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 plaintiff and defendant entered into an agreement to sell a property for Rs. 3.65 lakh in 2002, with part payment made and the balance payable once the seller cleared a pre-existing mortgage. When the seller did not act on the mortgage, the plaintiff sent reminder letters and legal notices, which went unanswered, and eventually filed a suit for specific performance in 2005. The trial court and first appellate court both ruled in the plaintiff's favour, but the High Court reversed this, holding that time was of the essence and that the plaintiff was not "ready and willing" to perform his part of the bargain.
The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred on multiple counts: time was not of the essence because the seller's own obligation (clearing the mortgage) had to be fulfilled first; the registered letters sent to the defendant's known address were validly proved as served once returned undelivered; and a short delay in filing a suit for specific performance (within the limitation period) cannot be held against a plaintiff in India, unlike in English equity law. Relying on earlier precedent (Mademsetty Satyanarayana v. G. Yelloji Rao), the Court restored the concurrent findings of the trial court and first appellate court and decreed specific performance in the plaintiff's favour.
In India, so long as a suit for specific performance is filed within the statutory limitation period, delay alone cannot defeat the claim, unlike in English law, where equitable discretion can refuse relief purely for delay. A registered letter returned as "unclaimed" from the addressee's correct address is treated as validly served.
