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 LawDelhi High Court

M.P Khaitan vs. Engineering Projects (India) Limited & Anr.

Arbitration Petition · 2026:DHC:7514Decided 1 Sept 2026New Delhi Bench
ARB.P. 340/2026CNR: DLHC010066052026
Justice Avneesh Jhingan

Background

The petitioner-contractor had built university buildings in Tripura under a contract with Engineering Projects (India) Limited (EPI), which itself was executing the project on behalf of Tripura University. After completion, a dispute arose over unpaid escalation charges, and the petitioner sought appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act, while the University argued it was not a party to the contract and should not be involved.

Decision Breakdown

The Court held that the contract's arbitration clause, which vested exclusive arbitrator-appointment power in EPI's own Chairman, was void as it violated Section 12(5) of the Arbitration Act (a party cannot appoint its own arbitrator), but the underlying agreement to arbitrate survived and the Court could appoint an independent arbitrator. On the University's status, the Court found, based on the University's own committee minutes acknowledging liability and a payment-dependency clause in the contract, that the University was prima facie a "veritable party" to the dispute, though it left the final determination of that question to the arbitrator. A retired judge was appointed as sole arbitrator under the Delhi International Arbitration Centre.

Lesson Learnt

A contract clause letting one party unilaterally appoint the arbitrator is legally unenforceable, but this does not kill the arbitration itself: courts will sever the invalid part and still appoint an independent arbitrator to resolve the dispute.

M.P Khaitan vs. Engineering Projects (India) Limited & Anr. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware