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 company was permitted by the Meerut Development Authority to develop a residential colony ("Global City," Abdullahpur, Meerut). To secure its obligations for the development, the company executed a "Security Bond cum Mortgage Deed" in favour of the Authority. The stamp authorities treated this instrument as a mortgage deed and demanded deficient stamp duty (about Rs. 4.6 lakh) under Article 40(b) of Schedule 1-B of the Indian Stamp Act, along with penalty and interest, instead of accepting the lower duty applicable to a mere security bond under Article 57. This order was upheld by the Allahabad High Court, leading to the appeal. A connected appeal involved a similarly-worded deed executed by one Naveen Mittal, a company director, to secure a business loan.
The Supreme Court held that the label given to a document ("Security Bond or Mortgage Deed") is not what determines its stamp duty treatment: what matters is the actual substance and legal effect of its clauses. Examining the operative provisions, the Court found that both instruments genuinely conferred a right over specified property to secure repayment of an obligation, satisfying the statutory definition of a "mortgage" under Section 2(17) of the Indian Stamp Act. It further clarified that the lower-duty treatment under the second limb of Article 57 is meant only for instruments executed by a surety guaranteeing someone else's obligation, not for a person (or a company director acting on the company's behalf) securing their own/the company's own debt as the principal debtor. Since no distinct surety existed apart from the principal debtor in either case, both instruments were mortgages attracting the higher duty under Article 40, and the High Court's rulings were upheld. Both appeals were dismissed.
The name given to a legal document does not control how it is taxed or treated in law. Courts look at what the document actually does; a deed that pledges your own property to secure your own debt will be treated as a mortgage (with higher stamp duty) even if it is titled a "security bond," unless it is genuinely executed by a third-party guarantor for someone else's obligation.
