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 moreSutlej Construction was awarded a 1996 contract by the Chandigarh administration for earth excavation and road-widening work; the administration terminated the contract, alleging the contractor's default, while the contractor blamed the administration's own failure to facilitate the work. The dispute went to arbitration, and the arbitrator largely ruled in the contractor's favour in a 2013 award (awarding roughly Rs. 50.9 lakh of its claims against Rs. 10.4 lakh allowed to the administration's counterclaims, plus interest). A district judge rejected the administration's objections to the award, but a single judge of the Punjab & Haryana High Court set the award aside on appeal, holding the arbitrator had misconducted himself.
The Supreme Court held that the arbitral award was a reasoned one, based on a plausible appreciation of the contract terms and evidence (e.g., that the administration, not the contractor, was responsible for spreading/compacting the excavated earth and providing site access). The High Court's single judge had wrongly re-appreciated the evidence as though sitting as a second appellate court, when the law permits an award to be set aside only on narrow grounds (such as the award "shocking the conscience of the court"), not merely because a reviewing judge would have reached a different factual conclusion. The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order and restored/upheld the arbitral award in full, allowing the appeal without costs.
Courts reviewing a legally sound and reasoned arbitral award cannot act like an appellate court re-weighing the underlying evidence: an award can only be overturned on the limited statutory grounds, which protects the finality that parties bargain for when they choose arbitration.
