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 appellants bought land through a chain of sale deeds originating from one Eswaramurthy Gounder, who had himself sold the property in 1976 shortly after allegedly executing an unregistered Will bequeathing it to his daughter (Respondent No. 1). Some 26 years after his death, that daughter filed for probate of the 1976 Will (and, days later, a separate suit claiming title) without impleading her two brothers or the appellants: the very persons whose interests the Will and later sales affected. The District Court revoked the probate it had earlier granted, holding it should have issued citations (notices) to these interested parties, but the Madras High Court reversed that, reasoning that probate courts only decide whether a Will was genuinely executed, not questions of property title.
The Supreme Court held the High Court's reasoning missed the point: the issue was not about deciding title but about the mandatory procedural requirement under Sections 263 and 283 of the Indian Succession Act to cite all persons with an interest in the deceased's estate, including a purchaser/alienee who acquired an interest before the probate proceedings were filed, before probate can validly be granted, since a grant of probate operates as a judgment binding the whole world. Since Respondent No. 1 knew of the earlier sale (as shown by her own plaint in the parallel title suit) yet omitted her brothers and the appellants as parties, she had suppressed material facts, and citations that should have gone out never did. The Court restored the District Court's revocation of probate, set aside the High Court's order, but clarified that the pending civil title suit must still be decided independently on its own merits.
Anyone applying for probate of a Will must cite (formally notify) every person with even a slight or possible interest in the deceased's estate, including later purchasers from the testator, failing to do so is valid "just cause" to have the probate revoked later, regardless of whether the underlying property-title dispute is separately resolved.
