Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 15 (0.91 seconds)
Documents citing Anita Laxmi Narayan Singh vs Laxmi Narain Singh on 24 March, 1992

State vs . : 1). Laxmi on 22 February, 2017

PW-7 to mention these facts in Ex.PW45/M7 and Ex.PW7/A. It is also pertinent to mention here that the car regarding verification of which SI Satish Dalal went there was also seized from there vide memo Ex.PW-7/B. Witnesses PW-7 and PW-41 deposed about this fact. At the time of recovery the number plate having no.DL6CQ 6072 was found affixed on it. Mr. Samuel, Record keeper, Transport Authority Sarai Kale Khan was examined as PW-42. He deposed that no vehicle having registration no.DL6CQ 6072 is registered with them. The testimony of this witness had gone unchallenged and uncontroverted. It is important to note that correct number was DL6CQ 0072. The record regarding vehicle having registration no.DL6CQ 0072 was proved by examining PW-17. According to the record Ex.PW- 17/A this vehicle was initially registered in the name of Sh.Vikas Shokeen but was transferred in the name of Laxmi Devi wife of Sh. Nathu Ram on 15.12.2003. It is pertinent to mention here that testimony of PW-17 had also gone unchallenged and uncontroverted. This evidence corroborates the averment made by PW-7 that one vehicle parked out side house of accused Laxmi State Vs. Laxmi etc. SC Nos.57573/16 & 58112/16 :: 182 :: having fake number plate. It is this car for verification of which SI Satish Dalal and Sh. Vijay Kumar Swamy had gone there. So far as the question of the accused persons absconding immediately thereafter is concerned, there are two DD entries on record Ex. PW45/M8 and PW45/M/10 where it is mentioned that they searched for Laxmi Sasan and her sons but they were found absent and their houses were found locked. Ld. Defence counsel tried to make out a case that they were at their residential house only and were not absconding and infact they were lifted from their houses only as deposed by the defence witness but the record shown that when PW32, 34, 37, 40, 42, 44 and 45 were examined, they never cross-examined them that accused Joginder and Rajender were lifted from their houses on 05.03.2004 at 11.30 pm itself. It is also important to note that so far as accused Vinod Jatav is concerned, according to D4W1, police came to his house at 5.30 pm while he was sleeping in his house along with his family and took away his brother Vinod Jatav.
Delhi District Court Cites 44 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Smt. Asha @ Deepa Ramchand Sharma vs Shri Ramchandra Laxmandas Sharma on 31 July, 1996

In Anita Laxmi Narayan Singh's case (Supra) the Supreme Court held thus Having regard to the fact that the husband is a high ranking railway officer who would be entitled to travel facilities, we think in the backdrop of events that have taken place, it would be expedient in the interest of Justice to transfer the proceedings from the Family Court, Bombay, to the District Court, Ghaziabad, for disposal in accordance with law. The restored divorce proceedings will stand transferred to the District Court Ghaziabad. The Family Court, Bombay will forthwith transmit the record and proceedings, inclusive of pending interim applications including the one in which the impugned order of 20th April, 1991 came to be passed, to the District Court, Ghaziabad for disposal in accordance with law. The respondent-husband will pay the cost of present three proceedings which we quantify at Rs. 5,000/(Rupees five thousand only).
Bombay High Court Cites 19 - Cited by 1 - R M Lodha - Full Document

State vs Laxmi Narayan on 13 February, 2024

22. PW1 complainant/victim Jamil has deposed in conformity with his complaint. He categorically deposed that accused Laxmi State vs. Laxmi Narayan and Others FIR No. 438/2016, PS: Saket Page 15 of 22 Narayan came from his shop and hit him on his head with an iron rod. When accused Laxmi Narayan tried to strike again with the iron rod, PW Rizwan intervened and rescued the victim Jamil. In the meantime, accused persons Deepak, Raju and Prabhunath, assaulted complainant as well as his brother i.e. victim Saleem with sticks. PW1/complainant Jamil also produced his blood- stained clothes and broken teeth which have been duly exhibited as Ex. P2 and P3. Despite grant of opportunity, PW1/complainant Jamil was not cross-examined by the Ld. Counsel for accused persons. Therefore, the deposition of PW1/complainant Jamil remains unrebutted and uncontroverted.
Delhi District Court Cites 29 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Manjunath M @ Manja @ Boosa Manja vs State Of Karnataka on 24 February, 2026

17. In view of the above and for the reasons stated, the present appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment and order dated 7-10-2013 passed by the High Court in Laxmi Narayan v. State of M.P. [Laxmi Narayan v. State of M.P., 2013 SCC OnLine MP 7987] is hereby quashed and set aside, and the FIR/investigation/criminal proceedings be proceeded against the accused, and they shall be dealt with, in accordance with law."
Karnataka High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - M Nagaprasanna - Full Document

Smt. Garima Singh vs Sri Sanjai Singh And Ors. on 27 May, 1996

54. After having come to the conclusion that this is a case of manifest fraud being played upon the Court and the Court below failed to exercise its inherent jurisdiction vested in it under Section 151, CPC, the question that arises is as to what relief should be granted. Repelling the argument of the respondent that the case should be remanded to the Trial Judge for deciding the application under Section 151, CPC on merits, learned Counsel for the petitioner placing reliance on several decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court, to quote one Anita Laxmi Narayan Singh v. Laxmi Narain Singh, 1992 (2) SCC 562, II (1992) DMC 202, submitted that in the extraordinary and peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, High Court must set aside the decree of divorce also to do complete justice to the petitioner. He contended that whenever technicalities are pitted against substantial justice, it is the latter which must prevail.
Allahabad High Court Cites 44 - Cited by 3 - Full Document

H M Gangadharappa vs State Of Karnataka on 16 April, 2026

17. In view of the above and for the reasons stated, the present appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment and order dated 7-10-2013 passed by the High Court in Laxmi Narayan v. State of M.P. [Laxmi Narayan v. State of M.P., 2013 SCC OnLine MP 7987] is hereby quashed and set aside, and the FIR/investigation/criminal proceedings be proceeded against the accused, and they shall be dealt with, in accordance with law."
Karnataka High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - M Nagaprasanna - Full Document
1   2 Next