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 moreA hotel owner in Madurai alleged that a neighbour, angered by a separate property dispute, vandalized his construction materials, damaged his hotel's glass showcase and door, and that associates trespassed and stole cash, also injuring his employees. He sued for damages and the trial court decreed the suit in his favour for over Rs. 18 lakhs. The High Court, on appeal, did not disturb the facts but set aside the decree solely on the ground that the Tamil Nadu Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act, 1992 impliedly excluded civil court jurisdiction over such claims since it prescribed its own compensation procedure.
The Supreme Court applied the well-established test from Dhulabhai v. State of Madhya Pradesh for when a civil court's jurisdiction can be treated as ousted by implication, and found that the 1992 Act's own Section 7(4) expressly contemplates a subsequent civil suit on the same matter (requiring courts to account for sums already paid as compensation), and its Section 14 "savings" clause states the Act is in addition to, not in derogation of, other laws. The Court held the Act's summary compensation procedure was only an additional, optional remedy, not a substitute for a full civil trial, so the jurisdiction of the civil court was not ousted either expressly or by implication. It allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's order, and sent the matter back to the High Court to decide the first appeal on its actual merits (since the High Court had only ruled on the maintainability question and never examined the merits of the damages claim).
A special law that creates its own compensation scheme does not automatically shut the door to an ordinary civil lawsuit for the same wrong: courts will only treat civil jurisdiction as excluded if the statute clearly makes its own remedy final and does not preserve other legal avenues.
