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, then aged 27 (later assessed as 24 at the relevant date), suffered grievous injuries in 2009 when a Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation bus, driven rashly and negligently, hit him. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded him about Rs.2.60 lakh in compensation, and on his appeal the Karnataka High Court raised this only slightly, to about Rs.3.05 lakh. The respondent-corporation did not appear at all before the Supreme Court despite valid notice.
The Supreme Court found that both the Tribunal and the High Court had used the wrong multiplier (18, not the one they applied) for calculating loss of future earnings given the appellant's age, and had also failed to add the mandatory 40% "future prospects" enhancement required by the Court's precedent in National Insurance Co. v. Pranay Sethi. Recalculating on this basis, the Court raised the compensation to about Rs.3.84 lakh: an increase of Rs.78,720 with 6% interest from the date of filing, and separately imposed a Rs.50,000 cost on the corporation for failing to appear and contest the case.
Motor accident compensation must be calculated using the age-appropriate multiplier and must include the standard "future prospects" addition laid down in Pranay Sethi; claimants (or their counsel) should check these standard components were correctly applied even after a first round of appeal.
