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 moreA partition suit filed in 1985 over ancestral property in Ranchi and Varanasi resulted in a decree (1990/1991, later supplemented in 2013) in favour of the appellant's share. When the appellant sought to execute the decree in 2014, the first respondent objected that the original court lacked territorial jurisdiction and that the decree was therefore a nullity. The Jharkhand High Court agreed that this objection could be examined at the execution stage and sent the matter back to the executing court for that purpose.
The Supreme Court held that an objection to mere territorial jurisdiction (as distinct from an objection going to a court's inherent, subject-matter jurisdiction) is governed by Section 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which requires it to be raised at the earliest opportunity before the trial court, and only succeeds if it actually caused a failure of justice. Since the respondent never raised this objection in time, the original decree was passed ex parte after the respondent failed to appear, and the objection did not touch the court's basic competence to hear the case, it could not be revived decades later in execution. An executing court cannot go behind a final decree on this ground. The Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's order, and directed the execution proceedings to conclude expeditiously, while clarifying this would not affect the respondent's separate pending first appeal raising other merits-based grounds.
An objection that a court lacked mere territorial jurisdiction (not subject-matter jurisdiction) must be raised at the very first opportunity before the trial court: it cannot be used years later to block execution of an otherwise valid and final decree.
