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 moreAn American couple, Balaji and Antoinette Bhagwat, left properties in India to be held in trust; after both died, the respondent was granted letters of administration by the Bombay High Court in 1994 to manage this property in India based on a will probated in a California court. Years later, in 1999, the appellant, a relative of the deceased, filed an application seeking to revoke those letters of administration, alleging fraud, suppression of facts, and improper handling of the estate including a charitable ashram on the land. The High Court rejected the revocation application as time-barred, and the appellant challenged that rejection before the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court examined whether Indian limitation law applied to applications for revocation of letters of administration, even though the Indian Succession Act itself prescribes no specific limitation period. Relying on its own precedents, the Court held that the residuary three-year limitation period under Article 137 of the Limitation Act applies, running from the date the right to challenge the grant accrues: here, from the original 1994 grant of letters of administration, which operates as notice to all concerned. Since the appellant's revocation application was filed in 1999, well beyond three years from 1994, the Court upheld the High Court's finding that the application was time-barred and dismissed the appeal with no order as to costs.
A grant of probate or letters of administration by a court acts as notice to the whole world, and anyone wishing to challenge or revoke it must act within three years of the grant, waiting years to raise objections, even serious ones like alleged fraud, risks losing the right to be heard at all due to delay.
