Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.30 seconds)
Documents citing C.Rameswaran vs N.Sambandam on 29 January, 2009

Thukkaram vs Shanthi Varadharajan on 17 December, 2014

21. A plain reading of Section 146 C.P.C., shows that it is an enabling provision. All that it says is that what can be done by a person, can always be done by another claiming under him. As a corollary, what cannot be done by a person, cannot also be done by someone claiming under him. This is on account of the fundamental principle, no one can confer a better title than what he himself has (Nemo dat qui non habet). This is the observation of the learned Single Judge of this Court in C. Rameswaran and 4 others vs. N. Sambandam and 8 others (2009 (2) CTC 119).
Madras High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 6 - R Mahadevan - Full Document

Venkatasubbu vs C.Rajendran Prasad on 6 June, 2018

47.In the present case, the learned Judge was of the view that the appellants had resorted to two parallel proceedings, one under the Arbitration Act and the other by way of a suit. When the order of interim injunction obtained by the appellants was vacated in arbitration proceedings, they obtained an injunction in the suit. The learned Single Judge also felt that the issues in the two proceedings were identical, and the suit was substantially to set aside the award. He, therefore, held that the proceeding by way of a suit was an abuse of the process of the court since it amounted to litigating the same issue in a different forum through different proceedings. (2) 2009 (2) CTC 119 (C.Rameswaran and 4 others v. N.Sambandam and 8 others), it is stated as follows:
Madras High Court Cites 31 - Cited by 0 - M V Muralidaran - Full Document
1