Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 18 (0.29 seconds)
M/S Ram Niwas Goel vs Municipal Corporation Of Delhi on 27 October, 2025 cites

M/S. Murlidhar Chiranjilal vs M/S. Harishchandra Dwarkadas And ... on 29 March, 1961

52 Having held thus, for the reasons adumbrated above, I find that the Defendant could have and ought have raised issue of fabrication of documents at the earliest point of time; the rescission of the contract after the completion of the work was not lawful warranted under law. The right of the Plaintiff under Section 64 stood severely affected; Even if the Defendant was assumed to be entitled to damages, it ought to have cared for mitigation of damages; and the belated action on the part of the Defendant, i.e. after the completion of the work had put the Digitally signed by RAVINDER RAVINDER BEDI BEDI Date: 2025.10.27 17:39:34 +0530 ____________________________________________________________________________ CS (COMM) No. 673/2024 Page no. 39/ 44 M/s Ram Niwas Goel v MCD Plaintiff at a much disadvantageous position; The assessment of damages by Defendant was purely on hypothetical basis and having regard to the law laid down in Maula Bux Vs. Union of India [1970 SCR (1) 928] and Murlidhar Chiranjilal Vs. Harishchandra Dwarkadas & Ors [AIR 1962 SC 366], the Defendant ought have proved the actual damages suffered. In the absence of such determination, the Defendant could not have usurped the right to withhold the payment of the Plaintiff.
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 86 - K N Wanchoo - Full Document

Maula Bux vs Union Of India on 19 August, 1969

52 Having held thus, for the reasons adumbrated above, I find that the Defendant could have and ought have raised issue of fabrication of documents at the earliest point of time; the rescission of the contract after the completion of the work was not lawful warranted under law. The right of the Plaintiff under Section 64 stood severely affected; Even if the Defendant was assumed to be entitled to damages, it ought to have cared for mitigation of damages; and the belated action on the part of the Defendant, i.e. after the completion of the work had put the Digitally signed by RAVINDER RAVINDER BEDI BEDI Date: 2025.10.27 17:39:34 +0530 ____________________________________________________________________________ CS (COMM) No. 673/2024 Page no. 39/ 44 M/s Ram Niwas Goel v MCD Plaintiff at a much disadvantageous position; The assessment of damages by Defendant was purely on hypothetical basis and having regard to the law laid down in Maula Bux Vs. Union of India [1970 SCR (1) 928] and Murlidhar Chiranjilal Vs. Harishchandra Dwarkadas & Ors [AIR 1962 SC 366], the Defendant ought have proved the actual damages suffered. In the absence of such determination, the Defendant could not have usurped the right to withhold the payment of the Plaintiff.
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 430 - J C Shah - Full Document

Rajendra Construction Company vs Maharashtra Housing & Area Development ... on 12 August, 2005

"4. The Supreme Court in a line of judgments has held that in view of changed economic scenario where there has been consistent fall in rates of interest, Courts must in accordance with the changed circumstances grant lesser rates of interest. These judgments of the Supreme Court are Rajendra Construction Co. v. Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Authority, (2005) 6 SCC 678, McDermott International Inc. v. Burn Standard Co. Ltd., (2006) 11 SCC 181, Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation v. Indag Rubber Ltd., (2006) 7 SCC 700, Krishna Bhagya Jala Nigam Ltd. v. G. Harischandra, (2007) 2 SCC 720 & State of Rajasthan v. Ferro Concrete Construction Pvt. Ltd. (2009) 3 Arb. LR 140 (SC)"
Supreme Court of India Cites 19 - Cited by 186 - C K Thakker - Full Document

Mcdermott International Inc vs Burn Standard Co. Ltd. & Ors on 12 May, 2006

"4. The Supreme Court in a line of judgments has held that in view of changed economic scenario where there has been consistent fall in rates of interest, Courts must in accordance with the changed circumstances grant lesser rates of interest. These judgments of the Supreme Court are Rajendra Construction Co. v. Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Authority, (2005) 6 SCC 678, McDermott International Inc. v. Burn Standard Co. Ltd., (2006) 11 SCC 181, Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation v. Indag Rubber Ltd., (2006) 7 SCC 700, Krishna Bhagya Jala Nigam Ltd. v. G. Harischandra, (2007) 2 SCC 720 & State of Rajasthan v. Ferro Concrete Construction Pvt. Ltd. (2009) 3 Arb. LR 140 (SC)"
Supreme Court of India Cites 48 - Cited by 1325 - S B Sinha - Full Document

Rajasthan State Road Transport Corpn vs Indag Rubber Ltd on 5 September, 2006

"4. The Supreme Court in a line of judgments has held that in view of changed economic scenario where there has been consistent fall in rates of interest, Courts must in accordance with the changed circumstances grant lesser rates of interest. These judgments of the Supreme Court are Rajendra Construction Co. v. Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Authority, (2005) 6 SCC 678, McDermott International Inc. v. Burn Standard Co. Ltd., (2006) 11 SCC 181, Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation v. Indag Rubber Ltd., (2006) 7 SCC 700, Krishna Bhagya Jala Nigam Ltd. v. G. Harischandra, (2007) 2 SCC 720 & State of Rajasthan v. Ferro Concrete Construction Pvt. Ltd. (2009) 3 Arb. LR 140 (SC)"
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 184 - A K Mathur - Full Document
1   2 Next