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.

Arbitration & Commercial LawSupreme Court of India

Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority vs. Rama Kant Singh

Civil AppealDecided 15 Mar 2022
Civil Appeal No. 2030 of 2022

Background

The respondent won a tender to carry out drainage work for the Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority under an agreement signed in December 2007. The Authority later terminated the agreement and forfeited the respondent's security deposit. The respondent challenged the termination before the Bihar Public Works Contracts Disputes Arbitration Tribunal, which ruled in his favour and awarded him a refund of his security deposit, unpaid dues, and 10% annual interest. The Authority challenged this award before the High Court, arguing the claim was time-barred, but the High Court upheld the award.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court agreed with the Authority on one technical point: the special one-year limitation period under the Bihar Public Works Contracts Disputes Arbitration Tribunal Act, 2008 applied (not the general three-year period under the Limitation Act), and the Tribunal had wrongly applied the general law. However, since the Tribunal had the power under the Act to condone delay, and the respondent's 21-month delay was reasonably explained (his representation against the termination was kept pending for an inordinately long time), the Court declined to strike down the award on the limitation ground. On the merits, it upheld the Tribunal's interpretation that the contract did not permit forfeiture of the security deposit or the penalty deductions. The Court did modify the award by removing interest on certain claims where it found no justification, and directed the Authority to pay the principal amount within three months, failing which 10% interest would apply from the date the dispute was first referred.

Lesson Learnt

Even where a claim is technically filed under the wrong limitation provision, a tribunal's power to condone delay for sufficient cause can save it, especially where the delay was caused by the other side's own inaction in deciding a pending representation.

Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority vs. Rama Kant Singh – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware