Mr. E.S. Sanjeeva Rao vs Central Bureau Of Investigation on 2 May, 2012
Similarly, in Punjab National Bank vs. R.L. Vaid and others 1
the Apex Court in para 5 has observed as under:-
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 84 (2.89 seconds)Documents citing
Punjab National Bank vs R.L. Vaid And Ors on 20 August, 2004
Masrat Begum vs Mumtaza Decided By Hon Ble High Court In on 3 March, 2014
To interpret words, phrases and provisions of a statute, it may
become necessary for judges to embark into lengthy discussion but the
discussion is meant to explain and not to define.
Punjab National Bank v. R. L. Vaid (supra)
There is always peril in treating the words of a judgment as though
they are words in legislative enactment and it is to be remembered that
judicial utterances are made in the setting of the facts of a particular case.
Circumstantial flexibility, one additional or different fact may make a
difference between conclusions in two cases. Disposal of cases by merely
placing reliance on a decision is not proper.
Chellamuthu vs State Rep.By on 31 March, 2021
From the report, it is proved that the pronote
is forged. The petitioners, using the forged pronote had filed the
civil suit. Hence, the learned counsel for the defacto complainant,
prayed for dismissal of the petition. The learned counsel, in
support of his contentions, relied on the Judgments of the Hon'ble
Apex court in Iqbal Singh Marwah Vs. Meenakshi Marwah
reported in (2005 (4) SCC 370); in C.P.Subhash Vs. Inspector
of Police, Chennai reported in (2013 (11) SCC 559); in Goan
Real Estate & Construction Ltd., Vs. Union of India reported
in (2010 (5) SCC 388); in Pubjab National Bank Vs. R.L.Vaid,
reported in (2004 (7) SCC 698); in Union of India Vs.
K.S.Subramanian reported in (1976 (3) SCC 677) and in
Subhash Chandra Vs. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection
Board reported in (2009 (15) CC 458).
Lavi Bhati vs All India Institute Of Medical Sciences ... on 25 March, 2021
Reference in this regard may
be made to Union of India Vs. Dhanwanti Devi (1996) 6 SCC 44,
Bhavnagar University Vs. Palitana Sugar Mill (P) Ltd. (2003) 2 SCC 111,
Punjab National Bank Vs. R.L. Vaid (2004) 7 SCC 698 and National
LPA 370/2020 & Connected Matters Page 6 of 8
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:ASHWANI
Signing Date:06.04.2021
12:24:17
Resource Allocation, In Re (2012) 10 SCC 1. Thus what has been held qua
students denied admission owing to a violation of the Rules, cannot be
applied where admissions are in compliance of the Rules.
Parvind vs All India Institute Of Medical Science ... on 25 March, 2021
Reference in this regard may
be made to Union of India Vs. Dhanwanti Devi (1996) 6 SCC 44,
Bhavnagar University Vs. Palitana Sugar Mill (P) Ltd. (2003) 2 SCC 111,
Punjab National Bank Vs. R.L. Vaid (2004) 7 SCC 698 and National
LPA 370/2020 & Connected Matters Page 6 of 8
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:ASHWANI
Signing Date:06.04.2021
12:24:17
Resource Allocation, In Re (2012) 10 SCC 1. Thus what has been held qua
students denied admission owing to a violation of the Rules, cannot be
applied where admissions are in compliance of the Rules.
Shatarupa Bhattacharya vs All India Institute Of Medical Sciences ... on 25 March, 2021
Reference in this regard may
be made to Union of India Vs. Dhanwanti Devi (1996) 6 SCC 44,
Bhavnagar University Vs. Palitana Sugar Mill (P) Ltd. (2003) 2 SCC 111,
Punjab National Bank Vs. R.L. Vaid (2004) 7 SCC 698 and National
LPA 370/2020 & Connected Matters Page 6 of 8
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:ASHWANI
Signing Date:06.04.2021
12:24:17
Resource Allocation, In Re (2012) 10 SCC 1. Thus what has been held qua
students denied admission owing to a violation of the Rules, cannot be
applied where admissions are in compliance of the Rules.
Smriti Arora vs All India Institute Of Medical Science & ... on 25 March, 2021
Reference in this regard may
be made to Union of India Vs. Dhanwanti Devi (1996) 6 SCC 44,
Bhavnagar University Vs. Palitana Sugar Mill (P) Ltd. (2003) 2 SCC 111,
Punjab National Bank Vs. R.L. Vaid (2004) 7 SCC 698 and National
LPA 370/2020 & Connected Matters Page 6 of 8
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:ASHWANI
Signing Date:06.04.2021
12:24:17
Resource Allocation, In Re (2012) 10 SCC 1. Thus what has been held qua
students denied admission owing to a violation of the Rules, cannot be
applied where admissions are in compliance of the Rules.
Chellamuthu vs State Rep.By on 31 March, 2021
From the report, it is proved that the pronote
is forged. The petitioners, using the forged pronote had filed the
civil suit. Hence, the learned counsel for the defacto complainant,
prayed for dismissal of the petition. The learned counsel, in
support of his contentions, relied on the Judgments of the Hon'ble
Apex court in Iqbal Singh Marwah Vs. Meenakshi Marwah
reported in (2005 (4) SCC 370); in C.P.Subhash Vs. Inspector
of Police, Chennai reported in (2013 (11) SCC 559); in Goan
Real Estate & Construction Ltd., Vs. Union of India reported
in (2010 (5) SCC 388); in Pubjab National Bank Vs. R.L.Vaid,
reported in (2004 (7) SCC 698); in Union of India Vs.
K.S.Subramanian reported in (1976 (3) SCC 677) and in
Subhash Chandra Vs. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection
Board reported in (2009 (15) CC 458).
Ramchandra S/O Shri Heera Ram vs State Of Rajasthan on 15 September, 2021
"5. We find that the High Court has merely referred to the
decision in R.K. Jain's case-(1993) 4 SCC 119 without
even indicating as to applicability of the said decision and
as to how it has any relevance to the facts of the case. It
would have been proper for the High Court to indicate the
reasons and also to spell out clearly as to the applicability
of the decision to the facts of the case. There is always
peril in treating the words of a judgment as though they
are words in a Legislative enactment and it is to be
remembered that judicial utterances are made in the
setting of the facts of a particular case. Circumstantial
flexibility, one additional or different fact may make a
difference between conclusions in two cases. Disposal of
cases by merely placing reliance on a decision is not
proper. Precedent should be followed only so far as it
marks the path of justice, but you must cut out the dead
wood and trim off the side branches else you will find
yourself lost in thickets and branches, said Lord Denning,
while speaking in the matter of applying precedents. The
impugned order is certainly vague."
Rajendra Prasad vs Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. on 9 February, 2007
In the case of Punjab National Bank v. R.L. Vaid and Ors. , the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that "thee is always peril in treating the words of a judgment as though they are words in a legislative enactment and it is to be remembered that judicial utterances are made in the setting of the facts of a particular case. Circumstantial flexibility, one additional or different fact may make a different between conclusions in two cases. Disposal of cases by merely placing reliance on a decision is not proper. Precedent should be followed only so far as it marks the path of justice, but you must cut out the dead wood and trim off the side branches else you will find yourself lost in thickets and branches, said Lord Denning, while speaking in thefnatter of applying precedents."