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 moreUdayanath Sahoo died after the motorcycle he was riding was hit from behind by a truck insured with the appellant, ICICI Lombard, causing him to crash into a roadside tree. His legal heirs claimed compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, and the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal awarded them Rs. 6,77,164 with 7% interest, holding the truck driver's rash and negligent driving responsible based on the FIR, the police final report (which held the truck driver guilty), and eyewitness testimony. The High Court of Orissa dismissed the insurer's appeal, and ICICI Lombard approached the Supreme Court, alleging the chargesheet had been fraudulently prepared by the claimants in connivance with the police.
The Supreme Court reaffirmed settled principles that in motor accident claims, negligence must be proved on the touchstone of "preponderance of probability," not the criminal standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt, and that a duly filed police chargesheet/final report is legitimate and admissible evidence for this purpose, relying on its own earlier decisions in Mangla Ram v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. and Mathew Alexander v. Mohammed Shafi. Since both the Tribunal and the High Court had concurrently relied on the FIR, final report, and oral evidence to find the truck driver at fault, and the insurer's bare allegation of police-claimant collusion was never actually proved, the Court found no perversity warranting interference and dismissed the appeal, upholding the compensation award.
In motor accident compensation cases, courts do not apply a strict "beyond reasonable doubt" standard: the police chargesheet and final investigation report can be relied upon to establish negligence on a balance of probabilities, and an insurer alleging fraud or collusion must actually prove it, not merely assert it.
