Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 215 (1.30 seconds)
Documents citing Thiagarajan & Ors vs Sri Venugopalaswamy B. Koil & Ors on 16 March, 2004

Ramlal & Anr vs Phagua & Ors on 19 October, 2005

2) Thiagarajan and Others vs. Sri Venugopalaswamy B. Koil and Others, (2004) 5 SCC 762 In the instant case, the High Court has framed a substantial question of law as extracted in paragraphs (supra). Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the High Court has not framed any other substantial question of law at the time of hearing except framed at the stage of admission. Sub-section 5 of Section 100 says that the appeal shall be heard on the question so formulated and the respondent shall at the hearing of the appeal be allowed to argue that the case does not involve such a question. The proviso states that nothing in this sub-section shall be deemed to take away or abridge the power of the Court to hear for reasons to be recorded, the appeal on any other substantial question of law not formulated by it, if it is specified that the case involves such question. As could be seen from the High Court records, no attempt was ever made by counsel for the appellants to formulate any other substantial question of law at the time of hearing.
Supreme Court of India Cites 9 - Cited by 67 - A R Lakshmanan - Full Document

Shri Hari Sankar Das vs Shri Ranjit Kumar Karmakar @ Dulal ... on 14 August, 2020

In Thiagarajan and Others vs. Venugopalaswamy B. Koil and Others : (2004) 5 SCC 762, the High Court has framed a substantial question of law as extracted in paragraphs (supra). Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the High Court has not framed any other substantial question of law at the time of hearing except framed at the stage of admission. Sub-section 5 of Section 100 says that the appeal shall be heard on the question so formulated and the respondent shall at the hearing of the appeal be allowed to argue that the case does not involve such a question. The proviso states that nothing in this sub-section shall be deemed to take away or abridge the power of the Court to hear for reasons to be recorded, the appeal on any other substantial question of law not formulated by it, if it is specified that the case involves such question. As could be seen from the High Court records, no attempt was ever made by counsel for the appellants to formulate any other substantial question of law at the time of hearing.
Tripura High Court Cites 18 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Thangammal vs Papathi on 23 December, 2005

2) Thiagarajan and Others vs. Sri Venugopalaswamy B. Koil and Others, (2004)5 SCC 762 In the instant case, the High Court has framed a substantial question of law as extracted in paragraphs (supra). Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the High Court has not framed any other substantial question of law at the time of hearing except framed at the stage of admission. Sub-section 5 of Section 100 says that the appeal shall be heard on the question so formulated and the respondent shall at the hearing of the appeal be allowed to argue that the case does not involve such a question. The proviso states that nothing in this sub-section shall be deemed to take away or abridge the power of the Court to hear for reasons to be recorded, the appeal on any other substantial question of law not formulated by it, if it is specified that the case involves such question. As could be seen from the High Court records, no attempt was ever made by counsel for the appellants to formulate any other substantial question of law at the time of hearing.
Madras High Court Cites 18 - Cited by 1 - N N Vasanthakumar - Full Document

Thangammal, Santhana Mary And ... vs Papathi And Ors. on 23 December, 2005

2) Thiagarajan and Ors. v. Sri Venugopalaswamy B. Koil and Ors. , In the instant case, the High Court has framed a substantial question of law as extracted in paragraphs (supra). Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the High Court has not framed any other substantial question of law at the time of hearing except framed at the stage of admission. Sub-section 5 of Section 100 says that the appeal shall be heard on the question so formulated and the respondent shall at the hearing of the appeal be allowed to argue that the case does not involve such a question. The proviso states that nothing in this sub-section shall be deemed to take away or abridge the power of the Court to hear for reasons to be recorded, the appeal on any other substantial question of law not formulated by it, if it is specified that the case involves such question. As could be seen from the High Court records, no attempt was ever made by counsel for the appellants to formulate any other substantial question of law at the time of hearing.
Madras High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 0 - N N Vasanthakumar - Full Document

Smt Saraswathi D/O Dhulappa W/O ... vs Smt Siddamma W/O Late Sangramappa Gumma ... on 1 December, 2023

43. It is relevant to refer to the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Thiagarajan and Others v. Sri Venugopalaswamy B. Koil and Others4, where the scope and ambit of Section 100 was discussed at length and it is held that existence of substantial question of law is sine-qua-non for the exercise of the jurisdiction under the amended provisions of Section 100 of CPC. It is re-iterated that where findings on facts by the First Appellate Court are based on evidence, the High Court in second appeal cannot substitute its own findings on re-appreciation of evidence, merely on the ground that another view was possible.
Karnataka High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next