Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.03 seconds)
Sulochana Amma vs Narayanan Nair on 24 September, 1993 cites

Daryao And Others vs The State Of U. P. And Others(And ... on 27 March, 1961

In Daryao v. State of U.P.8 this Court held that tile doctrine of res judicata is in the interest of public at large and a finality should be attached to the binding decisions pronounced by courts of competent jurisdiction, and it is also in the public interest that individuals should not be vexed twice over with the same kind of litigation.
Supreme Court of India Cites 21 - Cited by 473 - P B Gajendragadkar - Full Document

Gulam Abbas & Ors vs State Of U.P. & Ors on 3 November, 1981

In Gulam Abbas v. State of U.P.9 this Court held that the principle of res judicata though technical in nature, is founded on considerations of public policy. The technical aspect, for instance, pecuniary or subject-wise competence of the earlier forum to adjudicate the subject-matter or to grant reliefs sought in the subsequent litigation, should be immaterial when the general doctrine of res judicata is to be invoked. Explanation VIII, inserted by the Amending Act of 1976, was Intended to serve this purpose and to clarify this position. It, therefore, has to be held that the decree of the District Munsif, though of limited pecuniary jurisdiction, would operate as res judicata in the subsequent suit between the same parties.
Supreme Court of India Cites 54 - Cited by 223 - V D Tulzapurkar - Full Document

Parbhat General Agencies Etc vs Union Of India & Anr. Etc on 12 October, 1970

9. If the agreement is silent as regards supplying the vacancy, the law, it is urged, presumes that the parties intended to supply the vacancy. Where,therefore the court is moved under Section 8 of the Act to appoint an arbitrator, it was well within its jurisdiction to appoint another arbitrator. Reliance is placed on Prabhat General Agencies v. Union of India2.
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 23 - K S Hegde - Full Document
1   2 Next