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 moreRajendra Kumar Tekriwal and a construction company (Unique Construction) were in dispute over a matter already referred to and pending before an Arbitrator. A respondent (Respondent No. 3) had separately raised an objection before the Supreme Court that he was not a necessary party to the arbitration. The main appeal (CA 9555/2010) and a connected cross-appeal (CA 9556/2010) by Respondent No. 1 were both before the Court, along with a prior interim order dated 25.02.2010 restraining certain action pending the appeals.
The Supreme Court held that since the Arbitrator was already seized of the dispute, it was for the Arbitrator, not the Court, to decide whether Respondent No. 3 was a necessary party. The Court dismissed both the main appeal and the cross-appeal and vacated the earlier interim order, while expressly clarifying that all parties remained free to raise their contentions before the Arbitrator and requesting the Arbitrator to conclude proceedings expeditiously, preferably within six months. The Court also protected the appellant's position going forward: if any party entered into a transaction in the interim, sale proceeds would remain subject to the arbitration's outcome, and the appellant retained the right to separately challenge any valuation dispute through appropriate legal action.
When a dispute is already before an arbitrator, courts will generally decline to pre-decide procedural objections (like who is a necessary party) and will instead let the arbitrator rule on them, while still protecting the parties' interim financial position (e.g., tying sale proceeds to the arbitration outcome) so that no one is prejudiced by the delay.
