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 a public interest litigation before the Delhi High Court alleging lack of transparency in the Archery Association of India (AAI), the High Court had appointed an Administrator-cum-Returning Officer to oversee AAI's constitutional amendments and conduct fresh elections. Maharashtra Archery Association, AAI itself, and Kerala State Archery Association separately appealed to the Supreme Court, challenging the scope of the Administrator's powers and the validity of elections and constitutional amendments carried out under his supervision.
The Supreme Court held that the Administrator could only give effect to the four specific constitutional amendments approved by the Court's earlier order of 4th December 2017, and that any further amendments he made on his own, along with the elections conducted on that unauthorised basis (including the December 2018 elections), were null, void, and non est in law. The Court relegated all parties to the position as it stood after the four approved amendments, dissolved the Administrator's role (with appreciation for his service), and directed that the then-elected body continue only as a routine Committee of Administrators, barred from policy decisions or new financial commitments, until fresh elections were held within four weeks strictly under the Court-approved constitution. It left broader questions about full compliance with the National Sports Code to be decided by the Delhi High Court in the still-pending writ petition.
A court-appointed administrator's mandate is strictly limited to what the appointing order actually authorises: any amendments or elections carried out beyond that specific mandate can be struck down as void, even after the fact, underscoring that administrators of associations/societies must operate within the precise bounds of their court-given authority.
