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.
In 1973, the original landowner leased a Kolkata property to the appellants' predecessors (partners of M/s Kumar Industries) for 20 years, permitting them to construct a building, with an obligation to remove it and hand back vacant land when the lease expired in 1993. After the lease ended, the tenants applied in 2003 to be declared "thika tenants", a special protected tenancy category under West Bengal's thika tenancy laws that can vest the landlord's interest in the State, claiming rights under statutes enacted after their lease had already expired. The Controller and a specialised Tribunal initially accepted this claim, but the Calcutta High Court reversed, holding the tenants did not qualify as thika tenants; the property had since been transferred to respondent Mani Square Ltd.
The Supreme Court traced the history of three successive thika tenancy statutes (1949, 1981, and 2001 Acts) and held that the appellants could not qualify as thika tenants under any of them: the structure they built was a "pucca" (permanent, not temporary/kutcha) structure, which falls outside the statutory definition of thika tenancy; the 1981 Act's operation over this specific property had in any case been stayed by an earlier High Court order; and by the time the 2001 Act came into force, the tenants' lease had already expired in 1993, meaning they were no longer tenants at all and so had no continuing status to benefit from that later law. The Court affirmed a Calcutta High Court Full Bench ruling (Lakshmimoni Das) on interpreting the statutory term "thika tenancy," and rejected the Controller's reliance on an unrelated precedent (Purushottam Das Murarka) as inapplicable. It also directed final disbursement of deposited occupancy-charge amounts to the respondent. The appeal was dismissed, upholding the High Court's finding that no thika tenancy or statutory vesting ever arose.
A tenant cannot claim the benefit of a later-enacted tenant-protection statute for a tenancy that had already legally ended before that statute came into force, nor can a permanent ("pucca") structure built on leased land bring an occupant within a legal category specifically meant for temporary/kutcha structures.
