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 moreIn 1965-66, the original plaintiffs had agreed to buy about 50 acres of agricultural land and paid Rs. 6,000 toward a sale price of Rs. 22,951, but the sale was never completed. Decades later they sued for specific performance (that is, to compel the sale to actually go through). The Trial Court and the first appellate court refused specific performance but awarded money instead; the Bombay High Court, on second appeal in 2007, reversed this and ordered specific performance at an enhanced price, even though by then subsequent purchasers had been in possession of the land for about 40 years. The original defendants (and purchasers) appealed to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court held that, given the very long passage of time, the fact that subsequent purchasers had remained in effective possession for about 40 years, the land's sharply increased present value, and that the plaintiffs themselves had always pleaded alternative relief of compensation, ordering actual transfer of the land (specific performance) was no longer appropriate. Instead, applying its discretion under the Specific Relief Act, the Court set aside the High Court's decree of specific performance and substituted it with a lump-sum monetary award of Rs. 15,00,000 to the surviving plaintiff, payable within two months (with 6% interest thereafter), in full satisfaction of all claims relating to the land. The appeal was thus partly allowed: the principle of breach was not disturbed, but the remedy was changed from transfer of land to compensation.
Courts have discretion to award monetary compensation instead of ordering an actual property transfer under specific performance, especially where decades have passed, the land's value has drastically changed, and third parties have been in long, settled possession: specific performance is an equitable remedy, not an automatic entitlement.
