Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.61 seconds)Indore Development Authority vs Manoharlal And Ors. Etc. on 6 March, 2020
This was not a case of any review based upon the
subsequent ruling in Indore Development Authority vs
Manoharlal (supra).
K.D.Sharma vs Steel Authorities Of India Ltd.& Ors on 9 July, 2008
RPWST-2722-2024 & ors(F).docx
not an authority for the proposition that a review would be
maintainable because Indore Development Authority Vs case.
Manoharlal and Others8 had only clarified the legal position.
Bhaskar Laxman Jadhav & Ors vs Karamveer Kakasaheb Wagh Edu.Sty.& Ors on 11 December, 2012
To the
same effect are the observations in K. D. Sharma Vs Steel
Authority of India Limited and others 3, Bhaskar Laxman Jadhav
and others Vs Karamveer Kakasaheb Wagh Education Society
1
(2007) 4 SCC 221
2
(1994) 1 SCC 1
3
(2008) 12 SCC 481
Page 13 of 17
William Anton D'souza v Rajgonda Bhimgonda Patil
& ors.
Pune Municipalc Corp.& Anr vs Harakchand Misirimal Solanki & Ors on 24 January, 2014
14. As noted above, there are hardly any pleadings about
fraud or suppression in the present case. The bare statement
that the original Petitioners did not disclose that they were
offered compensation is not sufficient to allege or establish
any fraud. Even this allegation may not be correct because
this Court, by relying on Pune Municipal Corporation and
Another vs Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and Others5, held
that mere compensation tender was not sufficient to save the
lapsing of acquisition.
S. Sundaram Pillai, Etc vs V.R. Pattabiraman Etc on 24 January, 1985
15. S. Sundaram Pillai and others Vs V. R. Pattabiraman and
others6 deals with the concept of "wilful default" in the context
of rent control legislation. The context in which this decision
was included in the compilation of judgments is unknown
because no decisions were cited in the course of arguments by
Mr Narvankar, learned counsel for the Applicant.
State Of Bihar & Ors vs Ramesh Prasad Verma (Dead)Thr. Lrs on 31 January, 2017
16. State of Bihar and others Vs Ramesh Prasad Verma 7 is
possibly included in the compilation of judgments because it
holds that if any clarificatory or declaratory explanation is
provided in the statute, the same will typically have
retrospective operation, especially in the absence of any
indication to the contrary in the parent Act. This decision is
4
(2013) 11 SCC 531
5
(2014) 3 SCC 183
6
(1985) 1 SCC 591
7
(2017) 5 SCC 665
Page 14 of 17
William Anton D'souza v Rajgonda Bhimgonda Patil
& ors.
Zile Singh vs State Of Haryana & Ors on 7 October, 2004
17. Zile Singh Vs State of Haryana and others9 was also
possibly included in the compilation of judgments to explain
the concept of retrospective operation of statutes.
Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi Thr Secretary, Land ... vs M/S. K.L. Rathi Steels Ltd. . on 17 March, 2023
20. The decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases
of K. L. Rathi Steels Limited (supra) and Delhi Development
Authority vs. Tejpal and Others12 are also sufficient to dismiss
the Application for condonation of delay and, consequently,
the Review Petition. As noted earlier, even if we were to
condone the inordinate or unexplained delay of six years,
there would be no merit in the Review Petition, which,
otherwise, would have to be dismissed.
T. Arivandandam vs T. V. Satyapal & Another on 14 October, 1977
18. T. Arivandandam vs. T. V. Satyapal and another 11 is a
decision dealing with the scope of Order VII Rule 11 of CPC.
Therefore, the context in which it is included in the
compilation of judgments is not known.