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.

Family LawDelhi High Court

Mr. Brijesh Rajkumar Suiri vs. Mrs. Navita Brijesh Suri

Matrimonial Appeal (Family Court) · 2026:DHC:7905-DBDecided 16 Sept 2026New Delhi Bench
MAT.APP.(F.C.) 439/2024CNR: DLHC010975142024
Justice Vivek Chaudhary · Justice Renu Bhatnagar

Background

In divorce proceedings initiated by the wife, the Family Court had ordered the husband to pay Rs. 5,000 per month as interim maintenance, backdated to when the wife first filed her maintenance application in January 2021. The husband appealed, arguing his true income was much lower than the Rs. 22,000/month the Family Court assumed (based on Delhi's minimum wage notification, even though he lives and works in Haryana), and, more importantly, that the wife herself had admitted she was employed and earning during much of the period for which maintenance was backdated.

Decision Breakdown

The Court upheld the Family Court's income assessment of the husband, noting that Haryana's minimum wages are broadly similar to Delhi's, that some "guesswork" by courts is legally permissible in maintenance cases (since parties often don't disclose true income), and that a bare salary certificate from the husband's own father-employer wasn't enough to prove a lower income without other supporting evidence. However, the Court agreed with the husband on timing: the wife had admitted in her own court filings that she worked at a shoe retail showroom from March 2020 until she lost that job in June 2024, meaning she was not entitled to backdated maintenance for that period when she was actually employed. The appeal was partly allowed: maintenance was made payable only from July 2024 onward (when she became unemployed), not from the original 2021 filing date.

Lesson Learnt

In maintenance disputes, courts are allowed to estimate a paying spouse's income using reasonable inferences when true income isn't transparently disclosed, but a spouse claiming maintenance cannot be awarded backdated support for a period during which they admittedly had their own employment income.

Mr. Brijesh Rajkumar Suiri vs. Mrs. Navita Brijesh Suri – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware