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 moreTwo first cousins from one family litigated over a small parcel of agricultural land in Karnataka, each side tracing their claim to an alleged 1935 oral family partition. The plaintiff (respondent here) sued for a declaration of title and an injunction; the defendants (appellants) admitted the family relationship and the 1935 partition but set up a 1940 Release Deed, certain revenue-record mutation entries, and a claim of adverse possession to justify their own continued possession. The trial court decreed in the plaintiff's favour, the first appellate court reversed, and the High Court's second appeal then restored the trial court's decree, leading to this further appeal to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, holding there was no legal infirmity in the High Court's restoration of the trial court's findings. It held that no adverse possession claim can succeed between members of the same family absent the requisite "animus" to possess hostilely, since the land was being held under family arrangements. The 1940 Release Deed was found (as a matter of fact, by lower courts) to relate to different property, and the revenue entries alone, without independent documentary title, could not establish ownership. The Court reiterated that it will not re-appreciate pure findings of fact under Article 136 and found the appellants had no case even on independent examination.
A family member cannot claim land by "adverse possession" against relatives while living under an acknowledged family partition: courts require clear hostile intent, not just long possession, and the Supreme Court will rarely disturb concurrent factual findings on appeal.
