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 moreContract workers at ONGC's Sibsagar and Lakwa units in Assam sought regularization of their employment, claiming they performed permanent and perennial work. An Industrial Tribunal ruled in the workers' favour, and a Single Judge of the Gauhati High Court upheld that award, but the High Court's Division Bench, on intra-court appeal by ONGC, sent the matter back to the Industrial Tribunal for a fresh look in light of the Supreme Court's earlier ruling in Steel Authority of India v. National Union Waterfront Workers, to determine whether the contract was genuine. The workers' associations then appealed to the Supreme Court against this remand.
The Supreme Court held that the Division Bench, sitting in a writ appeal, was primarily required to examine whether the Single Judge's detailed findings were correct, not to send the entire dispute back to the Tribunal for reconsideration, especially since the Single Judge had already meticulously analyzed the Tribunal's award and there was little left for the Tribunal itself to re-examine. The Court found no justification for the Division Bench bypassing its own appellate role in favour of a fresh Tribunal inquiry. It therefore set aside the Division Bench's remand-to-Tribunal order and instead remitted the writ appeals back to the High Court's Division Bench itself, directing it to decide the appeals on their own merits expeditiously, preferably within six months.
An appellate court hearing a challenge to a tribunal's decision must itself examine whether that decision was correct, rather than simply bouncing a well-considered matter back down to the tribunal for a redo: appellate review cannot be outsourced back to the body whose decision is under challenge.
