Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.17 seconds)
M/S Taj Trade And Transport Co. Ltd. vs Next Wave Corporation & Anr on 16 July, 2013 cites

United Bank Of India vs Sh. Naresh Kumar And Ors on 18 September, 1996

10. Notice of the appeal was issued on the contention of the counsel for the appellant/plaintiff that the dismissal of the suit on the technical ground of the same having not been proved to have been filed by a duly authorized person on behalf of the appellant/plaintiff which is a company, is contrary to the judgment in United Bank of India Vs. Naresh Kumar AIR 1997 SC 3.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 697 - B N Kirpal - Full Document

Birla Dlw Ltd. vs Prem Engineering Works on 1 August, 1998

12. However, the judgment in Naresh Kumar relied upon by the counsel for the appellant/plaintiff has subsequently been held by the Division Bench of this Court in Birla DLW Ltd. Vs. Prem Engineering Works to be not applicable to private disputes for recovery of monies and it has been held that the ratio therein is confined to suits for recovery of public monies and public debts. The counsel is thus not justified in relying upon Naresh RFA No.85/2012 Page 3 of 7 Kumar in support of his suit which has no element of public money.
Delhi High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 62 - M Sarin - Full Document

Uday Shankar Triyar vs Ram Kalewar Prasad Singh & Anr on 10 November, 2005

14. Be that as it may, the Supreme Court in Uday Shanker Triyar Vs. Ram Kalewar Prasad Singh (2006) 1 SCC 75 has, without any limitation as to the nature of the suit or the status of the parties, held that the procedural defects and irregularities which are curable should not be allowed to defeat substantive rights and any defect in authority of the person signing can subsequently be corrected.
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 185 - Full Document
1