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

Lehna Singh (D) by LRs. vs. Gurnam Singh (D) by LRs. & Ors.

Not available · 2024 INSC 429Decided 16 May 2024
Not available
Justice Vikram Nath · Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra

Background

This was a review petition filed by Lehna Singh's legal heirs against the Supreme Court's own 2019 judgment in Civil Appeal No. 6567 of 2014, a decades-old property/injunction dispute between two families. In that 2019 judgment, the Court had ruled that the Punjab and Haryana High Court exceeded its powers under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code by re-examining facts in second appeal without framing a "substantial question of law," and had restored the First Appellate Court's decree in favour of the review petitioner's opponents. The review was sought because a subsequent Constitution Bench decision (Pankajakshi) clarified that second appeals from Punjab and Haryana are governed by Section 41 of the Punjab Courts Act, 1918, not Section 100 CPC, meaning no substantial question of law needs to be framed there.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court found that its 2019 judgment contained an "error apparent on the face of the record" in light of the later Constitution Bench ruling, took the unusual step of recalling its own earlier judgment, and restored the civil appeal for fresh hearing on merits. Re-examining the underlying evidence itself, the Court concluded that the First Appellate Court (District Judge) had wrongly reversed the trial court's findings, and that the High Court had, in fact, correctly set aside the First Appellate Court's decision to restore the trial court's decree. Accordingly, the review was allowed, the appeal was reheard, and, reversing the outcome of the Court's own 2019 decision, the civil appeal was dismissed.

Lesson Learnt

A Supreme Court judgment can be reviewed and even reversed by the Court itself if a later binding precedent shows the earlier decision applied the wrong legal standard, and litigants in Punjab and Haryana should know that second appeals there follow the state's own Punjab Courts Act procedure, not the general CPC framework used elsewhere.

Lehna Singh (D) by LRs. vs. Gurnam Singh (D) by LRs. & Ors. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware