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 moreOn 18.11.2009, a lorry driven rashly and negligently hit the appellant's two-wheeler from behind, causing multiple injuries including rib fractures. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Namakkal, awarded only Rs.25,300/- compensation, accepting the insurer's doctor's view that the appellant suffered only minor injuries. The High Court of Madras upheld this low award, so the appellant approached the Supreme Court seeking enhancement.
The Supreme Court held that the Tribunal and High Court wrongly discarded credible medical evidence (a radiologist's report and a treating doctor's 25% permanent disability certificate) merely because of a pleading technicality, when both hospitals involved were under the same management. Applying the principles from Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar and Govind Yadav v. New India Assurance for assessing injury compensation (covering medical expenses, loss of earnings, pain and suffering, and loss of amenities), the Court re-appreciated the evidence under Article 136 and found the claimant had indeed suffered a permanent 25% disability affecting his work as a poultry labourer. It enhanced the compensation from Rs.25,300/- to Rs.4,43,500/- with 9% interest, directing the insurer to deposit the balance within four weeks.
Courts should not reject genuine medical evidence over minor pleading inconsistencies, especially when the underlying facts are not seriously disputed; accident victims are entitled to compensation that realistically reflects permanent disability and lost earning capacity, not just visible/documented injuries.
