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.

Service & Administrative LawSupreme Court of India

M.L. Patil (Dead) Through LRs vs The State of Goa

Civil AppealDecided 20 May 2022
Civil Appeal No. 4100 of 2022
M.R. Shah · B.V. Nagarathna

Background

The appellant had been superannuated/retired by the Goa Government at age 58, though he contended the correct retirement age was 60. The Bombay High Court (Goa Bench) agreed that the retirement age was indeed 60 and that retiring him at 58 was illegal, but because he had approached the Court belatedly, it denied him back wages for the two extra years and also ruled he would get pension at revised rates only from 1 January 2020, with no arrears of pension. The appellant challenged only the denial of pension arrears and the delayed start date for revised pension, not the denial of back wages.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court agreed that denying back wages for the two "extra" years was justified given the delay in approaching the court, but held there was no justification for denying pension arrears, since pension (unlike back wages for actual service) is a continuous cause of action tied to the correct retirement age. The Court held that once it was settled that the retirement age was 60, the appellant was entitled to pension at revised rates from the date he would have turned 60, with all consequential arrears. The High Court's order was accordingly modified only to this extent, and the appeal was partly allowed with arrears to be paid within four weeks, with no order as to costs.

Lesson Learnt

A delay in approaching the court can validly cost a wrongly-retired employee the back wages for the extra years they would have worked, but pension entitlement, being a continuing right, is treated differently and cannot be denied or postponed once the correct retirement age is judicially established.

M.L. Patil (Dead) Through LRs vs The State of Goa – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware