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 appellant's father, a displaced person from Pakistan, was allotted land in Lonavala, Pune district, from property left behind after Partition. Rival claimants who bought the same survey numbers at a 1956 auction obtained mutation entries in their favour, and over nearly two decades revenue officers passed conflicting orders in appeals and revisions. The State Minister for Revenue then entertained a second revision and restored the entries in favour of the other claimants, a decision the Bombay High Court upheld.
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal. It held that under Sections 257 and 259 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, the State Government is the supreme revenue authority, and its power to revise a revenue officer's order is concurrent with other revenue officers, so a second revision (even after a Commissioner's revision) is maintainable. The only question before the Court was whether such a second revision was legally permissible, and it answered yes. The Court expressly declined to decide who owns the land, because the appellant himself had asked the High Court not to enter the merits, and the parties were left free to pursue that question in a civil court.
In land record disputes, a revenue officer's decision may be revisited by higher authorities under the state's revenue law, so the forum and procedure matter as much as the merits. Ownership questions themselves still have to be resolved separately, usually in a civil court.
