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 more37 daily-wage workers of Jharkhand's Public Health and Engineering Department (PHED) were dismissed, and a Labour Court reference held their dismissal unlawful under Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, ordering reinstatement with full back wages. Both the High Court's Single Judge and its Division Bench upheld this award. The employer (PHED) appealed to the Supreme Court, challenging only the award of full back wages, not the reinstatement itself.
The Supreme Court held that back wages are not an automatic entitlement simply because a dismissal is set aside: a workman must plead and prove he had no gainful employment during the dismissal period, with the employer entitled to prove otherwise, and courts must weigh settled factors from a line of precedent before deciding full, partial, or no back wages. It found both the Labour Court and High Court had failed to consider these principles or any evidence on the point, and that the High Court had misapplied an earlier precedent (Deepali Gundu Surwase) by quoting only general observations without its actual operative ratio. Exercising its Article 142 power to do complete justice, the Court partially allowed the appeal, reducing the back wages awarded from 100% to 50%, to be paid within three months.
Winning reinstatement after an unlawful dismissal does not automatically entitle a worker to full back wages: the worker must show they were without other income during the dismissal period, and courts are expected to weigh established factors (not just assume full wages) when deciding how much back pay to award.
