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 motorcycle carrying two riders collided with a car owned by Compaq International, insured by Bajaj Allianz and driven by Nirmal Singh; both motorcyclists were injured and were awarded compensation (reduced by 50% for contributory negligence) with the owner, driver, and insurer held jointly liable. The insurance company contested its liability, arguing that the driver's licence, based on an entry in a dispatch register, had expired in 2003, three years before the 2005 accident, and the Punjab & Haryana High Court agreed, allowing the insurer to recover the paid amount from the owner and driver instead.
The Supreme Court reversed the High Court, holding that the driving licence itself (not a disputed register entry) recorded a validity date of 29.04.2011, which was fully consistent with Section 14(2)(b) of the Motor Vehicles Act: under that provision, since the driver was born on 30.04.1961, his original licence remained valid until he turned 50 (i.e., until 29.04.2011), making the register entry relied on by the insurer erroneous rather than the licence. Because the licence was valid on the date of the accident, the insurer could not disown its liability, and since the compensation had already been paid to the injured persons, the direction allowing the insurer to recover that amount from the owner and driver was set aside. The Court allowed the appeal, leaving the parties to bear their own costs; a connected consumer-complaint appeal (No. 2540/2018) involving the same licence dispute was separately remitted to the State Consumer Commission in light of this finding.
When there's a conflict between an official document itself (here, the driving licence) and a clerk's register entry about it, courts will look at the governing statutory formula (here, the licence-validity rule tied to the holder's age) to determine the true facts, and insurers cannot escape liability in a motor accident claim based on a disputed or mistaken record if the actual licence was valid on the date of the accident.
