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 moreRam Raj Chaurasia, a tenant, had been evicted from his premises in 2015 on the ground that the landlord, Sharda Devi, needed the property back for reconstruction. The tenant alleged that no reconstruction had actually taken place and claimed this was because of collusion between the landlord and the builder (the second respondent), leaving him without his livelihood. The landlord, in turn, alleged it was the tenant who was colluding with the builder. The builder did not appear in the Supreme Court proceedings.
The Supreme Court noted the conflicting allegations of collusion made by each side against the other and the builder, but did not resolve which version was true. Since the tenant had already been evicted in 2015 on the stated ground of reconstruction, the Court held that it was open to him to pursue whatever legal remedy was available to him if the reconstruction promise was not honoured, without granting any specific relief itself. The appeal was disposed of on this basis, expressly preserving the tenant's liberty to take further legal action, and any pending applications were also disposed of.
A tenant evicted on the ground that the landlord needs the property for reconstruction is not left without recourse if that reconstruction never happens: he retains the right to pursue a separate legal remedy, even though the Supreme Court in this instance did not itself decide the collusion allegations.
