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.

Consumer RightsSupreme Court of India

M/s Imperia Structure Ltd. vs. Brig. Harit Pant

Civil AppealDecided 28 Mar 2022
Civil Appeal No. 1816 of 2022
Uday Umesh Lalit · S. Ravindra Bhat · Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha

Background

A group of homebuyers who had booked apartments with builder Imperia Structure Ltd. approached the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) for relief over delayed/undelivered possession. The NCDRC ruled in the buyers' favour, relying on the Supreme Court's own earlier decision in Imperia Structures Ltd. v. Anil Patni (2020), which had held that Section 18 of the RERA Act gives an allottee an unqualified right to demand a refund with interest if the promoter fails to deliver possession on time. The builder appealed both sets of NCDRC orders to the Supreme Court.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court found that the NCDRC had correctly and directly applied the binding principle already laid down in the Anil Patni case: that a homebuyer's right to withdraw from a delayed project and get a refund with interest under Section 18 of RERA is unqualified and exists "without prejudice to any other remedy." Seeing no error or reason to depart from its own settled precedent, the Court dismissed both appeals (covering multiple individual buyers) with no order as to costs.

Lesson Learnt

If a builder fails to hand over possession on time, a homebuyer has an unqualified statutory right under RERA to walk away from the project and get a full refund with interest: this cannot be diluted or re-litigated once the Supreme Court has settled the point.

M/s Imperia Structure Ltd. vs. Brig. Harit Pant – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware