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.

Civil Property & InheritanceSupreme Court of India

Chander Bhan (D) Through LR Sher Singh vs Mukhtiar Singh & Ors.

Not available · 2024 INSC 377Decided 3 May 2024
Not available
Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia · Justice Prasanna B. Varale

Background

In 2002, the appellant entered into an agreement to sell 16 "Kanals" of land with respondent no. 3 for Rs. 8 lakh, paying Rs. 2.50 lakh as earnest money upfront, with the balance due at the time of execution of the sale deed. When the deal did not go through as agreed, the appellant sued for specific performance. While the trial court and first appellate court ruled in the appellant's favour, the Punjab and Haryana High Court reversed those findings in second appeal, dismissing the specific-performance claim (though it did order return of the earnest money with interest). During the litigation, an injunction was in place, yet the land was later sold to respondents 1-2 by respondent no. 4.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court restored the concurrent findings of the trial court and first appellate court, holding that the sale deed executed in favour of respondents 1-2 during the pendency of the injunction was void of legal effect. Applying the doctrine of "lis pendens" (that a property transfer made while litigation is ongoing cannot defeat the rights of the party who wins that litigation), the Court held respondents 1-2 could not claim protection as bona fide purchasers for value. It set aside the High Court's judgment, upheld the decree of specific performance, and directed respondent no. 3 to accept the balance sale consideration of Rs. 5,50,000 and execute the sale deed in the appellant's favour within three months.

Lesson Learnt

Once a court case over a property is pending and an injunction is in place, any sale of that property to a third party during the litigation does not bind the person who ultimately wins the case: buyers must always check for pending litigation before purchasing property.

Chander Bhan (D) Through LR Sher Singh vs Mukhtiar Singh & Ors. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware