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 petitioner, a judge of the Karnataka Judicial Service who was later elevated to the High Court and transferred to the Gauhati High Court, was appointed Acting Chief Justice of the Gauhati High Court and served in that capacity for about 14 months before retiring. While serving as Acting Chief Justice he drew the salary of a Chief Justice, and on retirement he claimed that his pension should also be computed and capped at the higher level applicable to a regularly appointed Chief Justice, not merely a puisne judge. The government disagreed, leading him to approach the Supreme Court directly under Article 32.
The Court held that an Acting Chief Justice appointed under Article 223 of the Constitution is legally distinct from a Chief Justice appointed under Article 217: the higher salary during the acting tenure is a limited, purpose-specific equivalence and does not extend to pension entitlement generally. However, reading Rules 2 and 7 of Part I of the First Schedule of the High Court Judges (Salaries and Conditions of Service) Act, 1954 together, the period actually served as Acting Chief Justice must be counted and computed as Chief Justice service for pension purposes, but only for that specific 14-month period, not for the petitioner's entire career or with the full pension ceiling applicable to a retired Chief Justice. On this basis the Court dismissed the petition, holding the petitioner was not entitled to the broader relief and declaration he sought.
Holding an "acting" constitutional post carries only those specific legal entitlements the statute expressly grants for that purpose (here, salary during the term and pension credit for that period): it does not automatically confer all benefits of the substantive office for every purpose, such as a higher overall pension ceiling.
