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 appellant, then aged 25 and working as a coolie (daily-wage loader), suffered grievous injuries, including a permanent disability eventually assessed at 60% of the whole body, when the tractor he was travelling in overturned due to rash and negligent driving. A Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded him about Rs. 9,02,324 in compensation. On appeal, the High Court absolved the insurer of liability entirely, holding that the tractor's insurance policy covered only agricultural use, not carrying a passenger like the appellant, and also rejected the appellant's separate plea for enhanced compensation.
The Supreme Court agreed with the High Court that the insurer was not primarily liable, since the evidence showed the appellant travelled as a passenger on a tractor insured only for agricultural purposes, with no trailer insured or attached. However, relying on its own settled precedent (including National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Swarna Singh), the Court held that the insurer should still be directed to pay the compensation amount to the victim upfront, while being given the liberty to later recover that same amount from the tractor owner. On quantum, the Court declined the appellant's request to raise his disability assessment from 60% to 67%, finding the tribunal's and High Court's concurrent finding of 60% to be a reasonable view based on the medical evidence, and otherwise upheld the compensation amount as just and proper.
Even where an insurance policy technically does not cover how a vehicle was being used at the time of an accident (e.g., carrying a passenger on a tractor insured only for farm use), courts can still require the insurer to pay the accident victim first, so the victim is not left waiting, and let the insurer recover the money afterward from the vehicle's owner.
