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 moreHuawei Technologies had supplied equipment to Sterlite Technologies under a 2007 Supply Contract for an MTNL broadband network project and claimed about USD 13.39 million remained unpaid. When Sterlite did not respond to a legal notice, Huawei invoked the contract's arbitration clause and appointed a former High Court judge as sole arbitrator, but Sterlite objected to the appointment and the arbitrator recused himself. Huawei then went to the Supreme Court under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act asking the Court itself to appoint a new sole arbitrator.
The Court held that under Section 15(2) of the Act, when an arbitrator's mandate ends (here, by recusal), a substitute arbitrator must be appointed by following the same procedure that applied to the original appointment: in this case, the contract's requirement that the parties name an arbitrator "by mutual consent." Since Huawei had gone straight to the Supreme Court without first attempting to agree on a new arbitrator with Sterlite, the Court found the Section 11(6) application premature. It declined to appoint an arbitrator itself and disposed of the petition, leaving Huawei free to first seek a mutually-agreed arbitrator and only approach the Court again if that failed.
Before running to court for an arbitrator appointment, parties must first genuinely attempt to follow the agreed contractual procedure (such as appointment by mutual consent), skipping that step, even after an earlier arbitrator recuses, will get an application thrown out as premature.
