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 power generation company and the Andhra Pradesh electricity distribution utility were bound by a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) that, after several amendments, restricted the fuel used to generate power to "natural gas only." When the originally allotted natural gas supply from the KG-D6 basin became scarce, the generator sought to use the costlier Regasified Liquefied Natural Gas (RLNG) instead, arguing it was simply a form of natural gas. The Andhra Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission held that "natural gas only" did not include RLNG, but the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity reversed this, holding RLNG was merely a variant of natural gas and not excluded by the PPA's wording. The distribution utility appealed to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court held that a commercial contract must be interpreted according to the real intention of the parties as reflected in its text and history of amendments, and courts should not read in additional terms unless necessary for "business efficacy." Tracing the PPA's amendment history, from Naphtha as primary fuel, to natural gas as primary fuel, to the final 2007 amendment restricting fuel to "natural gas only", the Court concluded the parties had deliberately intended to confine the agreed fuel to natural gas in its natural form, excluding costlier variants like RLNG, because the underlying purpose was to keep power generation costs (and ultimately consumer tariffs) low. The Court held this intention could not be overridden merely because RLNG is chemically similar to natural gas, and that a generic statutory definition of "natural gas" from an unrelated regulatory law had no bearing on how the specific contractual term should be read. Accordingly, the Supreme Court reversed the Appellate Tribunal's judgment and restored the Regulatory Commission's original order holding that RLNG was not covered by the PPA.
The specific wording a contract uses, understood in light of how the parties amended and dealt with that contract over time, controls its interpretation: a party cannot later claim a broader meaning (e.g., treating a chemically similar substitute as covered) simply because it suits them, if the contract's own history shows the parties intended a narrower, specific meaning.
