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 moreAn employee of Nagpur Municipal Corporation went missing on 01.09.2012. He was kept on the rolls, treated as continuing in service, and was shown as having "retired" on 31.01.2015, with his family later paid full retiral dues (about Rs. 6.49 lakh) plus a monthly pension of Rs. 12,000. In 2022, a civil court declared him legally dead (a "civil death") on a suit filed by the family, but the decree did not fix any specific date of death. The High Court then directed the Corporation to give the missing man's son a compassionate appointment, treating 01.09.2012 (the date he went missing) as his date of death. The Corporation appealed to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court held that under Section 108 of the Indian Evidence Act, a missing person is only presumed dead after seven years of being untraceable, and courts cannot assume an earlier "date of death" without actual evidence. Since no evidence fixed a specific date of death, the presumed date of civil death was 01.09.2019 (seven years after he went missing), not 2012. Because the family had already accepted his "retirement" in 2015 and accepted full retiral benefits, the son could not simultaneously claim compassionate appointment on the basis that the father had died in service in 2012. The Court also held the High Court erred in directly ordering appointment instead of merely directing the Corporation to consider the claim. The High Court's order was set aside, though the Corporation was left free to consider the son for any suitable post outside the compassionate-appointment scheme.
A missing person is legally presumed dead only after seven years of disappearance (absent concrete proof of an earlier date of death), and a family cannot claim both full retirement benefits (treating the person as having "retired") and death-in-service benefits (like compassionate appointment) for the same person at the same time.
