Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (4.20 seconds)

Lic Housing Finance Ltd vs Nishant Masih on 18 April, 2023

2. The case of the plaintiff as pleaded in the plaint is as follows. It is stated that the plaintiff is a company incorporated under the provisions of Companies Act, 1956. The plaintiff is engaged in the business of giving financial assistance in the form of their loan schemes, for purchasing residential accommodation for individual home loan scheme. Under the said scheme, a borrower, who approaches the plaintiff company for loan to purchase/construct the property submits an application form and after sanction, enters into written agreement/contract. The defendant no.1 is the borrower under the above loan scheme within the meaning of loan agreement executed between the plaintiff and defendant no.1. The defendant no.2 is the builder/society to whom the loan amount has been disbursed. The defendant no.2 being a co-operative society, having its registration no.3289, registered on 07.04.2004, through its authorized signatory, was allotted a plot of land bearing no.7, sector Pi II, Greater Noida, as per lease deed dated 29.03.2005, registered in book no.1, volume no.916, on pages from 213 CS no.57737 of 2016 LIC HOUSING FIN. LTD. VS. NISHANT MASIH page no.2 to 248, with registration no.2509, registered on 29.03.2005 in the office of Sub-Registrar, Gautam Budh Nagar , Ghaziabad, UP and was constructing a multi-storey group housing society. The defendant no.2 proposed that as per this scheme they were in process of constructing various flats, for its members. The defendant no.1 approached the plaintiff, and applied to the plaintiff for the loan against the property/flat/unit no.1003, on ground floor, measuring 1950 sq. ft. in block/tower-T 1, in Shiv Kala Charms, plot no.07, Sector-Pi II, Greater Noida, UP (hereinafter referred to as 'said property') under the plaintiff's individual home loan scheme for purchasing the said property. The defendant no.1 also produced a share certificate showing membership no.553 issued by defendant no.2 society and further stated that the defendant no.1 had been allotted a flat bearing number property/flat/unit no.1003, on ground floor, measuring 1950 sq. ft. in block/tower-T1, in Shiv Kala Charms, plot no.7, Sector-Pi II, Greater Noida, UP. The tentative cost of said flat was Rs.46,70,000/- out of which a sum of Rs.11,50,000/- had already been paid by defendant no.1 to defendant no.2 society against following receipts: i) Receipt no.1811 dated 19.08.2010 for Rs.3,00,000/-, ii) Receipt No.1860 dated 22.09.2010 for Rs.1,50,000/-, iii) Receipt No.1831 dated 31.08.2010 for Rs.5,00,000/-, iv) Receipt No.1609 dated 20.06.2010 for Rs. 2,00,000/-. The said payment of Rs.11,50,000/- was confirmed by defendant no.2 society, which also assured the plaintiff that no other dues were outstanding against defendant no.1 in respect of said property. The defendant CS no.57737 of 2016 LIC HOUSING FIN.
Delhi District Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

M/S Sri Sambasiva Dairy Products India ... vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 9 May, 2025

Ltd. v. Eagle Star Life Assurance Co. Ltd., 1997 AC 749 : (1997) 2 WLR 945 (HL)] (5) The "rule" that words should be given their "natural and ordinary meaning" reflects the common sense proposition that we do not easily accept that people have made linguistic mistakes, particularly in formal documents. On the other hand, if one would nevertheless conclude from the background that something must have gone wrong with the language, the law does not require Judges to attribute to the parties an intention which they plainly could not have had.
Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Krishn Kumar Manjhi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 4 December, 2025

Ltd. v. Nirval Singh [Punjab State Power Corpn. Ltd. v. Nirval Singh, (2019) 6 SCC 774 : (2019) 2 SCC (L&S) 210] delay in pursuing claim/approaching court would militate against claim for compassionate appointment as very objective of providing immediate amelioration to family would stand extinguished. Before this Court, there was a delay of 07 years in approaching the Court and this Court observed and held that on the ground of delay itself, the heir/dependant of the deceased employee shall not be entitled to the appointment on compassionate ground.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Chandra Prakash Mishra And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 16 October, 2025

3. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants- Chandra Prakash Mishra, Priyanshi Mishra, Smt. Reeta Mishra and Shashwat Mishra, with the prayer to allow the present application and quash the entire proceeding as well as summoning order dated 02.07.2022 in Complaint Case No. 20283 of 2022 (Divyansh Upadhyay Vs. Chandra Prakash Mishra and others), under Sections 323, 504 506, 452 I.P.C., pending in the court of A.C.J.M.-VII, Varanasi, with a further prayer that proceedings of the aforesaid case be stayed during the pendency of the present application.
Allahabad High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - S Gopal - Full Document
1