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

M/s Patel Infrastructure Limited v. M/s Aditya Construction

Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 804Decided 5 Aug 2026
C.A. No.-010057-010057 - 2026 (arising out of SLP (C) No. 3250 of 2026)
Justice Sanjay Kumar · Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva

Background

A dispute arose between M/s Patel Infrastructure Limited and M/s Aditya Construction, a proprietorship registered as an MSME under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006. Patel Infrastructure raised an important legal question in its appeal: whether a buyer of goods or services from an MSME can independently start arbitration proceedings under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, rather than being limited to the statutory MSME facilitation council route.

Decision Breakdown

Instead of deciding the legal question, the respondent's counsel offered, on instructions, to resolve the dispute through arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act via the Delhi International Arbitration Centre, with the venue fixed at New Delhi for the convenience of both parties (who were based in Gujarat and Uttar Pradesh respectively). The Supreme Court accepted this consent arrangement and disposed of the appeal on those terms, directing the appellant to approach the arbitration centre within two weeks. The Court expressly left the underlying legal question about MSME buyers' arbitration rights open for decision in a future, appropriate case.

Lesson Learnt

Parties are free to resolve procedural or jurisdictional disputes by mutual agreement, and courts will readily accommodate a sensible settlement, but this means important, unsettled legal questions can remain open even after a case reaches the Supreme Court, to be decided only when a future case squarely requires an answer.

M/s Patel Infrastructure Limited v. M/s Aditya Construction – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware