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.

Company & Insolvency LawSupreme Court of India

Global Credit Capital Limited & Anr. vs. Sach Marketing Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

Not available · 2024 INSC 340Decided 25 Apr 2024
Not available
Justice Abhay S. Oka · Justice Pankaj Mithal

Background

A corporate debtor (a liquor company under insolvency proceedings) had appointed the respondent as a "Sales Promoter" under two service-agreement letters, each requiring the respondent to pay a large "security deposit" carrying 21% annual interest, far exceeding the small monthly promotion fee actually payable for the promotional work. When the corporate debtor entered insolvency, the resolution professional rejected the respondent's claim to be a financial creditor (entitled to a bigger say in the insolvency process), treating it instead as a mere operational creditor. The NCLAT held the respondent was a financial creditor; the resolution professional and other stakeholders appealed to the Supreme Court.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court held that courts must look past the label given to a transaction and examine its true, real nature. Here, the "security deposit" bore no rational connection to the promotional services actually being paid for (which were compensated separately, at Rs. 4,000/month), instead, the deposit carried a high interest rate, was treated in the company's own books as a "loan"/"long-term liability," and TDS was deducted on the interest, showing it functioned as a disguised loan rather than a genuine security deposit tied to service performance. Because it had the "commercial effect of a borrowing" under Section 5(8)(f) of the IBC, the Court upheld the NCLAT's finding that the respondent was a financial creditor, not merely an operational creditor.

Lesson Learnt

In insolvency and lending disputes, courts look at the real economic substance of a transaction, not just what the paperwork calls it, dressing up what is really a loan as a "security deposit" under a service contract will not change its true legal character.

Global Credit Capital Limited & Anr. vs. Sach Marketing Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware