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 appellant-company, a Mumbai-based shipping business, served retrenchment notices on about 98 workmen in 1992, citing accumulating losses and a need to rationalise its activities. The workmen's union challenged the retrenchment before the Industrial Court, alleging several statutory violations, including defective notice, failure to display a seniority list, and non-compliance with provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act requiring prior notice of changes affecting workers. The Industrial Court and, later, the Bombay High Court's Division Bench both ruled against the company. The company then appealed to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court held that the company had failed to prove that a seniority list was properly displayed as required by Rule 81 of the Industrial Disputes (Bombay) Rules, 1957, and found other statutory non-compliances as well. The Court rejected the company's argument for "moulding of relief" at this late stage, noting the workmen had already litigated for 23 years and should not be penalised for the company's own delay tactics. Relying on precedent holding that termination in breach of mandatory statutory safeguards is void ab initio, the Court upheld the workmen's entitlement to reinstatement and full back wages with consequential benefits.
Employers must strictly follow statutory procedures (such as displaying seniority lists and giving proper notice) before retrenching workers; failure to do so can render the termination void, entitling employees to reinstatement and back wages even after decades of litigation.
