Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 22 (0.66 seconds)

All India Handloom Fabric Marketing ... vs Phelps & Co. P. Ltd. on 18 February, 2000

12. In support of the claim for damages/use and occupation charges, no evidence was adduced by the respondent. The trial court proceeded to award damages by placing reliance on a decision in the case of Mrs. (Dr.) P.S. Bedi Vs. The Project & Equipment Corporation of India Ltd. . Needless to point out that evidence recorded in one case or the findings recorded therein regarding the quantum of damages and the rate at which the same would be payable, cannot be formed as the basis for awarding damages/mesne profits in another case, as has been done in this case, particularly in the absence of any evidence as regards comparison of the two properties. Therefore, the findings of the trial court awarding damages/mesne profits at the rate of Rs. 5000.00 per day is not sustainable.
Delhi High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 8 - Full Document

Channabasappa Gurappa Belagavi And ... vs Laxmidas Bapudas Darbar And Another on 3 November, 1998

In support of the above submission, the learned Counsel drew my attention to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Chapsibhai Dhanjibhai Dand v Purushottam; the Division Bench decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Syed Jaleel Zone v P. Venkata Murlidhar; the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Mrs. (Dr.) P.S. Bedi v Project and Equipment Corporation of India Limited; and also in the case of Sewak Ram and Others v Municipal Board, Meerut. Therefore, the learned Counsel pointed out that when the learned Munsiff, on proper construction of the terms provided in the lease deed Exhibit P. 19, had taken the view that the lease is a term lease, the learned District Judge has committed a serious error in taking the contrary view and treating the lease as a permanent lease.
Karnataka High Court Cites 27 - Cited by 0 - P V Shetty - Full Document
1   2 3 Next