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.
Transfer Petition (Criminal) · 2026 INSC 1060
Where a marriage has irretrievably broken down and the parties reach a genuine, voluntary settlement, including on alimony, the Supreme Court can use its Article 142 powers to grant a mutual-consent divorce and close out all related litigation in one stroke, without requiring the usual statutory waiting period.
Writ Petition (Civil) · 2026 INSC 1061
In long-running, complex litigation involving apportioned government liabilities across states, the Supreme Court can use a mechanism like a retired-judge committee plus periodic compliance affidavits to bring genuine finality, including firm timelines, transparency obligations, and interest for delayed payment, rather than leaving matters open-ended.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1062
In an "as is where is" liquidation auction, a bidder who voluntarily accepts the auction terms cannot later resile from a forfeiture clause by citing regulatory caps or after-the-fact excuses for non-payment: courts will enforce the auction notice's own conditions.
Writ Petition (Criminal) · 2026:DHC:8338-DB
Once someone is released from custody because the police failed to properly communicate the grounds of arrest, the police cannot simply re-arrest them by adding new charges: a specific, court-supervised procedure with senior-officer accountability must be followed, or the re-arrest itself becomes illegal.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8308
In economic-offence cases, bail can still be granted where the method used to quantify the alleged financial evasion is not adequately justified, and where the apprehension of re-offending is speculative rather than evidence-based.
Writ Petition (Criminal) · 2026:DHC:8323
A parole claim must be backed by a genuine, verifiable application to the competent jail authority: courts will scrutinise irregularities like an incomplete address, an unexplained thumb mark, or reliance on a mere friend's affidavit rather than close family.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8337
Courts can grant short, strictly time-bound interim bail purely on humanitarian/compassionate grounds (such as caring for a seriously ill family member), even while a case remains pending trial and an earlier bail plea has failed.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8312
Courts will not repeatedly re-examine a bail plea already rejected on merits unless the applicant can point to a genuine change in circumstances since the earlier order.
First Appeal from Order · 2026:DHC:8334
Under the no-fault compensation scheme for railway accidents, a valid ticket-holder injured while attempting to board a train, even carelessly, is generally entitled to compensation unless the railway can show a deliberate, conscious exposure to danger, not mere negligence.
6171 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 moreLegal 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 ___).
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
The plaintiff bought an open plot of land in Hardoi, Uttar Pradesh, through a registered sale deed in 1966 from the erstwhile Zamindar. In 1975, when the plaintiff tried to construct on the land, the defendants (claiming rights through a 1944 tenancy/rent dispute and a later 1966 possession proceeding under Section 145 CrPC) objected, leading to a suit for injunction and, alternatively, possession. The trial court and the First Appellate Court both ruled in the plaintiff's favour on ownership and possession, but the Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), in a second appeal, reversed this and dismissed the suit entirely on the ground that the defendants had perfected title by adverse possession since 1944, and that the suit was consequently time-barred.
The Supreme Court held the High Court erred in reappreciating factual findings in a second appeal under Section 100 CPC, a jurisdiction limited to substantial questions of law, without properly engaging with the lower courts' findings on limitation and ownership. It found that the defendants' predecessors were originally tenants under the 1944 rent suit, so their possession was permissive, not adverse, and could not mature into adverse possession against the landlord; the plaintiff's ownership/title arose only from the 1966 sale deed, so the limitation period for the 1975 suit ran from 1966, well within the 12-year period. The Court also noted the unchallenged finding that the land was non-agricultural and thus not subject to the Zamindari Abolition Act, undermining the defendants' alternative ownership claim. It set aside the High Court's judgment and restored the First Appellate Court's decree of possession in the plaintiff's favour.
Possession that begins as a tenant (permissive possession) cannot ripen into "adverse possession" against the landlord merely by continuing for a long time, and a High Court exercising second-appeal jurisdiction under Section 100 CPC should not re-open settled findings of fact without identifying a genuine substantial question of law.
