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.

Civil Property & InheritanceSupreme Court of India

National Capital Territory of Delhi & Ors. vs Subhash Chander Khatri & Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 1987 of 2023)

Civil AppealDecided 10 Apr 2023
Civil Appeal No. 1987 of 2023
M.R. Shah · C.T. Ravikumar

Background

The Delhi High Court had earlier declared that a land acquisition proceeding against the respondent's land had "lapsed" under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, because compensation had not been paid, even though the Department had already taken possession of the land and put it to use, and even the landowner had accepted this. The High Court still directed that the landowner be paid compensation under the newer 2013 Act. The NCT of Delhi appealed to the Supreme Court against this finding of "deemed lapse."

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court applied its own earlier Constitution Bench ruling in Indore Development Authority vs Manoharlal (2020), which clarified that under Section 24(2), a "deemed lapse" of acquisition occurs only where authorities failed to both take possession and pay compensation for five years or more before 2014. If either possession was taken or compensation paid, there is no lapse. Since it was undisputed that possession of the land had already been taken and the land put to use by the Department before the 2013 Act came into force, there could be no deemed lapse merely because compensation had not been paid. The Court therefore held the High Court's judgment unsustainable, quashed it, and dismissed the original writ petition, allowing the appeal with no order as to costs.

Lesson Learnt

Under the 2013 land acquisition law, an old acquisition does not automatically "lapse" for non-payment of compensation alone. If the government had already taken possession of the land before the new law came into force, the acquisition stands and the landowner cannot claim it lapsed simply because compensation was delayed.

National Capital Territory of Delhi & Ors. vs Subhash Chander Khatri & Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 1987 of 2023) – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware