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 appellants were private respondents (Nos. 8 to 80) in a writ petition before the Punjab & Haryana High Court concerning alleged unauthorised encroachment by them on Gram Panchayat land in Sonipat. The High Court disposed of that writ petition with mandatory directions, including a direction to the Deputy Commissioner to conduct a fact-finding inquiry and restore the land with police help, without issuing notice to or hearing the appellants, even though they were named respondents. The appellants' review petition against that order was also dismissed, prompting this appeal to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court held that the High Court's order could not stand because it was passed against the appellants without giving them any opportunity to be heard, violating the basic principle of natural justice that no order can be passed against a party to proceedings without hearing them. The Court expressly declined to examine the merits of the underlying encroachment dispute, noting it had not set out the factual contentions of either side. It allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's order, and restored the writ petition to its original number before the High Court, directing that it be decided afresh after hearing all parties, and, given the land dispute's scale, within six months without allowing adjournments.
A court order that affects a named party to a case is not valid if that party was never given a chance to be heard, regardless of how pressing the underlying issue (such as an encroachment or land dispute) may seem; natural justice requires notice and a hearing before adverse directions are issued against anyone named as a respondent.
