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 moreAn ex-parte decree from 1969 in a reversionary-rights suit was challenged decades later by the predecessor of the present appellants, who sought to set it aside. During that later suit, after two official witnesses had already been examined, the appellants sought to amend their plaint to add specific survey/khasra numbers of the disputed land, since the original 1968 suit file could not be traced. The trial court and the Punjab & Haryana High Court both refused the amendment, holding it came too late under the amended Order VI Rule 17 CPC.
The Supreme Court held that the proposed amendment did not change the nature or character of the suit: it only supplied correct particulars that could not have been furnished earlier because the original case record was untraceable. Since only two witnesses had been examined at the time the amendment was sought, and the amendment caused no prejudice to the defendants, the "due diligence" bar under the proviso to Order VI Rule 17 did not apply. Relying on its earlier ruling in Abdul Rehman v. Mohd. Ruldu, the Court reiterated that amendments necessary to determine the real controversy should be allowed liberally as long as they cause no injustice to the other side. The appeal was allowed, the amendment permitted, and the trial court directed to proceed with the suit on that basis.
Courts will generally permit amendments to pleadings, even after trial has begun, if the amendment doesn't change the fundamental nature of the case and is genuinely needed to place correct facts before the court, especially when the delay was caused by circumstances beyond a litigant's control (such as a missing case file).
