Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.24 seconds)
Amara Badyakar @ Angura Badyakar vs M/S. Eastern Coal Fields Limited & Ors on 4 August, 2023 cites

Career Institute Educational Society vs Om Shree Thakurji Educational Society on 24 April, 2023

Mrs. Banerjee relied on a decision passed in Special Leave to Appeal (C) Nos.7455-7456/2023 (Career Institute Educational Society Vs. Om Shree Thakurji Educational Society) to draw the distinction between obiter dicta and ratio decidendi in a judgment. She submits that even if a conclusion is made on facts it may not operate as a precedent if not the ratio of a case, though the same may operate as a res judicata. Everything stated in a judgment by an Hon'ble Judge cannot constitute a precedent.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 12 - Cited by 12 - M M Sundresh - Full Document

State Of Punjab And Another vs Shamlal Murari & Anr on 6 October, 1975

The question of maintainability of the writ petition is totally unrelated to the procedural/subsidiary Rules of the High Court. Procedure is only a handmaid of justice as held in (1976) 1 SCC 719 (The State of Punjab and Another V. Shamlal Murari & Another). Processual Law is not a tyrant but a servant, not an obstruction but aid to justice. Procedural law is a "handmaid" and not the "mistress", in the administration of justice.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 262 - V R Iyer - Full Document

Susmita Gayen vs The State Of West Bengal & Others on 11 February, 2021

Mr. Ghosh, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner refers to paragraph VIII of the said judgment and submits that the Co- ordinate Bench has held when a writ petition/application runs afoul of Rules 4, 5 and 7 of the 1986 Writ Rules still the Hon'ble Writ Court can either transfer the writ petition from one administrative side to the other by giving necessary directions to the Registry and irregular filing of a writ petition either on the Original Side or the Appellate Side would not preclude the Writ Court from entertaining any matter on the ground of urgency or any other ground which the learned Judge upon application of mind and discretion may deem it fit.
Calcutta High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 1 - S B Saraf - Full Document

M/S. Eastern Coalfields Ltd. & Ors vs Premlata Devi & Ors on 8 July, 2019

In Premlata Devi (supra) and Ila Chakraborty (supra) arguments regarding the maintainability of the writ petitions were raised and the same were answered. The submissions made by the authorities that the Writ Court lacks territorial jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition in the 4 Original Side have been specifically rejected. The allocation of the writ petitions on either of the sides is only for administrative convenience, so that the matters may be disposed of expeditiously.
Calcutta High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 4 - B Somadder - Full Document

Mrs. Ila Chakraborty vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 21 November, 2013

In Premlata Devi (supra) and Ila Chakraborty (supra) arguments regarding the maintainability of the writ petitions were raised and the same were answered. The submissions made by the authorities that the Writ Court lacks territorial jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition in the 4 Original Side have been specifically rejected. The allocation of the writ petitions on either of the sides is only for administrative convenience, so that the matters may be disposed of expeditiously.
Calcutta High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 1 - N Patherya - Full Document
1