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 moreTwo linked family suits sought partition of ancestral property on the basis that certain wills (through which one Veeraswamy claimed sole ownership) were invalid, while a third suit sought specific performance of a 1974 agreement by which Veeraswamy had agreed to sell part of that property to Sagi Subba Raju. The trial court and first appellate court dismissed the partition suits and partly decreed the specific-performance suit, and the High Court, hearing all appeals together, upheld the dismissals and fully decreed specific performance against the appellants (Veeraswamy's other family members).
The Supreme Court held that the two wills were validly proved by concurrent findings of three courts, so Veeraswamy had become absolute owner of the properties and was entitled both to sell them and to enter into the 1974 sale agreement; a mere rise in property prices since 1974 was not a ground to resist specific performance, especially since hardship had never been pleaded before the trial court. Separately, the Court held that because many defendants/purchasers had died or been deleted from the case without their legal heirs being brought on record, and the validity of the wills had already attained finality as against them, allowing the appeal against the remaining defendants would create two conflicting decrees on the same subject matter, so the appeals were liable to be dismissed on this ground of abatement as well as on merits.
In property litigation involving multiple co-defendants, failing to bring the legal heirs of deceased parties on record within the limitation period can cause an entire appeal to fail on a technical "abatement" ground, regardless of the merits, so keeping the case record updated with all parties' legal representatives is critical.
