Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 23 (0.76 seconds)
Documents citing Sahelibai vs Mangilal on 25 September, 2019

Mangilal And Anr. vs Hukumchand And 2 Ors. on 26 August, 2025

5.1 He further submits that the Claims Tribunal, while assessing the compensation, ought to have considered the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of Kishan Gopal and Another vs. Lala and Others reported in 2013 ACJ 2594 ; Meena Devi vs. Nunu Chand Mahto @ Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANUSHREE PANDEY Signing time: 01-09-2025 10:20:59 3 MA-961-2013 Nemchand Mahto reported in (2023) 1 SCC 204; Dinesh and Others vs. Mohd. Ikhelaq and Others passed in M.A. No.3655/2019 vide order dated 16.07.2025; The New India Assurance Ltd. vs. Kamalsingh Sisodiya and Others passed in M.A. No.2698/2023 decided on 07.03.2024 ; Radhakrishna and Another vs. Gokul and Others reported in 2013 ACJ 2860 and Meena Pawaia and Others vs. Ashraf Ali and Others reported in (2021) 17 SCC 148 .
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sahelibai vs Mangilal on 9 January, 2020

Upon hearing counsel for the appellant and perusal of the impugned judgments and decrees, in the considered opinion of this Court, both the Courts below have impeccably appreciated the evidence placed on record and reached to right conclusion that if the plastering of wall in question is allowed to be carried out, the wall in question on the side of the defendants has to be demolished. That 2 S.A.No.2255/2019 (Sahelibai and another Vs. Mangilal and others) cannot be permitted. The entire gamut of matter is in realm of facts. No question of law, much less substantial question of law arises warranting interference under Section 100 CPC.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - R Arya - Full Document
1   2 3 Next