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

Velagacharla Jayaram Reddy & Ors. vs M. Venkata Ramana & Ors. Etc.

Civil AppealDecided 11 Jan 2022
Civil Appeal Nos. 11015-11016 of 2017

Background

A co-operative housing society in Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh had formed a residential layout with designated areas for parks, a school and parking. A dispute arose when a vacant commercial plot was allotted (via an exchange and registered sale deed) to one member, M. Venkata Ramana, and challenged by a welfare association, former office-bearers of the society, and two shopkeepers who claimed the plot was actually reserved as a parking area in front of their shops. A departmental arbitrator and an appellate tribunal both ruled in favour of the challengers, but the Andhra Pradesh High Court reversed this and upheld the allotment.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court, after even calling for a fresh, exhaustive report from the local District Judge on the entire matter, found no actual document or approved layout plan showing the disputed plot was ever earmarked as a parking area: the "parking area" conclusion had been based only on the original arbitrator's own assumption. It also noted that the two shopkeepers challenging the allotment had themselves earlier tried to buy the very same plot for their own commercial use, undermining their claim to be acting in the public interest. Finding the allotment properly made to a genuine society member and that construction had stood on the plot for over two decades, the Court declined to interfere and dismissed the appeal.

Lesson Learnt

A claim that land is a protected public amenity (like a parking area) must be backed by the actual approved layout plan or documentary record: a party cannot rely on an official's unsupported assumption, especially where that party's own earlier conduct (trying to acquire the same plot for itself) undercuts its claim to be safeguarding public interest.

Velagacharla Jayaram Reddy & Ors. vs M. Venkata Ramana & Ors. Etc. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware