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 moreTwo sisters sued for partition of their late father's ancestral agricultural land and family house, naming their brother and the persons who had leased/later bought portions of the land as defendants. The trial court and the District Judge both dismissed their partition suit, and the Madras High Court dismissed their second appeal at the admission stage itself, prompting this further appeal to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court held that under the Hindu Succession (Tamil Nadu Amendment) Act, 1989, only an unmarried daughter of a living coparcener at the time of the 1989 amendment could claim coparcenary rights by birth; since both sisters had already married before 1989, they were not coparceners and could not claim partition of the ancestral property as a matter of right. However, the Court found that the father's share in the joint family property had, in fact, already been partitioned between him and the brother during his lifetime, making the father's share his separate property. Applying the ordinary rules of succession under Sections 8-10 and 15-16 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the Court worked out that each sister was entitled to a 1/6th share (through inheritance from both parents), with the brother entitled to the remaining 2/3rd. The Court protected the earlier sales made by the brother to third parties, but ruled the sisters were entitled to be compensated in money or property equivalent to their legitimate share in the sold portions, with 9% annual interest from the date of sale. The appeal was thus partially allowed, with parties bearing their own costs.
Not every family property dispute turns on being declared a "coparcener", even where a specific right (like the 1989 Tamil Nadu daughters'-coparcenary amendment) does not apply due to marriage date, ordinary inheritance/succession law can still entitle daughters to a definite share of their parents' separate property.
