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 moreSeveral persons claimed ownership of land near Bangalore that had been acquired decades earlier by the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) for a road and layout project, and they sued the BDA to stop it from interfering with their possession. A trial court ruled in favour of the occupants, but on appeal the High Court held that the occupants of vacant land (demolished structures) had no claim, while upholding the claim of one occupant whose structure (a saw-mill) was still standing. Both sides appealed to the Supreme Court: the occupants on the vacant-land finding, and the BDA on the saw-mill finding.
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals of the occupants of the vacant land, holding that a person dispossessed from land before filing a suit cannot claim an injunction to protect "settled possession," since there is no possession left to protect once structures are demolished. On the BDA's appeal regarding the saw-mill, the Court held that merely proving possession is not enough to defeat the true owner's title: a claimant must separately prove all the ingredients of adverse possession (peaceful, open, continuous and hostile possession for the full 12-year statutory period), which the courts below had never actually examined. The Court therefore allowed the BDA's appeal, set aside the High Court's order upholding that occupant's suit, and dismissed that suit as well.
Being in physical possession of land is not, by itself, enough to defeat the government's title to acquired land: a person relying on adverse possession must specifically plead and prove when their possession began, how it continued, and that it was open and hostile to the true owner for the full statutory period. Possession of land already cleared of structures before a lawsuit is filed gives no right to an injunction.
