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 appellant builder launched a residential project ("Hicons Onyx," later renamed "Fortune Residency") in Mumbai in 2011 and sold a flat to the respondents for about Rs. 1.93 crore, of which Rs. 1.87 crore was paid. The builder later transferred the project to another company without delivering the flat, prompting the buyers to approach the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC), which found deficiency of service and ordered a refund plus roughly Rs. 3.65 crore in compensation calculated at a high market rate.
The Supreme Court agreed that the builder was guilty of deficiency of service: it had no valid justification for transferring the project and failing to deliver the flat within a reasonable time (taken here as about three years), and a buyer cannot be made to wait indefinitely. However, the Court found the NCDRC's compensation calculation excessive because it relied too heavily on a few high-value sale deeds for a re-developed property, where market rates tend to run lower than fresh "green-field" projects. The Court fixed a more moderate reference rate (Rs. 50,000 per sq. ft. instead of Rs. 65,000), reducing the compensation while upholding the refund, a separate payment for the parking space, and litigation costs, with interest if not paid within six weeks. The appeals were allowed only in part.
A builder who fails to deliver a flat without good reason is liable to refund the money and pay compensation for the delay, but compensation in such cases must be grounded in a fair, representative assessment of market value, not simply the highest comparable sale price available, so damages remain compensatory rather than a windfall.
