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 moreA German company (the appellant) and an Indian company (the respondent) entered into a Share Purchase and Co-operation Agreement in 1995 to establish a joint venture. A dispute arose, and the German company obtained a summary judgment/decree against the Indian company from the English High Court (Queen's Bench Division). When the German company tried to enforce this foreign judgment in India, the Delhi High Court refused enforcement, holding it did not meet the standards required under Indian law. The German company appealed this refusal to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court examined whether the English judgment satisfied Section 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which lays down when a foreign judgment can be treated as conclusive and enforceable in India. It held that because the English Court had proceeded by way of summary judgment, dismissing the Indian company's application for leave to defend despite genuine triable issues, the judgment was not "given on the merits" and denied the respondent a fair trial, making it unenforceable under Section 13(b), (c), (d) and (f) CPC. The Court also separately clarified (though it did not change the outcome) that under Section 47 of the now-repealed Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, courts are free to adjudicate liability on a foreign judgment, but actually enforcing/executing the decree requires prior RBI/Central Government permission. The Court upheld the Delhi High Court's refusal to enforce the judgment and dismissed the appeal, with no order as to costs.
A foreign court judgment is not automatically enforceable in India. It must meet the fairness and merits-based standards of Section 13 CPC, and a summary judgment that denies a party a genuine opportunity to defend itself can fail that test even if the foreign court had valid jurisdiction.
