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 moreUnited Spirits, a licensed manufacturer of beer and Indian Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL) in Madhya Pradesh, supplied its products to state government-run warehouses, which in turn sold the liquor to licensed retailers. The company argued that since the actual sale transaction occurred between the government warehouse and the retailer (not between the company and the warehouse), it should not be liable to pay entry tax on the goods entering the local area. The Madhya Pradesh High Court rejected this argument, holding the company liable, and the company appealed to the Supreme Court.
The Court held that under the M.P. Entry Tax Act, what matters is who "occasioned" the entry of goods into the local area for consumption, use or sale, and it was the appellant's sale of liquor to the government warehouse that caused that entry to happen, regardless of whether the warehouse was itself also technically a "dealer." The Court also rejected the argument that no tax could be levied without a notification under Section 3B, holding that Section 3B is merely an enabling/machinery provision and, in its absence, the State could still assess and collect entry tax under the general procedure in Section 14. Finding no legal infirmity in the High Court's reasoning, the Supreme Court dismissed both appeals and upheld the entry tax liability.
Under entry-tax law, liability attaches to whoever's sale is the immediate cause of goods entering a taxable local area: a manufacturer cannot escape entry tax merely by routing goods through an intermediary warehouse before the final retail sale, and the absence of a specific machinery notification does not by itself bar the tax authority from collecting tax through the general assessment procedure.
