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

OPG Power Generation Private Limited vs Enexio Power Cooling Solutions India Private Limited

Not available · 2024 INSC 711Decided 20 Sept 2024
Not available
Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud · Justice J.B. Pardiwala · Justice Manoj Misra

Background

OPG Power Generation had floated a tender for design, supply, and installation of an air-cooled condenser unit for a 160 MW coal-based thermal power plant in Tamil Nadu, and engaged Enexio Power Cooling Solutions for the work. Disputes arose over defects, repair costs, and payment claims, which went to arbitration. The arbitral tribunal passed an award, and OPG challenged it; a single judge of the Madras High Court set aside part of the award, but a Division Bench of the High Court reversed that and restored the original arbitral award. OPG and a related company then appealed to the Supreme Court.

Decision Breakdown

Under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, courts can interfere with an arbitral award only on narrow grounds such as "patent illegality" or conflict with public policy. They cannot re-examine the merits like a regular appeal. The Supreme Court went through the tribunal's findings on limitation (including whether claims were kept alive by an acknowledgment made in an April 2018 meeting) and on the merits of the claims and counterclaims, and found no such patent illegality or perversity in the award. It held that the High Court's Division Bench was right to set aside the single judge's interference and restore the arbitral award. The appeals were accordingly dismissed, with parties bearing their own costs.

Lesson Learnt

Once parties choose arbitration, courts will not reopen the arbitrator's factual and legal findings on their merits: a challenge to an award can succeed only on the very limited grounds allowed by law, not by re-arguing the case as if it were a fresh appeal.

OPG Power Generation Private Limited vs Enexio Power Cooling Solutions India Private Limited – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware