Appeal was barred under Section 96 of Civil Procedure Code as it was opposed as the suit agreement was admitted by the defendants and there was no dispute regarding the identity of the site agreed to sale and the amount of consideration.
The Supreme Court held that the Court has to entertain the suit so filed, even if the part of the dispute, which was the subject matter of the dispute, is under the jurisdiction of the Court.
The Supreme Court was listening to a plea by the Andhra Pradesh Government against the order of the Andhra Pradesh High Court that quashed the FIR against the Ministers and Government officials who were allegedly involved in the Amaravati land scam.
This Case Is Based On Article 133 Of The Constitution, Where Arbitration Awards Are Challenged
The Supreme Court affirmed that under Order XXXII, rule 9 of the Original Side Rules of the Calcutta High Court, an Appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution could be admitted either by order of the High Court under Order XLV, rule 8 of the CPC or
The appeals by New Okhla Industrial Development Authority and the State of Uttar Pradesh raise the issue as to whether the High Court has transcended the limits of its power of judicial review.
A Plaint With Defects Of Misjoinder Of Parties Or Misjoinder Of Causes Of Action Cannot Be Barred By Law
Serving notice of summons is necessary and no order that affects the rights of a party should be heard without providing them with an opportunity to represent the case.
An order of dismissal passed by the appropriate authority is not effective without proper enquiry and communication to the officer concerned.
The Supreme Court held that the High Court proceeded to decide matters on which the Trial Court had recorded no final decision, and that which could not be decided by the High Court until the parties had opportunity to lead evidence thereon.
While confirming the accusation, the Supreme Court stated that an accused cannot be discharged for an offence under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code.
The Kerala High Court recently ordered the Bank of India to disburse the petitioner's loan application on the grounds that she was a deserving student and that educational loan repayment options should not be based on the parents' financial situation
The High Court dismissed the appeal of the applicant stating that the decision given by the Trial Court, that the suits were not maintainable and yet keeping them pending, was itself an exercise of jurisdiction with a material irregularity.
The Madras Bar Association filed a writ petition before the Court challenging the Tribunal Reforms (Rationalisation and Conditions of Service) Ordinance, 2021 and Sections 184 and 186 (2) of the Finance Act, 2017 on the grounds that they were against
The appellant was allowed to appeal as an indigent person after the suit had been dismissed on a merit basis. The order of the High Court passed on May 3, 1982, in C. M. No. 525 of 1981 was set aside and the appeal was accordingly allowed by the Supr
There is no justification in transferring a person from one quarter to another quarter of the same locality due to his/her promotion
The Supreme Court reversed the High Court judgement and restored the Trial Court order and held that the right to summon is available, and must be exercised during the trial proceedings and not after the trial gets completed.
In his dissenting judgment, Justice Hemant Gupta has held the first, second and the third proviso to section 184(1) , the use of the expression -preferably- in section 184(7) and the proviso to section 184(11) as legal and valid, as such provisions f
The High Court set aside the order of the Munsif, dismissing an application, and remanded the case for disposal in accordance with the law.
Use Of Refutation To An Act Against The Defendant In Criminal Trial Is Unconstitutional
Updated on : 24/07/2021 07:13:02