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 moreUnder the relevant sales tax/VAT laws, an assessee's first appeal against a tax assessment could be rejected by the Appellate Authority if the assessee failed to deposit the admitted tax due, or 12.5% of the disputed difference, before the appeal was taken up. The High Court had, following its own earlier ruling (Ankamma Trading Company), held that this deposit had to be made within the original limitation period for filing the appeal itself, and on that basis rejected appeals, including the appellant's, as suffering from an "institutional defect." The appellant and several similarly-placed assessees challenged this interpretation before the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court held that the statute does not require the proof of payment to accompany the appeal at the time of filing: it only needs to be produced before the Appellate Authority takes up the appeal for admission on merits (the "first date of hearing"). Since the Ankamma Trading Company view read a stricter timeline into the law than the text supported, the Supreme Court overruled that interpretation. Because the appellant and others in this group had deposited the required amount before their appeals were first taken up for consideration, their appeals succeeded: the High Court's judgments were set aside, the Appellate Authority's rejection orders were quashed, and their appeals were restored for consideration on merits. The Court also directed that Appellate Authorities must take up every appeal for admission within thirty days of filing, to prevent assessees who deposit late but within time from being unfairly blocked.
When a tax law requires proof of a pre-deposit "before" an appeal can be entertained, the deadline for producing that proof is the date the appeal is actually taken up for hearing, not the earlier deadline for filing the appeal itself; a taxpayer should not lose an appeal on a technicality if the law's wording does not clearly demand it.
