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 moreNovenco, a Danish manufacturer of industrial fans, had a dealership agreement with Xero Energy for marketing its patented "Novenco ZerAx" fans in India. Novenco alleged that Xero Energy's director secretly floated a new company, Aeronaut Fans, which manufactured and sold nearly identical fans infringing Novenco's patents and designs. After investigating and confirming the infringement through a technical expert, Novenco filed a commercial suit seeking an injunction, but sought exemption from the mandatory pre-institution mediation required by Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act on grounds of urgency. Both the Single Judge and Division Bench of the Himachal Pradesh High Court rejected the plaint, holding there was no genuine urgency given the delay between discovering the infringement and filing suit.
The Supreme Court held that the lower courts wrongly assessed "urgency" under Section 12A by scrutinizing the merits and the time lag, instead of examining whether the plaint and its supporting documents plausibly showed a need for urgent relief from the plaintiff's standpoint. It clarified that in cases of continuing intellectual property infringement, each ongoing act of infringement is a fresh wrong, so mere delay in filing suit does not by itself defeat urgency, especially since unchecked market confusion from counterfeit products harms both the rights-holder and the public. Finding Novenco's grievance genuine rather than a device to dodge mediation, the Court quashed the High Court's judgments and restored the commercial suit to be decided on its merits.
When a business is fighting ongoing counterfeiting or patent infringement, it should not assume that some delay in filing suit will automatically disqualify it from seeking urgent court relief. Courts must look at whether the harm is continuing and genuinely urgent from the complainant's point of view, not just at how much time has passed.
