Dr.Mrs.Chellarani David vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 21 April, 2011
39.Therefore, considering the ratio laid down by the Honourable Apex Court, this Court is of the view that an element of public purpose is involved in running a hospital.
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 45 (1.19 seconds)State Of Rajasthan vs Shiv Singh Dulawat on 20 September, 2021
22. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that the review sought on
fresh grounds is beyond the power of review under Order XLVII
Rule 1 CPC and thus, the petitioners cannot claim rehearing of the
(Downloaded on 20/09/2021 at 09:42:59 PM)
(22 of 46) [WRW-25/2019]
matter on fresh grounds. Reliance is placed in this regard on
decisions of the Supreme Court in Collector of 24 Parganas and
Others Vs. Lalith Mohan Mullick and Others : AIR 1988 SC 2121,
Lily Thomas Vs. Union of India and Others : AIR 2000 SC 1650,
and Nehali Panjiyara and Others Vs. Shyama Devi and Others :
State Of Rajasthan vs Raj. Samayojit Shiksha Karmi Welfare ... on 20 September, 2021
22. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that the review sought on
fresh grounds is beyond the power of review under Order XLVII
Rule 1 CPC and thus, the petitioners cannot claim rehearing of the
(Downloaded on 20/09/2021 at 09:43:01 PM)
(22 of 46) [WRW-25/2019]
matter on fresh grounds. Reliance is placed in this regard on
decisions of the Supreme Court in Collector of 24 Parganas and
Others Vs. Lalith Mohan Mullick and Others : AIR 1988 SC 2121,
Lily Thomas Vs. Union of India and Others : AIR 2000 SC 1650,
and Nehali Panjiyara and Others Vs. Shyama Devi and Others :
State Of Rajasthan vs Bhupendra Singh Tarad on 20 September, 2021
22. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that the review sought on
fresh grounds is beyond the power of review under Order XLVII
Rule 1 CPC and thus, the petitioners cannot claim rehearing of the
(Downloaded on 20/09/2021 at 09:43:07 PM)
(22 of 46) [WRW-25/2019]
matter on fresh grounds. Reliance is placed in this regard on
decisions of the Supreme Court in Collector of 24 Parganas and
Others Vs. Lalith Mohan Mullick and Others : AIR 1988 SC 2121,
Lily Thomas Vs. Union of India and Others : AIR 2000 SC 1650,
and Nehali Panjiyara and Others Vs. Shyama Devi and Others :
State Of Rajasthan vs Raj. Samayojit Shiksha Karmi Welfare ... on 20 September, 2021
22. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that the review sought on
fresh grounds is beyond the power of review under Order XLVII
Rule 1 CPC and thus, the petitioners cannot claim rehearing of the
(Downloaded on 20/09/2021 at 09:43:03 PM)
(22 of 46) [WRW-25/2019]
matter on fresh grounds. Reliance is placed in this regard on
decisions of the Supreme Court in Collector of 24 Parganas and
Others Vs. Lalith Mohan Mullick and Others : AIR 1988 SC 2121,
Lily Thomas Vs. Union of India and Others : AIR 2000 SC 1650,
and Nehali Panjiyara and Others Vs. Shyama Devi and Others :
State Of Rajasthan vs Shambhoo Singh Jhala on 20 September, 2021
22. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that the review sought on
fresh grounds is beyond the power of review under Order XLVII
Rule 1 CPC and thus, the petitioners cannot claim rehearing of the
(Downloaded on 20/09/2021 at 09:43:05 PM)
(22 of 46) [WRW-25/2019]
matter on fresh grounds. Reliance is placed in this regard on
decisions of the Supreme Court in Collector of 24 Parganas and
Others Vs. Lalith Mohan Mullick and Others : AIR 1988 SC 2121,
Lily Thomas Vs. Union of India and Others : AIR 2000 SC 1650,
and Nehali Panjiyara and Others Vs. Shyama Devi and Others :
State Of Rajasthan vs Ramgopal Verma on 20 September, 2021
22. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that the review sought on
fresh grounds is beyond the power of review under Order XLVII
Rule 1 CPC and thus, the petitioners cannot claim rehearing of the
(Downloaded on 20/09/2021 at 09:42:56 PM)
(22 of 46) [WRW-25/2019]
matter on fresh grounds. Reliance is placed in this regard on
decisions of the Supreme Court in Collector of 24 Parganas and
Others Vs. Lalith Mohan Mullick and Others : AIR 1988 SC 2121,
Lily Thomas Vs. Union of India and Others : AIR 2000 SC 1650,
and Nehali Panjiyara and Others Vs. Shyama Devi and Others :
Polycone Paper Ltd. vs Collector Of Customs on 3 May, 1993
(v) Collector of 24 Parganas v. Lalith Mohan Mullick, AIR 1988 SC 2121, wherein it was held that new grounds raised for the first time in Review Petition cannot be considered apart from fact that it would involve investigation of new facts.
Narottambhai Nathubhai Patel vs Special Land Acquisition Officer ... on 20 December, 2001
Such a view was also taken by the Apex Court in the case of The Collector of 24 Parganas and others Vs. Lalit Mohan Mullick and others, reported in AIR 1986 SC 622.
Akhandalmani Mahadev And Ors. vs Dayanidhi Alias Daitari Mulia (Dead) ... on 27 September, 2002
17. So far as question of abatement is concerned, it appears that defendant No. 1 Akhandalmani Mahadev is the deity who has been represented through Marfatdar villagers and the painters in whose favour a gift deed was executed by Raghunath Sen. Even though some of the defendants have expired and no substitution has taken place, not only defendant No. 1 is represented but also painters community has been represented. The Apex Court in the case of Collector of 24 Parganas and Ors. v. Lalith Mohan Mullick and Ors. reported in AIR 1988 SC. 2121 held that even if some of the defendants died during the pendency of the appeals, if their estates are sufficiently represented, abatement does not take place. In view of the observations made above, I hold that though some of the defendants expired during pendency of the appeal and no substitution has taken place, the deity and the painters community having been sufficiently represented, there shall be no abatement of the appeals.