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 had taken loans from Bank of India that turned into bad debts, after which the bank seized and auctioned their mortgaged property under the SARFAESI Act, with a third party emerging as the highest bidder and receiving a sale certificate in January 2006. After the auction and sale certificate but before the certificate was formally registered, the appellants attempted several times to pay off their outstanding dues (through money deposited in a relative's account, then cheques, then demand drafts) in an effort to redeem their mortgaged property, but the bank rejected each attempt as not being a valid tender. The Madras High Court's Division Bench ultimately ruled against the appellants, holding the sale had already become final and did not need registration to be complete, and the appellants appealed to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court held that it did not need to decide the broader legal question of whether a SARFAESI sale certificate needs registration to be complete, because the appellants' own attempts to pay had failed on the facts: the money was deposited into someone else's account rather than their own loan accounts, the cheques were not an acceptable mode of payment under the loan terms, and the demand drafts were made out to the wrong payee. Because none of these constituted a valid, legally proper tender of the outstanding dues, the Court held the appellants never properly exercised their right of redemption, and by the time the sale certificate was finally registered in September 2007 (followed by a sale to a third party), their window to redeem the property had closed for good. The Court therefore declined to invoke its special constitutional powers to unwind the sale and dismissed the appeals, leaving the final sale to the third-party purchaser intact.
When trying to pay off a loan to save mortgaged property from a bank auction, a borrower must pay in the exact legally valid manner, into the correct loan account, in an accepted payment mode, and made out to the correct payee, because even a genuine, timely attempt to pay can be rejected and ultimately cost the borrower their right to redeem the property if it is not done correctly.
