Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.31 seconds)
Southern Railway vs G.Bharathi on 18 March, 2026 cites

K.Lubna vs Beevi on 13 January, 2020

17. We are unable to accept the said contention. It is a well settled principle that a pure question of law which goes to the root of the matter can 12/25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis O.S.A.No.49 of 2021 be raised and decided at any stage of the proceedings, provided the relevant facts necessary for deciding such question are already available on record. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in K.Lubna v. Beevi, reported in (2020) 2 SCC 524, has held that when the relevant facts are already on record, a pure question of law can be examined even at the appellate stage. It has been observed as follows:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 16 - S K Kaul - Full Document

Punjab State Civil Supplies ... vs M/S. Sanman Rice Mills on 8 October, 2018

19. There can be no dispute regarding the limited scope of interference under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. 15/25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis O.S.A.No.49 of 2021 However, the said decision would not assist the respondent in the facts of the present case. The issue involved here does not relate to re-appreciation of evidence or re-evaluation of the factual findings recorded by the arbitral tribunal. The challenge raised by the appellant relates to the legality of the relief granted by the arbitrator.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 0 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Azizur Rehman Gulam And Anr vs Radio Restaurant And 7 Ors on 25 October, 2023

In support of his submissions, the learned Senior Counsel has referred to the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited and Another v. Sanman Rice Mills and Others, [(2024) SCC OnLine SC 2632], and the judgment of the High Court in the case of Azizur Rehman Gulam and Others v. Radio Restaurant and Others, [2023 SCC OnLine Bom 230] as well as the judgments in C.M.A. No. 2947 of 2004, dated 12.11.2004, and O.S.A.No.313 of 2019, dated 14.03.2025. The learned Senior Counsel therefore prayed that the appeal be dismissed as devoid of merits.
Bombay High Court Cites 61 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Yeswant Deorao Deshmukh vs Walchand Ramchand Kothari on 1 December, 1950

10. On the legal principle, it is trite to say that a pure question of law can be examined at any stage, including before this Court. If the factual foundation for a case has been laid and the legal consequences of the same have not been examined, the examination of such legal consequences would be a pure question of law [Yeswant Deorao Deshmukh v. Walchand Ramchand Kothari, 1950 SCC 766 : 1950 SCR 852 : AIR 1951 SC 16] .
Supreme Court of India Cites 10 - Cited by 89 - N C Aiyar - Full Document

Chitturi Subbanna vs Kudapa Subbanna & Others on 18 December, 1964

11. No doubt the legal foundation to raise a case by including it in the grounds of appeal is mandated. Such mandate was fulfilled by moving a separate application for permission to urge additional grounds, a course of action, which has already been examined by, and received the imprimatur of this Court in Chittoori Subbanna v. Kudappa Subbanna [Chittoori Subbanna v. Kudappa Subbanna, (1965) 2 SCR 661 :
Supreme Court of India Cites 23 - Cited by 86 - R Dayal - Full Document

Indian Oil Corporation Ltd vs Amritsar Gas Service And Ors on 19 November, 1990

27. The above principle has also been reiterated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. v. Amritsar Gas Service 19/25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis O.S.A.No.49 of 2021 [(1991) 1 SCC 533], wherein it was held that where a contract is by its nature determinable, the court cannot grant specific performance compelling continuation of the contractual relationship and the appropriate remedy, if any, would only be in the nature of damages. At this juncture, it would be useful to refer the relevant portion of the judgment:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 319 - J S Verma - Full Document
1