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 Government of NCT of Delhi and the Delhi Development Authority were contesting rulings that their land acquisition proceedings against the respondent landowners had lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 land acquisition law. The Supreme Court had already decided the identical legal issue against the requisitioning authority (DDA) in two earlier judgments (Civil Appeal No. 8477 of 2016 and Civil Appeal No. 5811 of 2015), so these three connected appeals raised the same point.
The Court held that the issue was, in principle, already covered against the appellants by its own prior rulings dismissing the DDA's appeals on the same point, and accordingly dismissed all three appeals. However, in the peculiar facts of these cases, it granted the appellants a one-year window to exercise their liberty under Section 24(2) of the Act to initiate fresh acquisition proceedings by issuing a fresh Section 11 notification. It made clear that if no fresh notification issued within that year, the appellants (if in possession) would have to hand back physical possession of the land to the original owners.
Once land acquisition proceedings lapse in law for prolonged inaction, the authority does not automatically lose all recourse: courts may still give it a limited, time-bound opportunity to restart the process properly, failing which the land must go back to its original owner.
