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

Subodh Singh vs Union of India & Ors.

Not available · 2024 INSC 458Decided 16 May 2024
Not available
Justice Hima Kohli · Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah

Background

The appellant's land in Village Kakrahi, District Auriya, Uttar Pradesh, was acquired under Section 20(E)(1) of the Indian Railways Act, 1989 via 2008 notifications, but the award covering a small leftover parcel of 0.0624 hectares was never separately made. In earlier litigation (Dedicated Freight Corridor Corporation of India vs Subodh Singh, 2011), the Supreme Court had already ruled that the acquisition had not lapsed and that the appellant was entitled to additional compensation at not less than 5% of the award value for each month of delay in payment. Despite this, when the appellant sought the additional compensation due for the leftover parcel, the High Court relegated him to fresh arbitration proceedings to work out the amount, prompting this appeal.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court held that its own 2011 ruling had already clarified how the additional compensation for delay was to be calculated, so there was no justification for the High Court to send the appellant back into fresh arbitration proceedings merely to determine an amount that could be computed directly. The Court held the appellant entitled to additional compensation at 5% of the award value for a delay period spanning 84 months, adjusted for amounts already paid, plus simple interest at 7% per annum on the outstanding balance until realization. The appeal was allowed on these terms, with the remaining amount to be released within eight weeks.

Lesson Learnt

Once a court has already laid down the formula for calculating compensation owed for delay, litigants should not be forced through another round of arbitration or fresh proceedings just to apply that formula. Courts can and should compute the amount directly to avoid further delay and expense.

Subodh Singh vs Union of India & Ors. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware