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.

Service & Administrative LawSupreme Court of India

Pandurang Vithal Kevne vs. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited & Anr.

Not available · 2024 INSC 1051Decided 20 Dec 2024
Not available
Justice J.K. Maheshwari · Justice Rajesh Bindal

Background

The petitioner was removed from his job with BSNL in 2000 for prolonged unauthorised absence and for running a private business while employed. His removal was upheld by a labour tribunal, then by the High Court, and then by the Supreme Court itself in 2010. Over the next 14 years, he repeatedly relitigated the same settled dispute, filing multiple review petitions, motions, a further SLP, and complaints alleging judicial corruption to the President, the Prime Minister, and the Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court. He then filed the present petition challenging the High Court's 2024 refusal to condone an 11-year delay in filing a second review petition.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court traced the petitioner's entire 24-year litigation history in a detailed table and found the petition to be a clear case of abuse of the judicial process through repetitive and meritless proceedings. Citing its own precedents on litigants who "pollute the stream of justice" through forum shopping and frivolous claims, the Court held there was no merit whatsoever in the petition or in condoning the delay, and dismissed it. Recognising that such conduct wastes judicial time that could go toward genuine litigants, the Court imposed an exemplary cost of Rs. 1,00,000 on the petitioner, payable to the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority.

Lesson Learnt

Courts can and will impose heavy costs on litigants who keep reopening matters that have already been conclusively decided: persistence through repeated appeals, reviews, and complaints is not a substitute for having a genuine legal grievance.

Pandurang Vithal Kevne vs. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited & Anr. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware