Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

arguments and the Judgements referred to in the written submissions had caused miscarriage of justice. In para - 5 of the application, the Appellants mentioned

neglect of duty and responsibility on the part of the Arbitrator causing miscarriage of justice. It includes failure to perform the essential duties which

behalf of the 'Appellants' that the impugned order has caused 'Miscarriage of Justice' not only to the 'Appellants

also contended that the EO has admitted procedural irregularities which has caused miscarriage of justice and the same cannot be rectified or cured ... such the applicant was handicapped in substantiating his innocence, which consequently has caused serious prejudice to the applicant. It is also the contention

order but is limited to correcting a mistake/error causing miscarriage of justice. Reference may be made to Surendra Koli v. State

held that by way of procedural material irregularity miscarriage of justice has been caused to the executant. 13. State Commission is of the opinion that ... that learned Executing Forum has committed material procedural irregularity which has caused miscarriage of 6 Kalyan Singh Versus Asst. Engineer Public Health & Irrigation

dated 13-5-1988 and thereby causing miscarriage of justice. But the law specifically prohibits so. Therefore, the part of the impugned order

behalf of the Appellants that the Ld. District Forum has caused great miscarriage of justice by admitting the petition of complaint which was hopelessly barred ... detriment of the interest of the Appellants/Ops which has caused great miscarriage of justice. While elaboration on this point, the Ld. Advocate

Allied Motors Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT (S C ) causing miscarriage of justice. Where his LD discretion finds that the issue is concerned to employer

before the Adjudicating Authority even after having submitted his resignation thus causing serious miscarriage of justice for the Respondent No.1. Hence, in the interest ... submitted his resignation thus causing serious miscarriage of justice for the Respondent No.1. Hence, in the interest of justice, we are of the view