Real judgements, distilled

Legal Case Shots

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.

Frequently asked questions

Is this suitable for use in legal research and court filings?+

Legal Case Shots is built to help you quickly identify and understand relevant precedent. For citation in pleadings or filings, always verify against the full judgment PDF and current citation format (e.g., 2026 INSC ___).

How is a "lesson learnt" different from the judgment's holding?+

The holding is what the court legally decided. The lesson learnt translates that into a practical takeaway: what a lawyer should factor into case strategy or client advice as a result of this precedent.

Is the full judgment available, or just a summary?+

Both. Each case shows a distilled summary (case type, key holding, and lesson learnt) and links to the full judgment as a PDF for when you need the complete text for research or citation.

Can I filter judgments by date or case type?+

Yes. Use Advanced Filters to narrow results by decision date and by practice area, including Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, Service & Administrative Law, Family Law, Civil Property & Inheritance, and Labour & Industrial Law.

Can I search judgments by a specific judge?+

Yes. You can filter judgments by the judge or bench that decided the case, which is useful for tracking how a particular judge has reasoned on similar issues across multiple rulings.

What is Legal Case Shots?+

Legal Case Shots is a searchable database of Supreme Court of India judgments, each broken down into the case type, the court's key holding, and a practical lesson learnt, with the full judgment available as a PDF for citation or deeper reading.

Contempt of CourtSupreme Court of India

Amit Kumar Das, Joint Secretary vs. Shrimati Hutheesingh Tagore Charitable Trust

Not available · 2024 INSC 73Decided 30 Jan 2024
Not available

Background

The Trust had sued for declaration of title, recovery of possession and damages, and obtained a decree; the appellant's society (Baitanik) had appealed, and the appellate court had stayed execution of the decree on condition of periodic deposits. When the society allegedly defaulted on those deposits, the Trust sought contempt action, alleging willful disobedience of the stay conditions. The Calcutta High Court's Division Bench, while finding the conduct contemptuous and illegal, chose not to initiate formal contempt proceedings and instead simply vacated the stay order, allowing the Trust to execute the decree. The society appealed to the Supreme Court against this High Court order.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court held that once the High Court itself found that there had been willful disobedience of a stay order, conduct that is contemptuous, it could not simply sidestep the formal contempt process and instead vacate the stay as an alternative remedy; doing so exceeded the proper scope of the High Court's contempt jurisdiction. The Court set aside that part of the High Court's order and remanded the matter back to the High Court to actually carry through the contempt proceedings it had found were warranted. However, the Trust was left free to independently pursue execution remedies (including its argument that the stay had lapsed automatically due to default) before the High Court or executing court. The appeal was thus allowed in part.

Lesson Learnt

A court cannot use an indirect route (like vacating a stay) as a substitute for formally exercising contempt jurisdiction once it has already concluded that a party willfully disobeyed its order. If the conduct is contemptuous, the proper contempt process must be followed through, not bypassed.

Amit Kumar Das, Joint Secretary vs. Shrimati Hutheesingh Tagore Charitable Trust – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware