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 moreNALCO (a government enterprise) floated a tender for construction work in Odisha, which Subhash Infra Engineers (SIE) initially won, but a dispute arose over whether a binding contract had actually come into existence after SIE sought changes to the specifications and later refused to proceed. When NALCO invoked arbitration and appointed its own former Chairman as the sole arbitrator, SIE went to a civil court instead, seeking a declaration that the appointment was void and an injunction stopping the arbitration. The trial court refused an interim injunction, but the District Court (on appeal) and then the Punjab & Haryana High Court granted SIE an injunction halting the arbitration, prompting NALCO to appeal to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court held that any objection to the existence or validity of an arbitration agreement must be raised before the arbitrator under Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, not through a civil suit for declaration and injunction, relying on its earlier ruling in Kvaerner Cementation India Ltd. v. Bajranglal Agarwal. It therefore set aside the orders of the District Judge and the High Court that had granted the injunction. However, since NALCO's own former Chairman-cum-Managing Director had been appointed as arbitrator, the Court held that under the Fifth Schedule to the Act (introduced by the 2016 amendment) he could not continue as arbitrator, and, with both parties' consent, appointed a retired High Court judge, Justice M.L. Mehta, as the new arbitrator to decide the dispute.
If a contract contains an arbitration clause, disputes over whether that clause/contract is even valid must first be raised before the arbitrator (under Section 16), not by filing a separate civil suit; separately, a company cannot validly appoint its own senior executive as a "neutral" arbitrator in a dispute involving itself, since post-2016 amendments disqualify arbitrators with such a conflict of interest.
