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, a tempo driver earning about Rs. 4,500/month, suffered severe compound fractures to his right arm in a road accident caused by a rashly driven tractor, leaving him permanently unable to drive for a living. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal assessed his disability at only 30% and his income at Rs. 3,000/month, awarding Rs. 4,38,000 as against his claim of Rs. 8,80,000. The Madhya Pradesh High Court partially enhanced this (raising disability to 55% and income to Rs. 4,000/month), but the appellant, whose counsel repeatedly failed to appear, leading the Supreme Court to appoint an amicus curiae, pursued a further appeal seeking adequate compensation.
The Supreme Court held that because the appellant's only livelihood was as a driver and medical evidence showed his hand was permanently crushed and deformed, his loss of earning capacity should be treated as 100%, relying on its own precedent (Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar) that a driver's permanent hand disablement effectively ends his earning capacity in that trade, regardless of the medically assessed percentage (55%) of bodily disability. Recalculating on an annual income of Rs. 54,000 with the appropriate multiplier, and adding sums for pain and suffering, medical expenses (past and future), loss of amenities, attendant and transport costs, and litigation costs, the Court raised the total compensation to Rs. 17,60,500 with 9% annual interest from the date of filing, to be paid within four weeks, and directed a fee for the amicus curiae.
In compensation claims for permanently disabling injuries, courts look beyond the raw medical disability percentage to the claimant's actual occupation: a disability that ends a person's ability to work in their specific trade (such as driving) can justify treating the loss of earning capacity as 100%, even if the medical disability rating is lower.
