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 moreAfter the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) admitted an insolvency application against Ambro Asia Private Limited filed by its operational creditor, Unox S.P.A., a suspended director of the company (the appellant) tried to appeal that admission order, but he filed the appeal in the name of the company itself, even though once insolvency proceedings begin, only the court-appointed interim resolution professional can represent the company, not a suspended director. The appellate tribunal (NCLAT) noticed this defect but, instead of rejecting the appeal, allowed the director to amend it later to substitute himself as the appellant, well after the legal deadline for filing such an appeal had passed.
The Supreme Court held that this was not a minor, curable defect but a "wholly incompetent" appeal from the start, since the suspended director had no legal standing to file it in the company's name once the interim resolution professional had taken over. Allowing the appeal to be converted to one filed by the director personally, after the statutory limitation period had already expired, effectively created a fresh appeal outside the time limit set by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, something the law does not permit. The Court distinguished this from precedents about fixing genuine clerical or procedural errors in pleadings, holding that a fundamentally unauthorized appeal cannot be salvaged that way. It also held that strict statutory time limits under the Code must be respected even if no one had challenged the NCLAT's earlier orders permitting the amendment. The appeal was dismissed without going into the merits of the underlying insolvency dispute.
Under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, once a company enters insolvency resolution, only the appointed resolution professional (not a suspended director or the company itself) can pursue legal proceedings on the company's behalf, and strict statutory limitation periods for appeals cannot be bypassed by later amending a fundamentally unauthorized filing.
