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 construction company was awarded a bridge contract by the Himachal Pradesh government, with a clause providing that any dispute would go to an arbitrator appointed by the department's Chief Engineer. When a payment dispute arose, the department appointed a serving Superintendent Engineer as sole arbitrator. The company objected, arguing the appointment should have been by name (not designation) and that a government employee could not be an arbitrator, and separately moved the High Court for an independent arbitrator instead of filing its claim with the appointed one.
The Supreme Court held that appointing an arbitrator by official designation was valid under the contract's own wording, and that a government employee can lawfully act as arbitrator in government contracts unless the later 2015 amendment to the Arbitration Act (which bars this) applies, which it did not here, since the arbitration had commenced before that amendment came into force. The Court also held that once an arbitrator is validly appointed under the agreed procedure, a party cannot separately approach the court under Section 11(6) for a different arbitrator. However, because the arbitrator had terminated the proceedings for non-filing of a claim-statement without first warning the company that no further adjournment would be granted, the Court set aside that termination in the interest of justice, directed a fresh arbitrator be appointed per the contract clause, and allowed the company to file its claim before the new arbitrator.
In government contracts, an arbitration clause naming an arbitrator by official post rather than by name is generally valid, and parties who want to challenge who was appointed as arbitrator must raise that objection before the arbitrator (and later under Sections 13/34), not through a fresh court application for a different arbitrator, but tribunals must give clear warning before terminating proceedings for a party's non-appearance or delay.
