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' 21-year-old son, a trained competitive swimmer, died when the two-wheeler he was riding as a pillion passenger crashed at night into an unlit, stationary truck parked in the middle of a Delhi road. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded his parents about Rs 14.87 lakh in compensation; on cross-appeals by both sides, the Delhi High Court reduced this to about Rs 9.25 lakh, using a lower assumed income for the deceased and a multiplier based on his mother's age rather than his own.
The Supreme Court held the High Court had erred on both points. Settled law (the Sarla Verma line of cases, affirmed by a Constitution Bench in Pranay Sethi) requires that the multiplier used to calculate loss of future income be based on the age of the deceased, not a surviving dependant: for a 21-year-old, the correct multiplier was 18, not 15. The Court also raised the assumed monthly income given the deceased's proven earning potential as a trained, prize-winning swimmer, and added the standard statutory addition for "future prospects" that the lower courts had failed to grant. Recalculating on this basis, the Court enhanced the total compensation to about Rs 20.64 lakh, roughly Rs 11.39 lakh more than the High Court had awarded, payable with interest.
In a motor accident death claim, the multiplier used to work out loss of future income must be based on the deceased person's own age, not a surviving relative's age: a detail that can make a significant difference to the final compensation amount.
