Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.63 seconds)Section 15 in The Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent control) Act, 1965 [Entire Act]
Section 115 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Rai Chand Jain vs Miss Chandra Kanta Khosla on 15 November, 1990
In Rai Chand Jain v. Miss Chandra Kanta Khosla , arising under E.P. Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (3 of 1949), whereunder the revisional jurisdiction was conferred under Section 15(5) of the said Act. At page 430 this Court held:
Dattonpant Gopalvarao Devakate vs Vithabrao Maruthirao Janagavai on 3 April, 1975
That jurisdiction enables the Court of revision, in appropriate cases, to examine the correctness of the findings of facts also, though the revisional court is not 'a second court of first appeal' (see Dattonpant Gopalvarao Devakate v. Vithalrao Marutirao Janagaval .
Smt. Rajbir Kaur & Anr vs S. Chokesiri & Co on 9 August, 1988
In Smt. Rajbir Kaur and Anr. v. S. Chokesiri and Co. , the Division Bench to which one of us (Venkatachaliah, J.) was a party held in paragraph 42 at page 37:
Raman & Raman Ltd vs The State Of Madras And Another on 15 March, 1956
19. As far as the present Act is concerned Section 20 contains the word "propriety" also. As to the meaning of the word "propriety" in Raman and Raman Ltd. v. The State of Madras and Anr. [1956] SCR 256, at page 264 it was held thus:
Article 227 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Ram Dass vs Ishwar Chander And Others on 9 May, 1988
The High Court in exercising its power under Section 15(5) of the said Act is within its jurisdiction to reverse the findings of fact as the same were improper and also illegal. It is appropriate to refer in this connection to the decision in the case of Ram Dass v. Ishwar Chander where it has been held that Section 15(5) of the Act enables the High Court to satisfy itself as to the "legality or propriety" of the order under revision, which is, quite obviously, a much wider jurisdiction.