Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.28 seconds)

Precision Steel And Engineering Works ... vs Prem Deva Niranjan Deva Tayal on 7 October, 1982

In Precision Steel & Engineering Works & Anr. Vs. Prem Deva Niranjan Deva Tayal (1982) 3 SCC 270 it was held that though the Court can grant conditional leave limited to the issue under Order XXXVII Rule 3(5) CPC, however there is no such power conferred on the Controller under sub-Section 5 of Section 25B of the DRC Act. Thus, there is no provision of grant of conditional leave to defend under Section 25B DRC Act.
Supreme Court of India Cites 41 - Cited by 614 - D A Desai - Full Document

S.K. Dey vs D.C. Gagerna on 19 July, 1984

It was further followed by this Court in S.K. Dey Vs. D.C. Gagerna AIR 1985 DELHI 169 and Bhauri Devi (deceased) through her legal heirs Vs. Shri Mahender Kumar 2007 X AD (DELHI) 597 and it was noted that the Controller is not competent to grant restricted leave i.e. leave limited to any particular issue. In other words, whenever the Controller is satisfied that the respondent/tenant is entitled to leave to contest on one or more of the RC.REV. 275/2014 Page 5 of 6 grounds disclosed in his application for leave to defend, such leave would be deemed to be unrestricted and untrammeled by any kind of fetters and it would be open to the respondent/tenant to take up whatever pleas are available to him under law in his written statement.
Delhi High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 12 - Full Document
1