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 dispute concerned a claim by one Mariyambi (since deceased, represented by her legal heirs) that she had received an oral gift of certain property. She later executed a sale deed in 1978 purporting to deal with that property, but the deed did not trace her title back to the claimed oral gift, and the official Record of Rights also did not support her claim. Both the trial court and the High Court had found that she failed to prove the oral gift ever took place, and the matter reached the Supreme Court by way of a civil appeal against those concurrent findings.
The Supreme Court observed that despite being the person who stood to benefit from the alleged gift, Mariyambi herself had not testified to prove that the oral gift actually occurred, and there was no supporting documentary evidence, neither the sale deed nor the land records, to back her claim. Since both lower courts had already concurrently found against the oral gift, and no additional counter-evidence was placed before the Supreme Court to disturb those findings, the Court held there was no justification to interfere. The appeal was accordingly dismissed, leaving the concurrent findings of the trial court and High Court undisturbed.
A claim of an oral gift of property is difficult to sustain in court without either the beneficiary's own testimony or supporting documentary evidence (such as revenue/land records); courts will not disturb concurrent findings of two lower courts rejecting such a claim in the absence of fresh, credible counter-evidence.
