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

Madan Mohan (Dead) Through LRs v. Thakar Dass (Dead) Through LRs

Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 730Decided 21 Jul 2026
Civil Appeal arising out of SLP(C) No.12435 of 2019 (Non-Reportable)
Justice Sanjay Karol · Justice Augustine George Masih

Background

An elderly landlady, Kamla Devi, had sought eviction of a tenant from a shop on two grounds: non-payment of rent and her own and her son's bona fide need to use the premises for business. Both the Rent Controller and the Appellate Authority ruled in the landlady's favour and ordered eviction. The tenant's revision petition succeeded before the Punjab and Haryana High Court, which held that the landlady had not approached the court with clean hands because she had concealed that a third shop she owned was lying vacant (allegedly used to store garbage). By the time the matter reached the Supreme Court, both original parties had died and their legal heirs were pursuing the case.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court restored the eviction order and set aside the High Court's judgment. It held that a landlord's bona fide requirement must be genuine, honest and free of mere pretext, but once the Rent Controller and Appellate Authority had concurrently found on facts that the third shop was being used to store garbage (not lying vacant as usable premises), the High Court had no jurisdiction under Section 115 CPC to re-appreciate that evidence and substitute its own view: revisional jurisdiction is confined to correcting jurisdictional errors, illegality, or perversity, not re-weighing facts like an appellate court. The Court found nothing dishonest in the landlady's case and restored the original eviction, directing the tenant to hand over vacant possession within two months.

Lesson Learnt

A High Court exercising revisional (as opposed to appellate) jurisdiction cannot re-examine and overturn concurrent factual findings of lower courts merely because it would have assessed the evidence differently: revision is meant only to correct clear legal or jurisdictional errors.

Madan Mohan (Dead) Through LRs v. Thakar Dass (Dead) Through LRs – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware