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 moreGMADA allotted apartments to Anupam Garg and another allottee under a Letter of Intent that promised possession within 36 months, failing which allottees could withdraw and receive a refund with 8% compounded annual interest. Possession was delayed by more than a year, and the allottees' consumer complaints were partly allowed by the State Consumer Commission, which ordered GMADA to refund the deposited amounts with 8% interest, pay compensation for mental harassment and litigation costs, and additionally reimburse the interest the allottees had separately paid on bank loans they had taken to fund the purchase. The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) upheld this order, prompting GMADA's appeal to the Supreme Court, limited to the extra bank-loan-interest component.
The Supreme Court held that the 8% compounded interest already awarded under the contract itself constitutes the compensation for being deprived of the use of the invested money, and that requiring GMADA to additionally pay the interest the allottees paid on their separate bank loans amounted to double compensation for the same default (delay in possession). The Court clarified it was not curtailing the Consumer Commissions' general power to award compensation, and left untouched the amounts awarded for mental agony and litigation costs. It interfered only with the bank-loan-interest component. The appeals were allowed to that limited extent, and the Court held there was no requirement for GMADA to make any further deposit beyond what already stood credited.
When a builder/development authority is already directed to pay compounded interest on a delayed-possession refund, courts will treat that interest as full compensation for the delay: additional interest paid separately on a buyer's personal loan cannot ordinarily be claimed on top of it, since that would amount to compensating the same default twice.
