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 moreIn 2016, Jitendra, a 25-year-old labourer, was extracting soybean from a thresher machine attached to a tractor when the tractor's driver reversed it rashly, causing Jitendra's hand to be caught in the machine. He suffered severe injuries and had his hand amputated below the elbow. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded him roughly Rs. 3.76 lakh in compensation, treating his disability as 20% and his income at a low notional figure; the High Court raised this to about Rs. 6.61 lakh, using a 40% disability figure. Still dissatisfied, Jitendra appealed to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court held that both the Tribunal and High Court had underestimated Jitendra's loss on two counts. First, relying on precedent, it held that his income should be calculated using the locally applicable minimum wage for unskilled workers (Rs. 6,850/month) rather than a lower, arbitrary figure, since there was no direct evidence of his actual earnings. Second, it held that his "functional" disability, the real-world impact of losing a hand on his ability to work as a labourer, was far more severe than the 40% anatomical disability found below, and raised it to 80%. Recalculating compensation using established precedents for each head (future prospects, medical expenses, pain and suffering, and so on), the Court raised the total award from Rs. 6.61 lakh to approximately Rs. 20.55 lakh.
In disability compensation cases, courts must look beyond the bare medical/anatomical disability percentage and assess how the injury actually affects the victim's real-world capacity to earn a living in their specific occupation, and can use official minimum wage notifications as a fair benchmark for income when no other evidence exists.
