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 petitioner company had entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the respondent university to provide web-enabling services, with a clause requiring any disputes to go to arbitration at Aurangabad. When the university kept a purchase order in abeyance, the petitioner approached the Bombay High Court (Aurangabad bench) instead of arbitration, seeking payment. The High Court dismissed the writ petition because the MoU's arbitration clause had to be given effect to, and the petitioner then appealed to the Supreme Court.
During the hearing, the petitioner's counsel agreed to refer the dispute to arbitration as per the MoU, and both parties jointly requested the appointment of a named retired Bombay High Court judge as the Sole Arbitrator. The Supreme Court appointed that retired judge as Sole Arbitrator, subject to the usual independence/impartiality declarations under Section 12 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, fixed Aurangabad as the seat of arbitration (as per the MoU), and directed the arbitration to be completed within 12 months with fees as per the Fourth Schedule of the Act.
When a contract contains a valid arbitration clause, courts will generally insist that disputes go through arbitration rather than ordinary litigation, and once parties agree in court to arbitrate, the court will simply facilitate (e.g., appoint the arbitrator) rather than decide the underlying dispute itself.
