Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.31 seconds)
Shahuraj Madhavrao Musande Since Died ... vs Anita Sanjay Raut And Others on 15 December, 2023 cites

M.K. Prasad vs P.Arumugam on 30 July, 2001

15. The judgment in the matter of M. K. Prasad Vs. P. Arumugam (supra) is vehemently pressed into service by the learned counsel for the petitioner. By referring to para Nos. 7 8 wp 6336.22 and 10, it is contended that both the petitioners should have been more vigilant, their failure to adopt extra vigilance should not have been a ground to oust him from the litigation. I have already recorded my finding that the petitioner has not been excluded from the benefits of the decree. He has been allotted 1/6th share. He has been awarded share in the compensation along with other family members. Thus, no prejudice as such is caused. Therefore, under the peculiar facts of the case in hand, the said judgment may not enure to the benefit of the petitioner.
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 576 - Full Document

G.Ratna Raj (Dead) By Lrs. vs Sri Muthukumarasamy Permanent Fund Ltd ... on 1 February, 2019

16. Lastly, para Nos. 21 and 27 of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the matter of G. Ratna Raj (Dead) By Legal Representatives Vs. Sri Muthukumarasamy Permanent Fund Limited and another (supra) are relied to buttress that it was an ex-parte decree when the petitioner had appeared. That enquiry is now immaterial because the explanation for condonation of delay is found to be insufficient and unconvincing.
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 9 - A M Sapre - Full Document
1