Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 128 (1.31 seconds)
Documents citing M/S. Brakewel Automotive Components ... vs P.R. Selvam Alagappan on 21 March, 2017

Jsw Energy Ltd vs Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory ... on 20 October, 2020

"Brakewel Automotive Components (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. P.R. Selvam Alagappan"; "Kumaran Vaidyar and Others v. K.S. Venkiteswaran and others" and "M/s Cauvery Hydro Energy Ltd. vs. Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Ltd.". They also bring on record MERC (conduct of business) regulations 2004 to contend that there is no suo-moto review powers and so also to substantiate their argument that the powers of review of Respondent-Commission is like that of a Civil Court.
Appellate Tribunal For Electricity Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Dtdc Express Ltd vs Om Enterprises And Anr on 14 July, 2022

d. That the executing court can go behind the decree if the said decree is null, void ab initio and a non est and under sec. 47 of CPC the executing court can allow the objection to the executability of the decree, if the same is found null ad void ab initio. Reliance is placed upon the dicta of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Brakewel Automotive Components (India) Private Limited v. P.R. Selvam Alagappan, reported as (2017) 5 SCC 371 at para 23 "Though this view has echoed time out of number in similar pronouncements of this Court, Digitally signed by DIVYAM LILA Civil Suit No. 220/20 DIVYAM Date:
Delhi District Court Cites 43 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Jaydev Panda @ Tripathy vs Dillip Kumar Panda .... Opp. Party on 4 September, 2019

6. Per contra, Mr. Pattnaik, learned counsel for the opposite party submitted that after decree was passed, the D.Hr was forcibly dispossessed. The decree for permanent injunction is executable. He placed reliance on the decisions in the case of Satyawati v. Rajinder Singh, 2013 (II) CLR (SC) 238, M/s. Brakewel Automotive Components (India) Pvt. Ltd. V. P.R. Selvam Alagappan, AIR 2017 SC 1577, Ghanashyam Pradhan v. Ram Pratap Kheria, 2018 (I) ILR Cut 936 and Puspa Sharma v. Kitei Nayak (CMP No.1528 of 2017 disposed of on 8.4.2019).
Orissa High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - A K Rath - Full Document

Havabai Widow Of Deceased Adam Umar Kana vs Heirs Of Deceased Ghanchanbai Hurbai ... on 16 January, 2019

6. As noted above on the facts of the case, it cannot be said that the court below exceeded its jurisdiction by going beyond the decree. The case of Brakewel Automotive Components( India) Private Limited vs. P.R. Selvam Alagappan (supra) therefore would not be of any assistance to the petitioner. In the very case pertinent observations have been made in para 21, 22 and 23 which can be extracted hereunder:
Gujarat High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - G R Udhwani - Full Document

Pranav Ansal vs State Consumer Disputes Redressal ... on 13 August, 2020

He has referred to the judgment in Brakewell automotive Components (India) Private Limited Vs. P.R. Selvam Alagappan (2017) 5 SCC 371 and in M/s R.S. Bajwa and Company Vs. State of Chattisgarh, AIR 2008 Chattisgarh, 75. He submits that no notice was received by the petitioner in consumer complaint due to which the petitioner had no knowledge of the proceedings.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 2 - S Sehgal - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next