Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.27 seconds)

Seema & Ors. vs . Jagdish & Ors. on 2 July, 2013

46 In petition no. 212/09, titled as Balwan Singh & Ors. vs. Jagdish & Ors , the awarded amount be deposited by R3 with State Bank of India, Dwarka Court Complex Branch, Sector­10, New Delhi within 30 days from today under intimation to the Nazir of this Court. Upon the aforesaid amount being deposited, SBI Branch is directed to release the entire amount with interest in the name of petitioner. 47 The interest on the aforesaid fixed deposits shall be paid monthly by automatic credit of interest in the respective Savings Account of the beneficiaries.
Delhi District Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Excellancy Time &Amp; Entertainment ... vs Bhopal on 19 July, 2018

5. The Subsequent plea of delay on account of correspondence for seeking clarification about order number also retains no significance, it merely being a typographical error. The reason taken in the application is not only held to be false, but is held to be misleading one. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Balwan Singh vs. Jagdish Singh - 2010 (4) CCC 551 (SC) has held that delay is just one of the ingredients, which has to be considered while condonation of delay. Court, in addition, must also take into consideration the conduct of the parties, bonafide reasons for delay and whether such delay would easily be avoided by the applicant acting with normal care and caution. It was also held that a person seeking aid of court for exercising its discretionary power, he is expected to state correct facts and to not to speak lies before the Court. The scope of due diligence was also clarified by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the 5 ST/COD/50174/2018 [DB] in ST/50428/2018-CU [DB] said case holding that the inaction can be attributed to the applicant only when something required to be done by him is not done.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1