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 moreThis batch of civil appeals (led by C.A. Nos. 5518-5523 of 2017, filed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court itself) arose from a dispute over the seniority ranking of District Judges in the Punjab Superior Judicial Service recruited in 2008. Three groups of officers, those promoted on merit-cum-seniority (50% quota), direct recruits (25% quota), and officers promoted via a limited departmental competitive exam (25% quota), disagreed over how a "roster" system should be applied to rank them against each other. The Punjab and Haryana High Court's Division Bench had set aside the seniority list issued in 2007-08, and multiple affected officers and the High Court itself appealed to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's view that a roster system does apply to determine seniority between the three recruitment streams. However, it set aside the High Court's specific finding that fifteen promotee officers under the merit-cum-seniority quota had exceeded their quota and should be placed at the bottom of the list. The Court itself worked out a fresh, final seniority list of all 35 officers recruited in 2008, arranging them according to the roster points applicable to each recruitment category, and declared that list final. All parties were directed to bear their own costs.
When recruitment happens through multiple quota-based channels (promotion, limited exam, direct recruitment), seniority among the resulting appointees must be fixed using a pre-set roster/point system applicable at the time, not by applying quota caps after the fact to bump qualified officers down the list.
