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 appellant worked as a daily-wager with the Water Resources Department of Chhattisgarh from 1986, and his service was later regularised to the post of Pump Operator in 2008, with retirement following in 2011, giving him over 25 years of actual service. When he sought gratuity for this entire period, the State resisted, and while the Controlling and Appellate Authorities under the Payment of Gratuity Act ruled in his favour, the Chhattisgarh High Court (both Single Judge and Division Bench) reversed this, holding his pre-regularisation years as a daily wager could not count toward continuous service.
The Supreme Court held that once the State itself had regularised the appellant's services, he was entitled to count his entire period of service, including the 22 years spent as a daily wager, for the purpose of computing "continuous service" of five years under Section 2-A of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. The Court found the High Court had wrongly relied on the Umadevi judgment, which does not apply where services have actually been regularised. It restored the orders of the Controlling and Appellate Authorities, directed the State to pay the gratuity within three months, and awarded Rs. 25,000/- in costs against the State for forcing a genuine claimant into prolonged litigation.
Once an employer regularises a worker's job, the years spent working informally before regularisation still count toward the years of continuous service needed to claim statutory benefits like gratuity: employers, especially government departments, cannot use technicalities to deny benefits earned through long years of actual work.
