Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 22 (1.59 seconds)Section 148 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Section 151 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Union Of India vs Pramod Gupta (D) By Lrs. & Ors on 7 September, 2005
That appears
to have been pronounced on 02.08.2005, in close proximity with the
ruling in Pramod Gupta (D) by L.Rs. (Supra), which was rendered or
07.09.2005.
Darshan Singh vs Kewal Krishan And Anr. on 26 August, 2002
In Darshan Singh v. Kewal Krishan in similar circumstances
after noticing the amended Section 148 CPC the learned Single held as
under:
The Limitation Act, 1963
Suhas Chakma vs South Asia Human Rights Documentation ... on 26 November, 2007
8. In summary, the case of the respondent no.3 and 4 reveals that vide
order dated 14.01.2016 in FAO 114/2016, the Court allowed the application
under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC and directed the respondents herein to file
the amended written statement within six weeks, and the respondents herein
failed to comply with the said direction. Thus, he subsequently filed an
application for condonation of delay on 02.06.2016. The amended written
statement was eventually filed on 11.07.2016, resulting in an acknowledged
delay of more than 30 days beyond the six-week period stipulated in the
order dated 14.01.2016, and he prays for the same to be taken on record. On
the legal aspect, he places reliance on a decision of this court in Rachna
Signature Not Verified Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:PRIYA Digitally Signed
Signing Date:21.03.2025 By:PURUSHAINDRA
17:50:27 5 KUMAR KAURAV
Mediratta And Ors vs Girdhari Lal1 and the order dated 09.01.2012 passed
in FAO (OS) 12/2012 titled as Suhas Chakma v. South Asia Human Rights
Doc, whereby the appeal filed against South Asia Human Rights Doc.
South Asia Human Rights Documentation ... vs Suhas Chakma & Others on 15 December, 2017
Trust v. Suhas Chakma and Others2 was rejected and the decision in South
Asia Human Rights Doc. Trust was affirmed.
Nasik Municipal Corp vs M/S R.M. Bhandari & Anr on 26 February, 2016
9. Subsequently, he contends that the Court has the power to take on
record the amended written submissions, and to substantiate the same, he
places further reliance on the decision in the case of Nashik Municipal
Corpn. v. R.M. Bhandari3.
Bharat Kalra vs Raj Kishan Chabra on 12 August, 2021
In addition, learned counsel also placed reliance
on another order passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Kalra v.
Raj Kishan Chabra4, to contend that the delay in placing on record the
amended pleadings can be condoned even beyond 30 days under Section
151 of the CPC, if the facts so warranted.