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 claimants (family of a deceased employee) were awarded Rs. 40,90,000/- by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in Rourkela after their relative died in a road accident. The High Court of Orissa, without giving any reasons, reduced this to Rs. 36,00,000/-. The insurance company had argued that money the family received under an Employees' Family Benefit (EFB) Scheme should be deducted from the compensation, since the benefit replaced lost income.
The Supreme Court criticised the High Court for cutting the award without giving any reasons, holding that "reasons are the heart and soul of any judicial pronouncement." Surveying a long line of precedent (Helen C. Rebello, Patricia Jean Mahajan, Vimal Kanwar, Shashi Sharma), the Court reaffirmed that benefits like insurance, pension, gratuity or EFB payments, which accrue from contracts/service entitlements rather than directly "because of" the death, generally cannot be deducted from motor-accident compensation, since the wrongdoer cannot take advantage of such foresight-based benefits. However, because the EFB amount here substantially exceeded a notional 12% return on the deposited sum, the Court offset this benefit against the "future prospects" addition the claimants would otherwise have received. Recalculating income, standard deductions and the Pranay Sethi heads (loss of estate, consortium, funeral expenses), the Court fixed compensation at Rs. 50,00,000/- with 9% annual interest from the date of filing.
Courts must give reasons whenever they alter a compensation award, and benefits a victim's family receives under independent schemes (insurance, pension, EFB) are usually not automatically deducted from accident compensation, but a court can balance such receipts against other heads like future-prospects addition if they substantially overlap.
