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 moreThis was a lead judgment covering well over 150 separate appeals, all by landowners or societies aggrieved that sub-registrars had refused to register their property-transfer documents because the properties appeared on government-notified "prohibited" lists under Section 22A of the Registration Act (e.g., government land, endowment/wakf land, land subject to ceiling laws). A Full Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court had already laid down detailed guidelines on how such lists must be prepared, published, and challenged, but had left the deeper question, whether Section 22A itself is constitutionally valid, pending before a High Court bench for further hearing. The appellants in these matters came to the Supreme Court essentially to get interim relief and procedural clarity while that larger constitutional question remained undecided below.
The Supreme Court did not re-examine the vires of Section 22A itself, noting explicitly that it had "not otherwise considered the matter on merits" on that constitutional question, and left that larger issue to be decided by the High Court bench already seized of it. However, it did finally dispose of the specific relief these appellants were asking for: it directed that any registration already permitted during the litigation would continue, but only as a "provisional registration" subject to the final outcome of the pending High Court writ petitions, with no further transfers allowed without the High Court's permission; it allowed parties who were before the Supreme Court but not already parties to the pending High Court writ petitions to get themselves added to those proceedings; and it permitted the same grievance-redressal mechanism available under one part of Section 22A to be argued for application to the other parts, before the High Court. On this basis, all the appeals before the Supreme Court were disposed of.
Even where a larger constitutional question about a law is still pending before another court, the Supreme Court can still finally resolve the narrower, practical dispute actually before it (here, how registrations should be handled meanwhile) without having to decide, or wait for, the bigger constitutional question.
