Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 48 (0.28 seconds)Section 144 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 41 in The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882 [Entire Act]
Nasir Ahmad And Ors. vs King-Emperor on 12 May, 1927
These cases were considered by a three-
Judge Bench of this Court in State of U.P. v.
Singhara Singh AIR 1964 SC 358 and the rule laid
down in Nazir Ahmad case (supra) was again
upheld. This rule has since been applied to the
exercise of jurisdiction by courts and has also been
recognised as a salutary principle of
administrative law".
Section 52 in The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882 [Entire Act]
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Nawabkhan Abbaskhan vs The State Of Gujarat on 19 February, 1974
9. On this aspect, Mr. Choubey referred to the decision
of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Nawabkhan
Abbaskhan v. State of Gujarat, AIR 1974 SC 1471, wherein the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in paragraph 20 held as under :
S.P. Chengalvaraya Naidu (Dead) By ... vs Jagannath (Dead) By L.Rs. And Others on 27 October, 1993
13. Mr. Choubey referred to the decision of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of S.P. Chengalvaraya Naidu v.
Jagannath & Ors., AIR 1994 SC 853, wherein the Hon'ble
Supreme Court quoted the observation of the Chief Justice
Edward Coke of England made about three centuries ago that
"fraud avoids all judicial acts, ecclesiastical or temporal". The
Hon'ble Supreme Court further held that the courts of law are
meant for imparting justice between the parties. One who comes
to the court, must come with clean hands and finally their
Lordships held that a person, who's case is based on falsehood,
has no right to approach the court. He can be summarily thrown
out at any stage of the litigation.
Andre Paul Terence Ambard vs The Attorney General Of Trinidad And ... on 2 March, 1936
"142. Before we part with this topic, we
would like to refer to one aspect of the question
relating to the exercise of power to punish for
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.68 of 2024 dt. 31-07-2025
13/45
contempt. So far as the courts are concerned, Judges
always keep in mind the warning addressed to them
by Lord Atkin in Andre Paul vs. Attorney-General of
Trinidad, AIR 1936 PC 141. Said Lord Atkin,
"Justice is not a cloistered virtue; she must be
allowed to suffer the scrutiny and respectful even
though out-spoken comments of ordinary men". We
ought never to forget that the power to punish for
contempt large as it is, must always be exercised
cautiously, wisely and with circumspection. Frequent
or indiscriminate use of this power in anger or
irritation would not help to sustain the dignity or
status of the court, but may sometimes affect it
adversely. Wise Judges never forget that the best
way to sustain the dignity and status of their office is
to deserve respect from the public at large by the
quality of their judgments, the fearless-ness, fairness
and objectivity of their approach, and by the
restraint, dignity and decorum which they observe in
their judicial conduct. We venture to think that what
is true of the judicature is equally true of the
Legislatures".
Thomson Press (India) Ltd vs Nanak Builders & Investrs.P.Ltd & Ors on 21 February, 2013
19. Mr. Choubey further referred to the decision of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Thomson Press (India)
Ltd. v. Nanak Builders and Investors Private Limited & Ors.,
AIR 2013 SC 2389, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court while
dealing with doctrine of lis pendens has held that the doctrine
of lis pendens is a doctrine based on the ground that it is
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.68 of 2024 dt. 31-07-2025
14/45
necessary for the administration of justice that the decision of a
court in a suit should be binding not only on the litigating
parties but on those who derive title pendente lite. The provision
of this section does not indeed annul the conveyance or the
transfer otherwise, but to render it subservient to the rights of
the parties to a litigation. It has further been held that a transfer
pendente lite is not illegal ipso jure but remains subservient to
the pending litigation. It has further been held that although the
above decisions do not deal with a fact situation where the sale
deed is executed in breach of an injunction issued by a
competent court, but there is no reason why the breach of any
such injunction should render the transfer whether by way of an
absolute sale or otherwise, ineffective. The party committing the
breach may doubtless incur the liability to be punished for the
breach committed by it but the sale by itself may remain valid as
between the parties to the transaction subject only to any
directions which the competent court may issue in the suit
against the vendor.