Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.57 seconds)
Documents citing Harbans Lal vs Ram Jawai Devi And Ors. on 9 April, 1979

B. Nookaraju vs M.S.N. Charities And Others on 22 February, 1994

In Sidramappa v. Shankaralingappa, , Ram Krishna Mandal v. Baikuntha Lal, , Avinash Chander v. Mohan Lal, and Harbans Lal v. Ram Jawai Devi, , the question involved is whether against an order made under Order 21, Rule 58(3) it is 'an Appeal' or 'Revision' that arises. Therefore, those decisions are all (of) no help in the present case, because we are concerned with the question, whether it is a 'Miscellaneous Appeal' or 'a Regular Appeal' that lies against the order made under Order 21, Rule 58(3) of the Code.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 11 - Cited by 10 - Full Document

Polychem Ltd. vs Bhushan Grover on 2 May, 2008

13. The last exception had been provided through proviso as noticed in Harbans Lal case (supra), where if objection to attachment is pending final disposal before the Court sale confirmation is not permissible. In the present proceedings, the order-sheet in this case shows that there are no objections pending. Therefore, on a textual and plain interpretation of Order 21 Rule 92 CPC, this Court has no choice, but to confirm the sale.
Delhi High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 1 - S R Bhat - Full Document
1