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.

Company & Insolvency LawSupreme Court of India

M/S RPS Infrastructure Ltd. vs. Mukul Kumar

Civil Appeal · 2023 INSC 816Decided 11 Sept 2023
Civil Appeal No. 5590 of 2021
Sanjay Kishan Kaul · Sudhanshu Dhulia

Background

RPS Infrastructure had won an arbitration award against a corporate debtor (KST Infrastructure) for a real-estate development dispute, but the debtor's challenge to that award was still pending when the debtor entered insolvency proceedings. The Resolution Professional invited claims through public newspaper notices, but RPS filed its claim 287 days after the deadline, only after the resolution plan had already been approved by the Committee of Creditors, and the claim was rejected as time-barred. RPS argued it was unaware of the insolvency proceedings and that its claim, being contingent on a pending arbitration appeal, should still have been factored in.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court held that public announcement of the CIRP through newspapers, as required under the IBC and its regulations, creates "deemed knowledge" for all creditors, including commercial entities like RPS: its claim of ignorance was not an acceptable excuse. The Resolution Professional had made genuine efforts to obtain the debtor's records (even filing a formal application for them) and could not be faulted for failing to include an undisclosed liability. Relying on its earlier ruling in Essar Steel, the Court held that allowing late claims after a resolution plan is approved would create endless uncertainty for resolution applicants, and dismissed the appeal.

Lesson Learnt

Creditors and claimants must stay vigilant and act promptly once insolvency proceedings against a debtor are publicly announced. Courts will not entertain very late claims after a resolution plan has already been approved, even if the claimant later blames lack of actual notice.

M/S RPS Infrastructure Ltd. vs. Mukul Kumar – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware