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 LawSupreme Court of India

M/s. Emaar India Ltd. vs Tarun Aggarwal Projects LLP

Civil AppealDecided 30 Sept 2022
Civil Appeal No. 6774 of 2022
M.R. Shah · Krishna Murari

Background

The parties had a Collaboration Agreement and later Addendum Agreement for developing a residential colony in Gurugram. A dispute arose over alleged non-compliance by Emaar, and the original applicants (Tarun Aggarwal Projects LLP) sought appointment of an arbitrator. Emaar opposed, arguing the dispute actually fell under a separate clause (Clause 36) of the agreement that required court enforcement, not arbitration under Clause 37. The Delhi High Court nevertheless appointed arbitrators without first deciding whether the dispute fell under Clause 36, and Emaar appealed to the Supreme Court.

Decision Breakdown

The Court held that where a party specifically pleads that the dispute is covered by a carve-out clause making it non-arbitrable, the referral court must hold at least a preliminary/prima facie inquiry into that question before appointing arbitrators. It cannot simply appoint arbitrators without examining whether the dispute is arbitrable at all. Relying on its earlier rulings (including Vidya Drolia) on who decides arbitrability, the Court found the High Court had skipped this necessary preliminary inquiry. It therefore set aside the High Court's order appointing arbitrators and sent the matter back to the High Court to conduct that preliminary inquiry and decide afresh.

Lesson Learnt

Before parties can be sent to arbitration, a court asked to appoint an arbitrator must first satisfy itself, even on a limited prima facie basis, that the dispute is actually arbitrable under the contract: simply pointing to a general arbitration clause is not enough if the contract also carves out certain disputes for the regular courts.

M/s. Emaar India Ltd. vs Tarun Aggarwal Projects LLP – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware