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 moreThe Union of India appealed against concurrent findings of the Central Administrative Tribunal and the Calcutta High Court (Circuit Bench at Port Blair) directing that Police Constables in the Union Territory of Andaman & Nicobar Islands be given the same pay scale as Delhi Police Constables, based on a recommendation of a government-constituted Anomaly Committee. The Union argued that a classification between matriculate and non-matriculate employees was constitutionally permissible and that the Anomaly Committee's recommendation was not binding on the Government. The High Court had earlier also imposed an 8% per annum "default cost" as a condition for staying its judgment pending appeal.
The Supreme Court held that the real question was not about the matriculate/non-matriculate classification but whether to disturb concurrent findings of the Tribunal and the High Court under its discretionary jurisdiction (Article 136); finding no justifiable ground to interfere, it dismissed the appeal and upheld pay parity for the constables. Exercising its equitable discretion, the Court vacated the High Court's earlier order imposing interest-by-way-of-cost from 01.01.1996, but made this conditional: if arrears were not paid to the affected employees within six months, the cost order would automatically stand revived, with no further extensions to be granted.
The Supreme Court is generally reluctant to re-open concurrent factual findings of a Tribunal and a High Court under its discretionary Article 136 jurisdiction, and even when it grants relief from a cost penalty, it can condition that relief on prompt compliance with the underlying payment obligation.
