Real judgements, distilled
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.
Transfer Petition (Criminal) · 2026 INSC 1060
Where a marriage has irretrievably broken down and the parties reach a genuine, voluntary settlement, including on alimony, the Supreme Court can use its Article 142 powers to grant a mutual-consent divorce and close out all related litigation in one stroke, without requiring the usual statutory waiting period.
Writ Petition (Civil) · 2026 INSC 1061
In long-running, complex litigation involving apportioned government liabilities across states, the Supreme Court can use a mechanism like a retired-judge committee plus periodic compliance affidavits to bring genuine finality, including firm timelines, transparency obligations, and interest for delayed payment, rather than leaving matters open-ended.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1062
In an "as is where is" liquidation auction, a bidder who voluntarily accepts the auction terms cannot later resile from a forfeiture clause by citing regulatory caps or after-the-fact excuses for non-payment: courts will enforce the auction notice's own conditions.
Writ Petition (Criminal) · 2026:DHC:8338-DB
Once someone is released from custody because the police failed to properly communicate the grounds of arrest, the police cannot simply re-arrest them by adding new charges: a specific, court-supervised procedure with senior-officer accountability must be followed, or the re-arrest itself becomes illegal.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8308
In economic-offence cases, bail can still be granted where the method used to quantify the alleged financial evasion is not adequately justified, and where the apprehension of re-offending is speculative rather than evidence-based.
Writ Petition (Criminal) · 2026:DHC:8323
A parole claim must be backed by a genuine, verifiable application to the competent jail authority: courts will scrutinise irregularities like an incomplete address, an unexplained thumb mark, or reliance on a mere friend's affidavit rather than close family.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8337
Courts can grant short, strictly time-bound interim bail purely on humanitarian/compassionate grounds (such as caring for a seriously ill family member), even while a case remains pending trial and an earlier bail plea has failed.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8312
Courts will not repeatedly re-examine a bail plea already rejected on merits unless the applicant can point to a genuine change in circumstances since the earlier order.
First Appeal from Order · 2026:DHC:8334
Under the no-fault compensation scheme for railway accidents, a valid ticket-holder injured while attempting to board a train, even carelessly, is generally entitled to compensation unless the railway can show a deliberate, conscious exposure to danger, not mere negligence.
6171 more judgements for members
You're seeing the newest cases. Log in — it's free — to keep scrolling, search by name or judge, and filter by court or legal area.
Log in to see moreLegal 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 ___).
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Unibros, a contractor, was awarded a construction contract by All India Radio for a building in Delhi that was supposed to finish in 12 months but was delayed by about 42.5 months due to the respondent's fault. An Arbitrator twice awarded Unibros roughly Rs. 1.44 crore for "loss of profit" during the delay period, calculated using Hudson's formula, but the Delhi High Court (both the Single Judge and the Division Bench) set aside this part of the award both times, finding that Unibros had produced no real evidence to prove it had actually lost profitable opportunities because of the delay. Unibros appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that courts have very limited power to interfere with an arbitrator's factual findings and that Hudson's formula is a legally accepted method for calculating such losses.
The Supreme Court held that while courts indeed have limited scope to interfere with arbitral awards, an award based on no evidence at all is "patently illegal" and conflicts with the fundamental public policy of India, which is a valid ground to set it aside under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. The Court clarified that a claim for loss of profit due to delay requires the claimant to prove, with credible independent evidence (such as other projects declined, tendering opportunities lost, or financial records), that it actually had a viable alternative opportunity to earn profit elsewhere: a bare formula like Hudson's estimates the amount of loss but cannot itself substitute for proof that a loss occurred. Since Unibros never produced such evidence in either round of arbitration, the Court upheld the setting aside of the loss-of-profit award and dismissed the appeal, though it waived the costs earlier imposed by the Single Judge.
A contractor cannot recover damages for "loss of profit" from a delayed contract simply by applying a standard formula; they must independently prove, with real evidence, that they actually lost a specific profitable opportunity because their resources were tied up: an arbitral award granting such damages without any such proof can be struck down as legally unsustainable.
