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

Ram Balak Singh vs State of Bihar and Anr.

Not available · 2024 INSC 360Decided 1 May 2024
Not available
Justice Pankaj Mithal · Justice Prasanna Bhalachandra Varale

Background

The plaintiff-appellant claimed to have inherited a small parcel of land (0.32 decimal) in village Kishanpur, Bihar, as the adopted son of Makhan Singh, to whom the land had originally been settled by the ex-landlord. When the village was brought under consolidation proceedings, the land was found incorrectly recorded in the State's name, and the plaintiff successfully applied under Section 10(B) of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956, to have the Consolidation Officer correct the record in his favour in 1979: an order that became final. The plaintiff then filed a civil suit for possession and confirmation of possession; the trial court decreed in his favour, but the First Appellate Court reversed this, a reversal the High Court upheld, reasoning the suit was barred because it collaterally challenged the consolidation authority's earlier order.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court framed the key legal question as whether a civil suit to declare rights over land, where a Consolidation Court has already recognized one party's rights, is barred under Section 37 of the Consolidation Act. It held that such a suit is not barred, because the plaintiff was not seeking to challenge or reverse the Consolidation Officer's 1979 order but rather to enforce and rely upon it; a civil court also cannot ignore or overturn a final order of the Consolidation Officer once it has attained finality. Applying this, the Court set aside the appellate courts' judgments and restored the trial court's decree, allowing the plaintiff's suit for possession to succeed, with no order as to costs.

Lesson Learnt

A final order passed by a specialised authority (like a Consolidation Officer correcting land records) is not just paperwork: a civil court is bound to respect and give effect to it, and a suit to enforce (not challenge) such an order is not barred by law.

Ram Balak Singh vs State of Bihar and Anr. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware