Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.02 seconds)

Smt. Pratima Chaudhury vs Director Of Pension & Ors on 19 May, 2010

In this connection Mr. Laha has referred a case law reported in (2011) 1 CAL LT 115 (HC) (Smt. Pratima Chaudhury versus Director of Pension & Ors.) to impress upon this Court that since the marriage, if any, in between BholanathDas and Pratima Das was void being held during the subsistence of marriage in between Bholanath Das and Mira Das, Pratima Das was not entitled to claim family pension 8 as legally married wife of Bholanath Das from the Railway Authority and that plaintiff Mira Das is entitled to claim the same.
Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side) Cites 8 - Cited by 1 - J K Biswas - Full Document

Kedar Lal Seal vs Hara Lal Seal on 8 March, 2011

In this connection, the case law Kedal Lal Seal and another vs. Hari Lal as reported in AIR (39) 1952 Supreme Court page 47 may be referred to. In that case the Hon'ble Apex Court held that the Court would be slow to throw out a claim on mere technicality of pleading when the substance of the thing is there and no prejudice is caused to the other side, however clumsily or inartistically the plaint may be worded. It was 13 further held that in any event, it is always open to a Court to give a plaintiff such general or other relief as it deems just to the same extent as if it had been asked for, provided that occasions no prejudice to the other side beyond what can be compensated for in costs.
Calcutta High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 3 - S Banerjee - Full Document
1