Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (1.39 seconds)

Sham Rajendra Agrawal vs Ghanshyam Hajarilal Sharma And Anr. on 9 March, 2007

The Counsel for the applicant then relied on the decision of this Court in 2000(3) Bombay Case Reporter, 1071 (Dr. Bharat Dhokane v. Yeshwantrao Gadakh). This decision also has no bearing on the case at hand. In this case, the Supreme Court had refused to interfere with the reasoned order of the High Court. It is held that the Supreme Court is deemed to have taken into consideration the merits of the case. The difference is that the High Court had passed a reasoned order and those reasons weighed with the Supreme Court. Therefore, the matter could not be reopened. In the case at hand, the writ petition was dismissed in limine so too the Special Leave petition. Virtually, therefore, there is no decision on merit in this case either by the High Court or by the Supreme Court.

Rajasthan State Shriganganagar Sugar ... vs Ajeet Singh (2023/Rjjd/003615) on 29 March, 2023

[2023/RJJD/003615] (6 of 12) [CFA-1/2023] Ltd. V. Sharad Subramayan & Ors.; 2016 (2) CCC 188 (Cal) and Dr. Bharat Pandurang Dhokane V. Yeshwent Rao Kankarrao Gadakh and Anr.; 1999 (4) ALLMR 632, the learned Court below reached to a conclusion that the said judgments were not the private documents and were public in nature and definitely fall in the category of 'Public Documents' and therefore, could be considered for decision of an application under Order VII Rule 11, CPC.
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - R Borana - Full Document
1