LegalAware
LegalAware.ai
EMPOWERING LEGAL AWARENESS

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 ProcedureSupreme Court of India

Suresh G. Ramnani vs. Aurelia Ana De Piedade Miranda @ Ariya Alvares (Dead Thr. LRs) & Ors.

Civil Appeal · 2022 INSC 1196Decided 10 Nov 2022
Civil Appeal No. 8293 of 2022
Aniruddha Bose · Vikram Nath

Background

In a long-running Goa property dispute, a second appeal was allowed by Justice G.S. Patel of the Bombay High Court (Goa Bench) in January 2019 while he was sitting virtually from the Bombay principal seat, having since been transferred away from the Goa Bench. The losing party filed a review petition, which was admitted by a different judge at the Goa Bench. The original appellant then applied to have the review transferred back to Justice Patel specifically, but this application was rejected by the judge handling the matter at Goa, prompting the present appeal to the Supreme Court.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court declined to resolve the underlying interpretive question of whether Bombay High Court Rules required the review to be heard by the same judge who passed the original order (Justice Patel) or by whichever judge held the relevant roster at the Goa Bench. Instead, it held that under the proviso to Rule 3(1) of Chapter XXX of the Bombay High Court Rules, when the judge who passed the original order is no longer available or sitting at that bench, the question of which judge should hear the review is an administrative matter falling within the Chief Justice's power as "master of the roster", not something the single judge could decide on the judicial side. The Court set aside the impugned order and directed that the transfer application be placed before the Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court for an appropriate administrative decision.

Lesson Learnt

Questions about which judge or bench should hear a matter once the original judge has moved on are administrative roster decisions for the Chief Justice, not something a sitting judge can resolve on the judicial side by simply rejecting or allowing a transfer application.

Official source (sci.gov.in)View Judgment (PDF)
Suresh G. Ramnani vs. Aurelia Ana De Piedade Miranda @ Ariya Alvares (Dead Thr. LRs) & Ors. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware