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 moreLand belonging to the appellants/landowners in Gulbarga, Karnataka was acquired for an industrial project of the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board (KIADB), and a Reference Court fixed compensation at a certain rate per acre, which the Karnataka High Court upheld on appeal. The landowners appealed to the Supreme Court seeking enhancement of the compensation, while in connected appeals the KIADB and the allotted company separately challenged a later High Court order that had remanded related proceedings back to the Reference Court for reconsideration.
The Supreme Court examined comparable sale instances and market value evidence for the acquired land and held that the landowners were entitled to enhanced compensation, raising the rate from Rs.1,37,000 to Rs.1,92,000 per acre, along with statutory solatium (30% under Section 23(2)) and interest under Sections 23(1-A) and 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, plus costs. It allowed the landowners' appeal on that basis, while allowing one set of connected appeals (against the remand order) and dismissing another set of connected appeals filed by the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board; an application by a third party (Ultra Tech Cement Ltd.) to be added to the case was dismissed as not maintainable, though it was heard on the matter.
Landowners challenging compensation for acquired land can get enhanced compensation from the Supreme Court if they can show, through comparable sales and market evidence, that the amount fixed by lower courts was too low, and such enhancement comes with statutory solatium and interest built in.
