Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 786 (4.19 seconds)
Documents citing Dalpat Kumar And Anr. vs Prahlad Singh And Ors. on 16 December, 1991

Tamil Nadu Generation And Distribution ... vs Ptc India Limited & Anr on 4 March, 2024

Irreparable injury, however, does not mean that there must be no physical possibility of repairing the injury, but means only that the injury must be a material one, namely one that cannot be adequately compensated by way of damages (Dalpat Kumar v. Prahlad Singh, (1992) 1 SCC 719 : AIR 1993 SC 276; Mahadeo Savlaram Shelke v. Puna Municipal Corporation, (1995) 3 SCC 33).
Appellate Tribunal For Electricity Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - R Ranganathan - Full Document

Haryana Power Purchase Centre & Ors vs Ptc India Limited & Ors on 19 April, 2024

36. As the grant of interim relief is discretionary, exercise thereof is subject to the court/tribunal satisfying itself that its interference is necessary to protect the party from the species of injury. In other words, irreparable injury would ensue before the legal right would be conclusively established. (Dalpat Kumar v. Prahlad Singh, (1992) 1 SCC 719).The Court/Tribunal should satisfy itself that non-
Appellate Tribunal For Electricity Cites 25 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution ... vs Central Electricity Regulatory ... on 22 February, 2024

Irreparable injury, however, does not mean that there must be no physical possibility of repairing the injury, but means only that the injury must be a material one, namely one that cannot be adequately compensated by way of damages (Dalpat Kumar v. Prahlad Singh, (1992) 1 SCC 719 : AIR 1993 SC 276; Mahadeo Savlaram Shelke v. Puna Municipal Corporation, (1995) 3 SCC 33).
Appellate Tribunal For Electricity Cites 30 - Cited by 0 - R Ranganathan - Full Document

M/S. Shanta Sriram Constructions Pvt. ... vs The State Of Telangana And 3 Others on 18 February, 2022

In Dalpat Kumar v. Prahlad Singh [(1992) 1 SCC 719 : AIR 1993 SC 276] the Supreme Court explained the scope of the aforesaid material circumstances, but observed as under: (SCC p. 722, para 6) "6. ... The phrases 'prima facie case', 'balance of convenience' and 'irreparable loss' are not rhetoric phrases for incantation, but words of width and elasticity, to meet myriad situations presented by men's ingenuity in given facts and circumstances, but always is hedged with sound exercise of judicial discretion to meet the ends of justice. The facts are eloquent and speak for themselves. It is well nigh impossible to find from facts prima facie case and balance of convenience."
Telangana High Court Cites 31 - Cited by 0 - P N Rao - Full Document

Reserved On: 21-10-2022 vs Geeta Charak Nee Jamwal W/O Jagjit Singh on 29 October, 2022

32. To appreciate the findings arrived at by the courts below, we must first see on whom the onus of proof lies. The record reveals that the disputed documents are registered. We are, therefore, guided by the settled legal principle that a document is presumed to be genuine if the same is registered, as held by this court in Prem Singh and Ors. V Birbal and Ors8. the 11 CM(M) No. 117/2022 relevant portion of the said decision reads as below:
Jammu & Kashmir High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - M Lal - Full Document

Mahan Energen Limited [Formerly Known ... vs Central Electricity Regulatory ... on 24 January, 2023

15. This Tribunal must also satisfy itself that non-interference would result in "irreparable injury" to the party seeking relief ie the Appellant, and they need protection from the consequences of the apprehended injury. Irreparable injury, however, does not mean that there must be no physical possibility of repairing the injury, but means only that the injury must be a material one, namely one that cannot be adequately compensated by way of damages (Dalpat Kumar v. Prahlad Singh: AIR 1993 SC 276; Mahadeo SavlaramShelke and Ors. Vs. Puna Municipal Corporation and Ors.: MANU/SC/0673/1995). This Tribunal would refuse to grant interlocutory relief if the injury suffered by the Appellant, on account of refusal to grant interim relief, is not irreparable.
Appellate Tribunal For Electricity Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next