Bombay High Court (Goa Bench) disposing of the appellant's writ petition, under which the respondent agreed to leave a 3-metre pathway. Later, the respondent filed an application "for speaking to the minutes," asking the High Court to clarify exactly where that 3-metre access should run (along a specific plan), which the High Court allowed: a decision the appellant then unsuccessfully challenged in a review petition.
The Supreme Court found that the High Court's later order modifying the pathway's exact location, based on a plan the appellant said it never accepted, was passed without giving the appellant a proper opportunity to contest it, and that the High Court had effectively exercised review-like power under the guise of "speaking to the minutes," which is meant only for correcting clerical or typographical errors, not for substantively altering an order's content. The Court set aside both the clarification order and the subsequent order dismissing the review, and restored the "speaking to the minutes" application to the High Court to be decided afresh after hearing both sides, without expressing any opinion on the merits of where the pathway should actually run.
An application to a court to "speak to the minutes" of its own order can only be used to fix clerical slips, not to substantively change what was actually decided. If a court alters the substance of an earlier order this way, without a fair hearing to the affected party, that order can be set aside and the matter sent back for a proper hearing.
