Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.39 seconds)
Future Coupons Private Limited vs Amazon.Com Nv Investment Holdings Llc on 1 February, 2022 cites

Canara Bank And Ors vs Shri Debasis Das And Ors on 12 March, 2003

38. Whenever an order is struck down as invalid being in violation of the principles of natural justice, there is no final decision of the case and fresh proceedings are left open. All that is done is to vacate the order assailed by virtue of its inherent defect. Such proceedings are not terminated and are usually remitted back. [See Canara Bank v. Debasis Das, (2003) 4 SCC 557] However, in this case, much water has flown under the bridge, 25 since the passing of the order by the learned Single Judge, which has now been rendered redundant, for the following reasons :
Supreme Court of India Cites 9 - Cited by 494 - A Pasayat - Full Document

Delhi Chemical And Pharmaceutical ... vs Himgiri Realtors Pvt. Ltd. & Anr on 24 May, 2021

40. Our attention is drawn to the fact that the learned Single Judge had relied on M/s. Bhandari Engineers & Builders Pvt. Ltd. v. M/s. Maharia Raj Joint Venture, 2019 SCC Online Del. 11879, which has been overruled by a Division Bench order in Delhi Chemical and Pharmaceutical Works Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. Himgiri Realtors Pvt. Ltd. & Anr., EFA (OS) (Comm.) No. 4 of 2021.
Delhi High Court - Orders Cites 0 - Cited by 14 - R S Endlaw - Full Document

Ram Kishan vs Tarun Bajaj & Ors on 17 January, 2014

41. Viewed differently, contempt of a civil nature can be made out under Order XXXIX Rule 2­A CPC not when there has been mere “disobedience”, but only when there has been “wilful disobedience”. The allegation of wilful disobedience being in the nature of criminal liability, the same has to be proved to the satisfaction of the court that the disobedience was not mere “disobedience” but “wilful” and “conscious”. This Court in the case of Ram Kishan v. Tarun Bajaj, (2014) 16 SCC 204, considering the implication of exercise of contempt jurisdiction, held that the power must be exercised with caution rather than on mere probabilities. While delineating 28 the conduct which can be held to be “wilful disobedience”, this Court held that:
Supreme Court of India Cites 17 - Cited by 172 - B S Chauhan - Full Document
1   2 Next