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 Tamil Nadu government acquired part of the appellant's land in 1993 to provide house sites for landless families, and the Land Acquisition Officer initially fixed compensation at a mere Rs. 400 per cent (a unit of area). On a reference, the Subordinate Court raised this to Rs. 2,500 per cent plus statutory benefits, but the Madras High Court later cut it down further to Rs. 1,670 per cent. The landowner appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing the land, situated between a national highway and a railway track, suitable for housing, was worth much more than what was allowed.
The Supreme Court held that the High Court had erred in reducing the compensation, and that the Subordinate Court's original assessment of Rs. 2,500 per cent was correctly reasoned. It found that the "data land" the Land Acquisition Officer relied on (sold at Rs. 400 per cent) was not comparable because a railway track separated it from the acquired land, whereas nearby sale deeds for land adjacent to the acquired plots showed market values of roughly Rs. 4,900 per cent, supporting a higher valuation given the land's proximity to the highway and its potential for housing use. The Court restored the Subordinate Court's compensation order, allowing the landowner's appeal and dismissing the Tahsildar's cross-appeal, with no order as to costs.
When fixing compensation for acquired land, courts must compare it to genuinely similar neighbouring land (location, access, development potential) rather than an unrelated "data" sale that doesn't share the same characteristics, using a poorly comparable sale to lowball compensation will not survive appellate scrutiny.
