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 public-spirited citizen filed a PIL in the Himachal Pradesh High Court alleging that the Shimla Municipal Corporation had leased its restaurant property ("Ashiana"/"Goofa" at the Ridge, Shimla) to the state-owned Himachal Pradesh Tourism Development Corporation (HPTDC) at a rent far below market rate, causing the Corporation financial loss. Without deciding whether HPTDC's existing lease was valid or quashing it, the High Court passed interim orders directing the Municipal Corporation to invite fresh tenders for the property, and on seeing a much higher bid, directed the property be leased to the highest bidder and HPTDC evicted. The State and HPTDC appealed to the Supreme Court against these interim directions.
The Supreme Court held that the High Court's interim orders had gone far beyond the relief actually sought in the PIL and amounted to a mandatory, final-in-effect order passed at a mere interlocutory stage, without ever examining or quashing the subsisting lease contract between the Municipal Corporation and HPTDC. Since no one had even alleged that HPTDC was in unauthorised occupation, and the statutory procedure under the Himachal Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act (requiring Corporation recommendation and prior government sanction for any lease) had not been followed either, the High Court's directions to re-tender the property were legally unsustainable. The Supreme Court set aside both interim orders and treated the underlying writ petition itself as disposed of, while directing that any outstanding rental dues owed by HPTDC be resolved with the State's assistance, failing which the Municipal Corporation could pursue lawful recovery or eviction proceedings separately. It also ordered the earnest money deposited by the bidder who had emerged highest in the court-directed tender process to be refunded with interest, since that tender process itself was set aside.
Courts conducting judicial review, even in public-interest litigation, cannot issue sweeping, final-effect directions at the interim stage without first deciding the validity of an existing contract or following the statute's own procedural safeguards; doing so oversteps the limited scope of interim relief.
