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 was allotted a plot by the Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA) in 2001 but, after a dispute over an enhanced cost demand, took a refund of his deposited amount while a consumer complaint was still pending. The District Forum, unaware the amount had been refunded, ordered HUDA to re-allot the same plot; while HUDA's appeal against that order was still pending before the State Commission, HUDA's own Estate Officer went ahead and actually handed over possession, regularised the allotment, and later issued a completion certificate, even after the State Commission had set aside the re-allotment order. The appellant then built on and occupied the plot for years. The State and National Consumer Commissions ultimately held that, having accepted a refund, the appellant was no longer a "consumer" entitled to any relief.
The Supreme Court noted the extraordinary administrative confusion within HUDA: one wing of the authority kept handing the appellant possession, a no-encumbrance certificate, and construction clearances, seemingly unaware of (or disregarding) the ongoing litigation and adverse orders from its own side. Having already directed an internal inquiry into which officials were responsible for this lapse, and noting that the appellant had since spent his retirement savings building a substantial structure on the plot, the Court set aside the National Commission's order and allowed the appeals. It permitted the appellant to retain the plot, conditioned on his paying the current (2014-15) HUDA rate for it after adjusting sums already paid, and directed HUDA to proceed against the officials responsible for the lapses and report back on disciplinary action.
Even where a litigant's own earlier conduct (such as taking a refund) might legally weaken their claim, courts can still fashion equitable relief based on changed ground realities, such as a completed, lived-in construction built in reliance on the authority's own repeated actions, while also holding the responsible officials accountable.
