cites: 128974499

U.P. State Sugar Corporation vs M/S. Sumac International Ltd on 4 December, 1996

, that in U.P. State Sugar Corpn. v. Sumac International Ltd. [(1997) 1 SCC 568] (hereinafter U.P. State Sugar Corpn. [(1997) 1 SCC 568] ) this Court, correctly declared that the law was settled.

Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 385 - S V Manohar - Full Document

Ansal Engineering Projects Ltd vs Tehri Hydro Development Corporation ... on 31 July, 1996

In another judgment in Ansal Engineering Projects Ltd v. Tehri Hydro Development Corporation Limited, (1996) 5 SCC 450, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as follows:-

Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 115 - Full Document

Vinitec Electronics Private Limited vs Hcl Infosystems Limited on 2 November, 2007

In Vintec Electronics Private Limited's case cited supra also the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held in para 12 as follows:-

Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 170 - B S Reddy - Full Document

Kuldip Gandotra vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 7 October, 2005

(iv) Kuldip Gandotra v. Union of India reported in Manu/DE/3055/2005;

Delhi High Court Cites 25 - Cited by 17 - S Khanna - Full Document

Bank Of India & Ors vs O.P. Swarnakar Etc on 17 December, 2002

(v) Bank of India v. O.P.Swaranakar reported in AIR 2003 SC 858;

Supreme Court of India Cites 47 - Cited by 287 - S B Sinha - Full Document

New India Assurance Co. Ltd vs Raghuvir Singh Narang & Anr on 25 February, 2010

(vi) New India Assurance Co. Ltd v. Raghuvir Singh Narang, reported in (2010) 5 SCC 335;

Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 33 - R V Raveendran - Full Document

Iswar Bhai C. Patel & Bachu Bhai Patel vs Harihar Behera & Anr on 16 March, 1999

(vii) Iswar Bhai c. Patel @ Bachu Bhai Patel v. Harihar Behera, reported in (1999) 3 SCC 457;

Supreme Court of India Cites 10 - Cited by 237 - S S Ahmad - Full Document

Rangammal vs Kuppuswami & Anr on 13 May, 2011

(xi) Rangammal v. Kuppuswami, reported in (2011) 12 SCC 220.

Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 244 - G S Misra - Full Document

M/S Bses Ltd. (Now Reliance Energy Ltd.) vs M/S Fenner India Ltd. & Anr on 3 February, 2006

In BSES Ltd. v. Fenner India Ltd. [(2006) 2 SCC 728] this Court held: (SCC pp. 733-34, para 10) 10. There are, however, two exceptions to this rule. The first is when there is a clear fraud of which the bank has notice and a fraud of the beneficiary from which it seeks to benefit. The fraud must be of an egregious nature as to vitiate the entire underlying transaction. The second exception to the general rule of non-intervention is when there are special equities in favour of injunction, such as when irretrievable injury or irretrievable injustice would occur if such an injunction were not granted.

Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 149 - Full Document

State Of Maharashtra & Anr vs M/S National Construction ... on 9 January, 1996

The general rule and its exceptions has been reiterated in so many judgments of this Court [Ed.: See e.g. U.P. State Sugar Corpn. v. Sumac International Ltd., (1997) 1 SCC 568 at pp. 574-77, paras 12-16; State of Maharashtra v. National Construction Co., (1996) 1 SCC 735 at p. 741, para 13.

Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 142 - A M Ahmadi - Full Document

Search Results Page

Refine Search

Search Results