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. Kelkar & Kelkar vs. M/s. Hotel Pride Executive Pvt. Ltd.

Civil AppealDecided 4 May 2022
Civil Appeal No. 3479 of 2022
M.R. Shah · B.V. Nagarathna

Background

A dispute between the parties was referred to arbitration, and the arbitrator awarded the claimant, Kelkar & Kelkar, about Rs. 12.46 lakh. The trial court made this award a decree of the court. Instead of challenging the award through the appeal process available under the (then-applicable) Arbitration Act, 1940, the losing party filed a writ petition directly in the Bombay High Court, arguing that a procedural requirement under a contract clause had not been followed before the arbitrator was appointed. The High Court agreed, set aside the award, and sent the matter back for fresh arbitration. The original claimant then appealed to the Supreme Court.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court held that the High Court should not have entertained a writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution at all, because the law already provided a specific alternative remedy (an appeal under the Arbitration Act, 1940) against both the arbitral award and the trial court's order converting it into a decree. Because that statutory route existed and was not used, the writ petition should not have been allowed to bypass it. The Court set aside the High Court's order, but as a fair balance, gave the respondent liberty to now pursue the proper appeal under the Arbitration Act within four weeks, without that appeal being rejected merely on grounds of delay.

Lesson Learnt

Where the law provides a specific alternative remedy such as a statutory appeal, that route should ordinarily be used instead of a writ petition under Articles 226/227 challenging the same order. Courts are reluctant to let a writ petition become a shortcut around an available appeal process.

M/s. Kelkar & Kelkar vs. M/s. Hotel Pride Executive Pvt. Ltd. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware