The Supreme Court in Kumud Lall v. Suresh Chandra Roy clarified the doctrine of medical negligence claim survival, holding that claims affecting the estate of a deceased doctor can continue against legal heirs, while purely personal claims extinguish upon death.

The Supreme Court’s judgment in Rajasthan Public Service Commission v. Lavanshu Sankhla & Ors. (2026 INSC 444) is an important ruling on the issue of the public recruitment eligibility date in government service appointments. Delivered by Honourable Justice Vikram Nath and Honourable Justice Sandeep Mehta on 4 May 2026, the judgment settles a recurring controversy in public recruitment law — whether candidates must possess essential qualifications on the last date of applicat

The Supreme Court clarifies a crucial issue in property law: municipal records cannot determine ownership. This article explains the legal difference between administrative records and title, with practical insights for lawyers and property owners in India.

The Supreme Court has delivered a series of employment and service law rulings that every employer, HR professional, and in-house counsel needs to understand. From landmark decisions on regularisation of long-term temporary workers, to the validity of employment bonds, POSH Act compliance, and resignation rules, this article breaks down the key judgments in plain language and explains what practical steps organisations should take right now.

The Supreme Court’s final week of March 2026 delivered landmark rulings across constitutional, criminal, service, and environmental law. From women officers’ permanent commission to arbitration limits and NGT powers, here are the 10 judgments that define India’s evolving legal landscape.

The circumstantial evidence murder case Supreme Court judgment India clarifies that conviction cannot stand where forensic chain of custody is broken and electronic evidence fails Section 65B requirements.

The COVID vaccine injury compensation Supreme Court judgment India examines the State’s constitutional duty to provide institutional redress and a possible no-fault compensation policy for serious vaccine adverse events.

The specific performance sale agreement Supreme Court judgment India clarifies that courts may deny specific performance where the plaintiff suppresses material documents and the sale agreement appears to be a sham transaction.

The Gobind Singh v Union of India Order 41 Rule 27 Supreme Court judgment reiterates that appellate courts cannot admit additional evidence unless strict statutory conditions are satisfied.

The Abhishek Sharma v State of Jammu and Kashmir regularisation Supreme Court judgment rules that artificial classifications in public employment cannot defeat Article 14 equality rights.

The Union of India v Larsen & Toubro arbitration interest Supreme Court judgment explains the distinction between pre-award and post-award interest and reinforces party autonomy under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

The Suhas Chakma open prisons Supreme Court judgment lays down a national framework for open correctional institutions, prison reform and rehabilitation of prisoners under Article 21.

The WBSEDCL v Adhunik Power change in law PPA judgment explains how courts interpret fuel source risk, indemnity clauses, and change in law compensation in long term power purchase agreements.

The Kerala Technical Education Service Rule 6A Supreme Court judgment resolves the conflict between AICTE qualification norms and state promotion rules, safeguarding prior Supreme Court beneficiaries while preserving remedies for affected non-parties.

The ICICI Bank Ltd. v. Era Infrastructure simultaneous CIRP Supreme Court judgment settles whether creditors must elect between debtor and guarantor, addressing double recovery safeguards and NCLT discretion.

The Supreme Court decision in Bhagyalaxmi Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Babaldas Amtharam Patel surety liability settles how far guarantors remain liable when borrowers exceed sanctioned limits and when partial discharge applies.

The Torrent Power Supreme Court judgment reinforces the primacy of CoC commercial wisdom, holding courts cannot interfere with approved resolution plans absent statutory violations or material irregularity.

In the Lease vs Licence Supreme Court 2026 ruling, the Court restores a 99-year registered lease in Vivekananda Kendra, clarifies the intention test, limits unilateral cancellation, and reinforces lis pendens protection in property disputes.

The Panacea Biotec Supreme Court judgment clarifies when limitation begins in Drugs Act prosecutions and holds that complaints by public servants need not mechanically follow Section 202 CrPC enquiry requirements.

The Sistema Shyam Teleservices Supreme Court judgment clarifies when liability begins after licence cancellation and holds that government delay cannot justify retrospective interest claims.