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

P. Kishore Kumar vs Vittal K Patkar

Civil Appeal · 2023 INSC 1009Decided 20 Nov 2023
Civil Appeal No. 7210 of 2011
Bela M. Trivedi · Dipankar Datta

Background

A parcel of land in Karnataka that had once been "Inam" land (a hereditary land grant) became the subject of a title dispute after the Mysore Inam Abolition Act, 1954 vested such lands in the State, subject to Inamdars or tenants applying for occupancy rights. A 1958 order of the Special Deputy Commissioner had rejected the plaintiff's predecessor's claim to occupancy rights as a tenant while registering the land in favour of the defendant's predecessor, an Inamdar. Despite this, revenue records later showed the plaintiff's side as owners, and the plaintiff purchased and sued for declaration of title, ultimately succeeding before the trial court and, on second appeal, the Karnataka High Court, both of which relied heavily on the revenue records.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court held that the 1958 Commissioner's order was clear and unambiguous, it rejected the plaintiff's vendor's claim as a tenant and vested occupancy rights in the defendant's predecessor, and that revenue records, being merely for fiscal purposes, cannot override or contradict this order or confer title. Applying the principle "nemo dat quod non habet" (no one can give a better title than they themselves have), the Court found that since the plaintiff's vendor never had valid title, she could not pass any title to the plaintiff, whereas the defendant's chain of sale deeds was properly supported by the Commissioner's order. The Court also held the High Court had exceeded its limited jurisdiction under Section 100 CPC (second appeal) by re-appreciating facts and framing a question that was not a genuine "substantial question of law," and restored the first appellate court's dismissal of the plaintiff's suit.

Lesson Learnt

Entries in revenue records (like mutation registers) are for tax/fiscal purposes only and do not create or prove ownership: a clear, unchallenged government order determining title or occupancy rights will prevail over conflicting revenue entries, and a purchaser cannot get better title than their seller actually possessed.

P. Kishore Kumar vs Vittal K Patkar – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware