Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 16 (0.65 seconds)
Documents citing V. Bhaskaran Etc. vs State Represented By Inspector Of ... on 15 December, 2017

M/S.Narne Estates Pvt. Ltd., vs Narne Gopal Naidu, on 29 January, 2020

The objection of the learned counsel for Respondent No.1 is also liable to be rejected in view of the judgment of the Larger Bench of the Supreme Court in V.C. Shukla's case (cited supra) wherein, in para 100, it was held that "the test formulated by the Court was that any order which substantially affects the rights of the accused or decides certain rights of the parties cannot be said to be an interlocutory order. The fact that the controversy still remains alive was considered irrelevant". Hence, the said ratio will have preferential application.
Telangana High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 2 - K R Challa - Full Document

M/S. Narne Estates Pvt.Ltd., vs Narne Gopal Naidu on 29 January, 2020

The objection of the learned counsel for Respondent No.1 is also liable to be rejected in view of the judgment of the Larger Bench of the Supreme Court in V.C. Shukla's case (cited supra) wherein, in para 100, it was held that "the test formulated by the Court was that any order which substantially affects the rights of the accused or decides certain rights of the parties cannot be said to be an interlocutory order. The fact that the controversy still remains alive was considered irrelevant". Hence, the said ratio will have preferential application.
Telangana High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - K R Challa - Full Document

M/S.Narne Estates Pvt. Ltd., vs Narne Gopal Naidu, on 29 January, 2020

The objection of the learned counsel for Respondent No.1 is also liable to be rejected in view of the judgment of the Larger Bench of the Supreme Court in V.C. Shukla's case (cited supra) wherein, in para 100, it was held that "the test formulated by the Court was that any order which substantially affects the rights of the accused or decides certain rights of the parties cannot be said to be an interlocutory order. The fact that the controversy still remains alive was considered irrelevant". Hence, the said ratio will have preferential application.
Telangana High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - K R Challa - Full Document

M/S. Narne Estates Pvt. Ltd., Gun Rock ... vs Narne Gopal Nadu, on 29 January, 2020

The objection of the learned counsel for Respondent No.1 is also liable to be rejected in view of the judgment of the Larger Bench of the Supreme Court in V.C. Shukla's case (cited supra) wherein, in para 100, it was held that "the test formulated by the Court was that any order which substantially affects the rights of the accused or decides certain rights of the parties cannot be said to be an interlocutory order. The fact that the controversy still remains alive was considered irrelevant". Hence, the said ratio will have preferential application.
Telangana High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - K R Challa - Full Document

M/S. Narne Estates Pvt. Ltd., Gun Rock ... vs Narne Gopal Nadu, on 29 January, 2020

The objection of the learned counsel for Respondent No.1 is also liable to be rejected in view of the judgment of the Larger Bench of the Supreme Court in V.C. Shukla's case (cited supra) wherein, in para 100, it was held that "the test formulated by the Court was that any order which substantially affects the rights of the accused or decides certain rights of the parties cannot be said to be an interlocutory order. The fact that the controversy still remains alive was considered irrelevant". Hence, the said ratio will have preferential application.
Telangana High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - K R Challa - Full Document

M/S. Narne Estates Pvt.Ltd., vs Narne Gopal Naidu on 29 January, 2020

The objection of the learned counsel for Respondent No.1 is also liable to be rejected in view of the judgment of the Larger Bench of the Supreme Court in V.C. Shukla's case (cited supra) wherein, in para 100, it was held that "the test formulated by the Court was that any order which substantially affects the rights of the accused or decides certain rights of the parties cannot be said to be an interlocutory order. The fact that the controversy still remains alive was considered irrelevant". Hence, the said ratio will have preferential application.
Telangana High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - K R Challa - Full Document

M/S.Narne Estates Pvt. Ltd., vs Narne Gopal Naidu, on 29 January, 2020

The objection of the learned counsel for Respondent No.1 is also liable to be rejected in view of the judgment of the Larger Bench of the Supreme Court in V.C. Shukla's case (cited supra) wherein, in para 100, it was held that "the test formulated by the Court was that any order which substantially affects the rights of the accused or decides certain rights of the parties cannot be said to be an interlocutory order. The fact that the controversy still remains alive was considered irrelevant". Hence, the said ratio will have preferential application.
Telangana High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - K R Challa - Full Document

M/S.Narne Estates Pvt. Ltd., vs Narne Gopal Naidu, on 29 January, 2020

The objection of the learned counsel for Respondent No.1 is also liable to be rejected in view of the judgment of the Larger Bench of the Supreme Court in V.C. Shukla's case (cited supra) wherein, in para 100, it was held that "the test formulated by the Court was that any order which substantially affects the rights of the accused or decides certain rights of the parties cannot be said to be an interlocutory order. The fact that the controversy still remains alive was considered irrelevant". Hence, the said ratio will have preferential application.
Telangana High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - K R Challa - Full Document

M/S. Narne Estates Pvt. Ltd., Gun Rock ... vs Narne Gopal Nadu, on 29 January, 2020

The objection of the learned counsel for Respondent No.1 is also liable to be rejected in view of the judgment of the Larger Bench of the Supreme Court in V.C. Shukla's case (cited supra) wherein, in para 100, it was held that "the test formulated by the Court was that any order which substantially affects the rights of the accused or decides certain rights of the parties cannot be said to be an interlocutory order. The fact that the controversy still remains alive was considered irrelevant". Hence, the said ratio will have preferential application.
Telangana High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - K R Challa - Full Document
1   2 Next