Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.16 seconds)
Ssa International Limited vs Paras Sales Corporation And Ors. on 21 September, 2004 cites

A. Venkatasubbiah Naidu vs S. Chellappan And Ors on 19 September, 2000

3. The said judgment was made on the facts of that case having referred to the attending circumstances and taking into account the subsequent conduct of the plaintiff. Another case relied upon by Mr.Rawal is a Supreme Court decision in the case of A.Venkatasubbaiah Naidu Vs. S.Challappan and Ors., 2000 VII AD (S.C.) 333. In that case the Court held that failure of the applicant to comply with the provisions of Order 39 Rule 3 CPC will disentitle him to complain about the disobedience alleged against opposite party.
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 451 - Full Document

Nat Organic Chemicals Industries vs B.L. Industries on 14 January, 1988

In support of her contention that the ad-interim injunction is not liable to be vacated for the alleged non-compliance of the provisions of Order 39 Rule 3 CPC, she has relied upon decisions of this Court in the case of Exide Industries Ltd. Vs. Exide Corporatioin, USA and Ors., and an earlier judgment in the case of Nat Organic Chemicals Industries Vs. B.L. Industries, wherein the Court has taken a view that it is not in all cases of non-compliance of the provisions of Order 39 Rule 3 CPC that an ex-parte order should be vacated but before doing so, the defendant must show that it has caused a serious prejudice to him.
Delhi High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 6 - B N Kirpal - Full Document

Exide Industries Ltd. vs Exide Corporation, Usa And Ors. on 17 October, 2001

In support of her contention that the ad-interim injunction is not liable to be vacated for the alleged non-compliance of the provisions of Order 39 Rule 3 CPC, she has relied upon decisions of this Court in the case of Exide Industries Ltd. Vs. Exide Corporatioin, USA and Ors., and an earlier judgment in the case of Nat Organic Chemicals Industries Vs. B.L. Industries, wherein the Court has taken a view that it is not in all cases of non-compliance of the provisions of Order 39 Rule 3 CPC that an ex-parte order should be vacated but before doing so, the defendant must show that it has caused a serious prejudice to him.
Delhi High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 4 - Full Document
1