Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.24 seconds)Section 29 in The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882 [Entire Act]
Section 23 in The Indian Contract Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Dorab Cawasji Warden vs Coomi Sorab Warden & Ors on 13 February, 1990
(12) Counsel for the defts. has brought to my notice a number of judgments Regretfully, however, none of these apply to the facts and circumstances of this case, as (Dorab Cawsil Warden vs. Coomi Sorab) related to injunction order to be passed in a partition suit ; (Rajeshwar Nath Gupta vs. Adm. Gen.) related to a commercial premises in Connaught Place ; . (Mrs. Vijay Srivastava vs. M/s. Mirahul Enterprises) did not relate to tenancy between the parties ; , dealt with the existing agreements regarding tenancies. Air 1983 Delhi 392 related to grant or non-grant of injunction, in a matter which related to Motion Pictures, and not tenancy agreements.
Ram, Gopal Banarsi Dass vs Satish Kumar on 5 September, 1985
(13) In 1985(2) Rcj 697 (F.B.) (M/s Ram Gopal vs. Satish Kumar) the facts were that a site in Chandigarh was taken by the owner. There was no conveyance deed executed, and therefore the purpose had not been prescribed by any document. The F.B. came to the conclusion that inasmuch as there is no deed of conveyance, purpose has not been prescribed and no injunction can issue.
The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882
1