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 moreMaya Appliances, a home-appliance manufacturer, gave its distributors a quarterly "quantity discount" based on their sales performance in the previous quarter, and excluded this discount from its taxable turnover under the Karnataka VAT Act. Tax authorities disallowed the deduction, arguing Rule 3(2)(c) of the VAT Rules required the discount to be shown in the very tax invoice for the sale it related to, and since this was a later, performance-based discount, it did not qualify. The Karnataka High Court sided with the tax department, prompting the appeal to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court relied on its own recent two-judge decision in Southern Motors v. State of Karnataka (one of the same judges, the then-Chief Justice, had sat on that bench too), which had already read down Rule 3(2)(c) to allow discounts proven through contemporaneous business records even if quantified and granted after the original invoice. The Court held that requiring the discount to appear on the original sale invoice itself would make genuine trade discounts, which are often only quantifiable after a review period, practically impossible to claim, defeating the purpose of taxing only the net turnover actually received. It therefore set aside the High Court's judgment and directed that the appellant be allowed to deduct the trade discount in computing its taxable turnover for the relevant years, following the Southern Motors parameters.
Tax deductions for genuine trade discounts cannot be denied merely because the discount amount is determined and documented after the original sale invoice: what matters is that the discount is backed by a regular trade practice or agreement and is clearly reflected in the business's accounts.
