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 Gujarat Maritime Board invited tenders in 2017 for 8 of the 20 vacant ship-recycling plots at the Alang-Sosiya yard, reserving some for Scheduled Caste (SC) and Scheduled Tribe (ST) applicants under the Gujarat Maritime Board's 2015 Ship Recycling Regulations. An SC/ST shipbreakers' association challenged this before the Gujarat High Court, arguing the 7% SC and 14% ST reservation should be calculated against the total number of plots (not just those being auctioned), which would mean all 8 (or even all 20) plots had to go to SC/ST candidates; the High Court agreed and quashed the tender. A plot-licensee who had not been a party before the High Court (and wished to amalgamate his plot with a neighbouring one) was given special leave to challenge this interpretation before the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court examined the historical evolution of the regulations: the 1994 Regulations reserved plots only from specific categories (not the total), the 2006 Regulations expressly added the words "out of total plots," but the 2015 Regulations (relevant here) dropped that phrase entirely and instead linked the reservation clause (5.4) directly to the plots being made available for auction under clauses 5.1 and 5.2. Reading clause 5.4 in that context, the Court held the reservation of 7% (SC) and 14% (ST) applies only to the plots actually being auctioned at a given time, not to the total universe of plots in the yard, and that the High Court's reliance on the general definition of "plot" ignored this contextual limitation. It therefore set aside the High Court's judgment, while clarifying that since no general-category candidate had challenged the reservation already made for the 8 plots in question, that specific allocation would stand undisturbed, with all future tenders to follow the Court's interpretation going forward.
When a government regulation changes its wording across successive versions (here, dropping the phrase "out of total plots"), courts will interpret the current text in its own context rather than importing meaning from an earlier, differently worded version: precise statutory/regulatory language matters significantly in reservation and quota disputes.
