Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 543 (5.11 seconds)
Documents citing Kashmir Singh vs Harnam Singh & Anr on 3 March, 2008

Bhaskaran vs Lakshmi on 30 June, 2011

16.Considering the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the above judgments, in my opinion, the substantial questions of law No.2 and 3 framed at the time of admission, cannot be treated as substantial questions of law and the only substantial question of law that arises for consideration is the 1st substantial question of law. Further, by answering 1st substantial question of law, the answer to the other substantial question of law will also be covered.
Madras High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - R S Ramanathan - Full Document

Manoj Kumar Jain vs Gopal Das on 14 December, 2023

The existence of a substantial question of law is a condition precedent for entertaining the second appeal; on failure to do so, the judgment cannot be maintained. The existence of a substantial question of law is a sine qua non for the exercise of jurisdiction under the provisions of Section 100 CPC. It is the obligation on the court to further clear the intent of the legislature and not to frustrate it by ignoring the same. (Vide Santosh Hazari v. Purshottam Tiwari; Sarjas Rai v. Bakshi Inderjit Singh; Manicka Poosali v. Anjalai Ammal; Sugani v. Rameshwar Das; Hero Vinoth v. Seshammal; P. Chandrasekharan v. S. Kanakarajan; Kashmir Singh v. Harnam Singh; V. Ramaswamy v.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 43 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Rukshamaniben vs Bai on 28 April, 2011

As rightly referred to by learned Counsel Mr. Shah relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Kashmir Singh v. Harnam Singh and Anr. (supra), it has been specifically observed, which is quoted hereinabove that, though as a general rule, the High Court will not interfere with the concurrent findings of the courts below. At the same time, it is not a absolute rule and it is subject to exceptions which have been enumerated. The facts of the case would therefore fall in the exceptions with regard to the appreciation of material evidence and drawing the inference without any basis or foundation. The exceptions which have been enumerated provide:
Gujarat High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - R H Shukla - Full Document

Nirmal Singh & Anr vs Gurmej Singh & Others on 7 September, 2011

16. Above-all, the entire case revolves around the re-appreciation and re- appraisal of the evidence on record, which is not legally permissible and is beyond the scope of second appeal. Since no question of law, muchless substantial, is involved, so, no interference is warranted in the impugned judgment and decree of the Ist appellate Court, in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in case Kashmir Singh v. Harnam Singh & Anr. 2008 (2) R.C.R. (Civil) 688 : 2008 AIR (SC) 1749, in the obtaining circumstances of the present case.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - M S Sullar - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next