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 respondent had financed and hypothecated a car through the appellant finance company, and later filed a civil suit seeking an injunction to stop the financier from forcibly repossessing the vehicle. The loan agreement between the parties contained an arbitration clause, so the financier applied under Section 8 of the Arbitration Act asking the civil court to refer the dispute to arbitration instead of trying it itself. Both the trial court and the Kerala High Court refused, reasoning that the plaintiff's allegations of illegal/public-policy-violating conduct by the financier meant the civil court's jurisdiction was not ousted by the arbitration clause.
The Supreme Court held that once a party files a proper application under Section 8 of the Arbitration Act before filing its first statement on the substance of the dispute, the civil court is bound to refer the parties to arbitration: the language of Section 8 is mandatory, not discretionary, as settled in earlier rulings (P. Anand Gajapathi Raju, Hindustan Petroleum Corporation, Sukanya Holdings). The Court rejected the lower courts' approach of carving out an exception based on alleged "public policy" violations, holding that courts cannot bifurcate a dispute between arbitration and civil adjudication. It set aside both the trial court's and High Court's orders and directed the trial court to pass a fresh order on the Section 8 application within two months, consistent with this ruling.
If a contract contains a valid arbitration clause, a court generally cannot refuse to refer parties to arbitration merely because one side characterizes the dispute as involving "illegal" or "public policy" conduct: an application under Section 8 filed in time is mandatory for the court to act upon.
