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 moreShri Ambadevi Sanstha, a registered public trust, challenged orders of the Joint Charity Commissioner permitting the sale of several parcels of trust agricultural land and two houses at prices the trust considered far too low, even though higher competing offers (and later objections from a newly elected body of 15 trustees who wanted the sale stopped) were on record. The Bombay High Court dismissed the trust's writ petitions and upheld the Commissioner's permission to sell, prompting the trust's appeals to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court found that the Joint Charity Commissioner had acted illegally under Section 36 of the Bombay Public Trusts Act by sanctioning the sales: no genuine effort was made to ascertain the true market value of the properties, a higher competing offer (Rs. 9,000/acre) was ignored in favour of a lower one, earnest money had been improperly accepted from a purchaser before permission to sell was even granted, and the Commissioner disregarded the trustees' own objections and resolution against the sale. The Court held there was no demonstrated necessity for the trust to sell its properties at all, and that allowing an illegal transaction to stand would harm the trust's long-term interest. It allowed the appeals, set aside both the High Court's and the Commissioner's orders, annulled the sale transactions, and, rejecting the purchasers' claim of equity from decades of possession and improvements, directed that possession of the land and houses be restored to the trust within two months, by police action if necessary.
Charity commissioners and other authorities overseeing trust property cannot rubber-stamp a sale at below-market value or against the trustees' own wishes; courts will annul such sales and order restoration of the property even after purchasers have held and improved it for many years, because no amount of time cures an illegally granted permission.
