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 moreAs part of an industrial incentive scheme for Sikkim, the Central Government in 2003 exempted manufacturers from basic excise duty and certain named additional duties for ten years. The appellant, a manufacturer of "Indian Mouth Freshener" (pan masala) in Sikkim, argued that this exemption should also extend to National Calamity Contingent Duty (NCCD) and education cess, surcharges introduced by later Finance Acts in 2001, 2004 and 2007, even though the 2003 notification never mentioned them. When the tax authorities demanded repayment of these cesses, the company's writ petitions were dismissed by the High Court, leading to this appeal.
The Supreme Court held that an exemption notification must be strictly construed according to its actual wording, and since NCCD and the education cesses did not even exist when the 2003 notification was issued, the government could not be presumed to have intended to exempt duties it did not yet know would be created. Importantly, the Court found that two of its own earlier two-judge decisions (SRD Nutrients and Bajaj Auto), which had held such cesses were automatically covered once the base excise duty was exempted, were decided "per incuriam" because they failed to consider a binding three-judge bench precedent (Union of India v. Modi Rubber Limited) directly on point, and a smaller or coordinate bench cannot depart from that binding precedent. Following Modi Rubber, the Court dismissed the appeals and upheld the High Court's judgment.
Tax exemption notifications are read strictly and narrowly: a company cannot assume that relief granted for one named duty automatically extends to a different duty or cess created later by separate legislation, unless the exemption notification is itself amended to say so.
