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 had mortgaged a plot with a marriage hall on it to a bank, which initiated recovery proceedings. He then agreed to sell the same property to the respondent for Rs. 19 lakh, assuring there was no encumbrance even though the loan was outstanding. After an initial cheque bounced, the parties executed a fresh agreement raising the price to Rs. 37.5 lakh, of which Rs. 18 lakh was paid as advance. The respondent later sued for specific performance (to force the sale through), while the appellant filed a counter-claim for recovery of possession, and both the trial court and the Madras High Court ruled in the respondent's favour.
The Supreme Court reversed both lower courts, holding that the respondent-buyer was not in fact "ready and willing" to perform his part of the contract, a mandatory requirement for a court to grant specific performance, even though two courts below had found otherwise on facts. The Court found this concurrent finding "completely opposed to and contrary to the facts on record," noting discrepancies around possession and payment that undermined the buyer's claim. It therefore dismissed the specific-performance suit, allowed the appellant's counter-claim for recovery of possession, and directed a practical cash settlement: refund of the Rs. 18 lakh advance (with interest only if not paid within three months), no mesne profits owed to the appellant for the long period of wrongful possession, and no interest owed to the respondent on his advance either.
To win a specific-performance claim and force a seller to complete a property sale, a buyer must affirmatively prove continuous readiness and willingness to pay and perform: courts can, and sometimes must, overturn even concurrent factual findings of two lower courts if the record plainly contradicts them.
