Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.21 seconds)The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Om Prakash And Anr. vs Smt. Rukmini Devi And Ors. on 20 April, 1982
6. Learned Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 4, on the other hand, has submitted that the Court below has examined the explanation offered on behalf of the petitioner at length and after considering the facts and circumstances of the case has recorded a finding that there was no sufficient cause justifying absence of petitioner on 4.4.1989 when his application was dismissed. It has been submitted that this finding is finding of fact and cannot be interfered with by this Court Under Article 226 of the Constitution. It has also been submitted that there is no question of granting restoration in case petitioner has failed to establish sufficient cause. Learned Counsel has placed reliance on cases Hafiz Bashir Ahmad v. Smt. Rani and Ors. reported in 1985 ALJ 716 and Om Prakash and Anr. v. Smt. Rukmini Devi and Ors. .
Section 50 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
The Sale Of Goods Act, 1930
Section 50 in The Sale Of Goods Act, 1930 [Entire Act]
Hafiz Bashir Ahmad vs Smt. Rani And Ors. on 3 January, 1985
6. Learned Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 4, on the other hand, has submitted that the Court below has examined the explanation offered on behalf of the petitioner at length and after considering the facts and circumstances of the case has recorded a finding that there was no sufficient cause justifying absence of petitioner on 4.4.1989 when his application was dismissed. It has been submitted that this finding is finding of fact and cannot be interfered with by this Court Under Article 226 of the Constitution. It has also been submitted that there is no question of granting restoration in case petitioner has failed to establish sufficient cause. Learned Counsel has placed reliance on cases Hafiz Bashir Ahmad v. Smt. Rani and Ors. reported in 1985 ALJ 716 and Om Prakash and Anr. v. Smt. Rukmini Devi and Ors. .
1