Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 14 (0.28 seconds)
M/S Simla Gomti Pan Products Pvt. Ltd. ... vs Commissioner Of State Tax U.P. ... on 3 November, 2025 cites

In Re: Kelly And Henderson P. Ltd., L. Jai ... vs Kelly And Henderson Pvt. Ltd. on 19 March, 1979

He expressed his own view of the relationship between the two at p. 31 as follows: ?Henderson v. Henderson abuse of process, as now understood, although separate and distinct from cause of action estoppel and issue estoppel, has much in common with them. The underlying public interest is the same : that there should be finality in litigation and that a party should not be twice vexed in the same matter. This public interest is reinforced by the current emphasis on efficiency and economy in the conduct of litigation, in the interests of the parties and the public as a whole?.?
Bombay High Court Cites 17 - Cited by 40 - S V Manohar - Full Document

M/S Prism Johnson Limited Having ... vs Madhya Pradesh Paschim Kshetra Vidyut ... on 20 September, 2019

The point has been taken up in a large number of subsequent decisions, but for present purposes it is enough to refer to the most important of them, Johnson v. Gore-Wood & Co [2002] 2 A.C. 1, in which the House of Lords considered their effect. This appeal arose out of an application to strike out proceedings on the ground that the plaintiffs claim should have been made in an earlier action on the same subject matter brought by a company under his control.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 9 - P Shrivastava - Full Document

Devilal Modi, Proprietor, M/S. Daluram ... vs Sales Tax Officer, Ratlam And Others on 7 October, 1964

142. This Court in Devilal Modi v. Sales Tax Officer, Ratlam, AIR 1965 SC 1150, held that if the underlying rule of constructive res judicata is not applied to writ proceedings, it would be open to the party to take one proceeding after another and urge new grounds every time, and would be inconsistent with considerations of public policy. The relevant observations read as under:?
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 150 - P B Gajendragadkar - Full Document

Shankara Co-Op. Housing Society Ltd vs M. Prabhakar & Ors on 5 May, 2011

In Shankara Coop. Housing Society Ltd. v. M. Prabhakar, (2011) 5 SCC 607, this Court held that the ground of non-compliance of statutory provision which was very much available to the parties to raise but did not raise it as one of the grounds, cannot be raised later on and would be hit by the principles analogous to constructive res judicata. The relevant observations read as under:?
Supreme Court of India Cites 66 - Cited by 356 - H L Dattu - Full Document
1   2 Next