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 moreKamla Nehru Memorial Trust (KNMT), a charitable trust, was allotted 125 acres of industrial land in Uttar Pradesh in 2003 for floriculture, but over the following years repeatedly defaulted on payments, sought waivers of interest, and delayed submitting documents needed to execute the lease deed, despite the land authority (UPSIDC) rescheduling its dues. UPSIDC eventually cancelled the allotment in 2007 after issuing multiple notices, sparking roughly fifteen years of litigation, including an earlier round before the Supreme Court that sent the matter back to the High Court, which ultimately upheld the cancellation.
The Supreme Court rejected KNMT's claims that UPSIDC had frustrated the contract by not demarcating the land or handing over possession, finding these excuses were an afterthought since the land had in fact been demarcated to KNMT's own written satisfaction and possession was contractually conditional on executing the lease deed first. The Court held UPSIDC's several notices satisfied the "three consecutive legal notices" procedure for defaulters and that KNMT was a chronic defaulter, so the cancellation was valid. Separately invoking the Public Trust Doctrine, the Court also criticized UPSIDC's own conduct, the original allotment had been made within two months without a competitive process, declared a parallel allotment made to a third party during the dispute void, and directed that all future allotments follow a transparent, non-discriminatory process.
Persistent failure to pay dues or complete formalities can validly cost an allottee their rights to public land, but public authorities are also expected to allocate public resources through transparent, competitive processes. Courts can address both sides of the same dispute under the Public Trust Doctrine.
