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 moreMahadeo, a bus driver for the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, was dismissed after a 1996 accident in which a lorry collided with his bus, killing two passengers. The Labour Court and a single judge of the Bombay High Court upheld his dismissal, finding the departmental inquiry fair. Years later, Mahadeo discovered that in separate compensation proceedings before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT), the Corporation itself had, on sworn affidavit, blamed the lorry driver entirely for the accident and been absolved of liability: a fact it never disclosed to the Labour Court. On review, the High Court set aside Mahadeo's dismissal and the Labour Court's award, granting him full back wages; the Corporation appealed to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court held the Corporation was guilty of "suggestio falsi" (making a false representation) and "suppressio veri" (suppressing the truth) by taking one position before the MACT (blaming the lorry driver entirely) while telling the Labour Court that Mahadeo was solely responsible: conduct the Court likened to fraud on the court and impermissible "approbating and reprobating." It upheld the High Court's exercise of review jurisdiction, holding the MACT written statement and award were highly relevant documents Mahadeo could not earlier have produced. On back wages, the Court applied the settled principle that full back wages is the normal rule for illegal/wrongful termination but modified the High Court's award of 100% back wages down to 75%, noting that Mahadeo admitted to some interim "badli" (substitute) daily-wage work of unspecified earnings.
An employer cannot take one factual position in one legal proceeding to avoid liability and a contradictory position in another to justify dismissing an employee. Courts treat such inconsistency as a fraud on the process, and it can cost the employer heavily in back wages and reinstatement benefits.
