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

Dharmesh S. Jain & Anr. vs. Urban Infrastructure Real Estate Fund

Not availableDecided 25 Jan 2022
Not available
M.R. Shah · Sanjiv Khanna

Background

The applicants had earlier been directed by the High Court to deposit an amount to keep an arbitral award's execution stayed, and after seeking and being granted repeated extensions by the Supreme Court, still failed to deposit the money. When the respondent applied for recall of an ex-parte extension order, the Supreme Court on 28.10.2021 directed the applicants to deposit the amount and warned that non-compliance would be treated seriously. The applicants then filed the present application asking the Court to recall that 28.10.2021 order, arguing it was passed without proper notice or hearing and exceeded what could be ordered in a special leave petition.

Decision Breakdown

The Court rejected the recall application, noting that the applicants' own counsel had appeared and been heard before the 28.10.2021 order was passed, and had not objected at the time to maintainability or asked for time to file a reply, so they could not raise those objections now. The Court found the application to be an afterthought aimed at escaping contempt proceedings initiated by the respondent, pointing to the applicants' repeated pattern of seeking extensions while never actually complying with the High Court's original deposit direction. Since the order was passed only after due hearing and given the applicants' demonstrated intent to delay rather than comply, the Court held no case for recall was made out and dismissed the application.

Lesson Learnt

A party cannot seek to recall a court order on procedural grounds (lack of notice, non-maintainability) if it fully participated in that hearing without raising the objection at the time; courts will scrutinize repeated extension requests for genuine intent to comply versus tactics to delay enforcement.

Dharmesh S. Jain & Anr. vs. Urban Infrastructure Real Estate Fund – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware