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 large shop/"gala" (No. F-158) in Mumbai's wholesale fruit and vegetable market became vacant after an earlier Supreme Court ruling, and five traders competed for it under norms framed by a court-appointed committee (the Daud Committee) decades earlier. The market committee (APMC) eventually allotted it by lottery to the appellant trader at a steeply discounted price, but a rival claimant challenged this before the Bombay High Court, which instead awarded the gala to a different claimant (Habibullah) based on a separate administrative order allowing him to use his father's earlier booking payment.
The Supreme Court held that Habibullah was not eligible because he had neither booked the gala himself before the cut-off date nor paid any booking amount in his own name: the norms did not permit transferring one person's booking credit to another, so the High Court erred in relying on an administrative order that ignored this. It also held that a partnership firm cannot claim eligibility based on its individual partners' personal payments and licences. Finding that the gala, valued at roughly double what the original lottery price assumed, should fetch the best return for the public market committee, the Court set aside the lottery-based allotment altogether and directed APMC to invite sealed-tender bids from the four genuinely eligible claimants, with the gala going to the highest bidder at a fixed upset price of Rs. 55 lakhs.
Eligibility rules set by courts or committees for public allotments must be followed strictly: a right to a public resource built on borrowed or transferred credentials (like someone else's payment record) generally will not hold up, and courts can order a transparent bidding process instead of an under-valued allotment to protect public revenue.
