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 batch of workmen had been granted relief by the Labour Court, which the State of Chhattisgarh challenged in the High Court. A Single Judge of the High Court drew a distinction between workmen who had completed ten years of service and those with less than ten years, interfering with the Labour Court's award only for the latter group. A Division Bench reversed the Single Judge, holding that length of service beyond the statutory threshold was not the correct test. The State then appealed to the Supreme Court against the Division Bench's order, and by the time of the hearing the workmen had continued working for years under the award.
The Supreme Court held that the Single Judge's classification based on ten years of service was legally unsustainable; the only relevant question under the Industrial Disputes Act is whether a workman completed 240 days of continuous service within a 12-month period, and the Division Bench had correctly corrected this error. The Court also noted that a coordinate Bench had already decided an identical issue on similar facts in a related appeal, declining to interfere with the Labour Court's award. Observing that the workmen had continued working for a considerable time since the award, the Court dismissed all the State's appeals, while clarifying that if the State genuinely lacked sufficient work to accommodate them, it remained free to take appropriate steps under the Industrial Disputes Act.
Eligibility for protection against retrenchment under labour law turns on the specific statutory test, 240 days of continuous service in a year, not on open-ended judicial distinctions like a minimum number of years served; courts will apply the test uniformly across workmen in the same situation.
