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.

Banking & Debt Recovery LawSupreme Court of India

Rockline Construction Company vs Doha Bank QSC & Ors.

Not availableDecided 24 Apr 2023
Not available
Krishna Murari · Sanjay Karol

Background

Rockline Construction had won an auction of a mortgaged property back in 2007, but the sale was later set aside by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT), entitling Rockline to a refund of its deposit with interest, after deducting any "mesne profits" (compensation for use of the property in the meantime). This Court had earlier upheld that outcome. Rockline then filed this application asking the Court to fix the exact interest rate on the refund and settle how much should be deducted as mesne profits, since a recovery officer had provisionally fixed a modest 9% interest rate against Rockline's claim for a market commercial rate of around 14.5%.

Decision Breakdown

The Court noted that Rockline is undisputedly entitled to interest on its long-held deposit, but held that the two live issues, the correct rate/terms of interest and the exact mesne profits, are best decided by the specialised appellate tribunal (DRAT) where an appeal on this very point was already pending, rather than by the Supreme Court stepping in. It rejected the bank's argument that Rockline's appeal was time-barred, given the long-running nature of the litigation, and directed the DRAT to decide the pending appeal strictly on merits within two months, with liberty for Rockline to come back to the Supreme Court if needed.

Lesson Learnt

Even after the Supreme Court finally settles a party's basic entitlement (here, to a refund with interest), it will often leave the fact-heavy job of working out the exact amount to the specialised tribunal set up for that purpose, rather than recalculating figures itself: litigants should pursue such calculation disputes in the proper forum rather than expecting the apex court to do the arithmetic.

Rockline Construction Company vs Doha Bank QSC & Ors. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware