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 jewellery business had filed a consumer complaint (apparently relating to an insurance claim) before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC). The Presiding Member of the Commission dismissed the complaint in limine: that is, without even issuing notice to the insurance company or hearing the merits. The jewellery firm appealed directly to the Supreme Court under Section 23 of the Consumer Protection Act, arguing the dismissal was improper since the dispute deserved to be tried on merits.
The Supreme Court held that while a 2003 amendment to Section 13 of the Act does give the Commission jurisdiction to dismiss a complaint in limine without notice to the opposite party, that power must be exercised only in appropriate cases based on the specific facts, not routinely. On examining the complaint and the impugned order, the Court found this dispute did not warrant outright dismissal and instead deserved a reply from the insurer followed by adjudication on merits. The Court deliberately avoided discussing the underlying factual dispute in detail, to prevent prejudicing either side at the merits stage. It allowed the appeal, set aside the Commission's dismissal order, admitted the complaint, and directed the respondents to file their reply within one month so the Commission could decide the case on its merits.
A consumer forum's power to reject a complaint at the threshold, without even hearing the other side, is an exception, not the rule: courts can insist that bona fide consumer disputes get a fair hearing on the merits rather than being thrown out on a preliminary view alone.
