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

Savitri Bai and another vs. Savitri Bai

Not available · 2024 INSC 152Decided 29 Feb 2024
Not available
Justice Sanjay Karol · Justice Sanjay Kumar

Background

Both the plaintiff and the main defendant in this decades-old property dispute happened to share the name "Savitri Bai." The plaintiff claimed she had purchased a house in Katni, Madhya Pradesh, in 1979 through a registered sale deed from the second wife and children of the late Babulal Kahar, and that the defendant (Babulal's daughter from his first wife) had illegally taken forcible possession of it. The defendant countered that her father had, before the sale deed was executed, made a Will in 1977 bequeathing the property to her son, Meghraj. The Trial Court and the First Appellate Court both dismissed the plaintiff's suit, but the Madhya Pradesh High Court reversed this in second appeal, decreeing possession in the plaintiff's favour and declaring the Will null and void.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's judgment, and restored the findings of the Trial Court and First Appellate Court. It held that the Will had been duly proved through independent evidence, the testimony of the advocate who scribed it and the attesting witnesses, satisfying the requirements of Section 68 of the Evidence Act, 1872 and Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, and that the High Court had wrongly brushed this evidence aside. Since the Will validly vested the property in Meghraj, and he was neither a party to the later sale deed nor represented in it through his guardian, that sale deed could not pass title to his share of the property, regardless of his mother's signature on it in her individual capacity.

Lesson Learnt

A Will that is properly proved through its scribe and attesting witnesses, in compliance with the Evidence Act and Succession Act, takes precedence over a later sale deed executed by someone who no longer owns the property; a signature on a sale deed by a person in her individual capacity cannot transfer property that actually belongs to her child unless she signs as that child's lawful guardian.

Savitri Bai and another vs. Savitri Bai – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware