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 moreThis Special Leave Petition (No. 15059/2011) concerned a dispute over whether the Central Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is excluded by a State-level works-contract arbitration tribunal law (comparable to the Gujarat Public Works Contracts Disputes Arbitration Tribunal Act, 1992). It was heard together with two other matters, the Lion Engineering Consultants appeal and a State of Bihar arbitration appeal, and decided by one order.
The Court noted that the question of whether a State arbitration tribunal law displaces the Central Arbitration Act in respect of works contracts had already been decided by it a few weeks earlier (vide order dated 8.03.2018 in Civil Appeal No. 974/2012, Madhya Pradesh Rural Road Development Authority vs. M/s L.G. Chaudhary Engineers and Contractors) in relation to the materially similar Madhya Pradesh Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983. Finding the provisions of the Gujarat Public Works Contracts Disputes Arbitration Tribunal Act, 1992 to be in pari materia with the M.P. law already considered, the Court applied the same reasoning to this case. On that basis, the Court dismissed MMC Projects' Special Leave Petition, finding no reason to depart from its recent, directly applicable precedent.
When the Supreme Court has recently settled a legal question under a State law that is materially identical to the one at issue in a new case, it will apply the same reasoning and dispose of the new matter in line with its earlier ruling, rather than re-litigating the same point from scratch.
