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 plaintiff (respondent) sued for specific performance of an agreement to sell a half-share in a shop, claiming he had paid most of the sale price in 2000 with the balance and registration due later. The defendant (appellant) denied any such agreement existed. The trial court dismissed the suit; the first appellate court, while accepting the agreement existed, still dismissed the suit on the ground that the plaintiff had failed to prove he was always ready and willing to perform his part of the contract. The High Court, in second appeal, reversed this and allowed the suit without framing any substantial question of law.
The Supreme Court held that the High Court had erred in overturning a pure finding of fact in second appeal without framing any substantial question of law and without giving cogent reasons. It reiterated settled law under Section 16(c) of the Specific Relief Act that a plaintiff seeking specific performance must plead and prove continuous readiness and willingness to perform the contract from the date of the agreement until the filing of the suit: merely sending a legal notice and filing suit shortly after the extended deadline does not establish this. Since the first appellate court's finding that the plaintiff had failed to prove such readiness and willingness was a sound factual finding based on evidence and law, the Supreme Court restored it. The appeal was allowed, the High Court's judgment was set aside, and the first appellate court's judgment was restored.
A person seeking specific performance of a contract to sell property must affirmatively plead and prove, with evidence, that they were continuously ready and willing to fulfil their own obligations throughout the life of the agreement: simply having an agreement and eventually suing is not enough.
