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 are the sons and legal heirs of a deceased lessee who had taken godown/building space totalling 15,500 sq. ft. on lease from the respondent, M/s Krishna Mills Pvt. Ltd., in Coimbatore. A dispute arose over the actual monthly rent (the landlord claimed Rs. 48,000, the lessee claimed Rs. 33,000), and the Rent Controller fixed a much higher "fair rent" of Rs. 2,43,600 per month. The lessee appealed that fair-rent order but never sought a stay of it, and meanwhile the landlord filed for eviction on the ground of wilful default in paying the fixed fair rent. The Rent Control Appellate Authority ordered eviction, which the Madras High Court upheld in its revisional jurisdiction, prompting the heirs' appeal to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court held that because the lessee/appellants had challenged the fair-rent order in appeal but never obtained a stay of it, that order remained operative and binding on them, obliging them to pay rent at the fixed higher rate: merely having a pending appeal does not excuse non-payment when no stay has been secured. The Court rejected the argument that the finality of the fair-rent determination could be used as a shield while simultaneously withholding payments due under it. It agreed with the High Court that the instances of default were established and that the High Court, exercising limited revisional jurisdiction, had correctly declined to re-examine the concurrent factual findings of default. The appeal was dismissed and the eviction order upheld, though the appellants were given six months to vacate on filing the usual undertakings, failing which the landlord could pursue execution.
Filing an appeal against a rent-fixation or similar order does not by itself suspend the obligation to comply with it: a tenant (or their heirs) who wants relief from an order pending appeal must actually apply for and obtain a stay; otherwise, continued non-payment at the order's rate can be treated as wilful default justifying eviction.
