Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.44 seconds)Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 115 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Section 104 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Section 103 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
L. Chandra Kumar vs Union Of India And Others on 18 March, 1997
(i) The High Courts power of superintendence under
Article 227 cannot be curtailed by any statute. It has
been declared a part of the basic structure of the
Constitution by the Constitution Bench of this Court in L.
Chandra Kumar v. Union of India and therefore
abridgement by a constitutional amendment is also very
doubtful.
Shalini Shyam Shetty & Anr vs Rajendra Shankar Patil on 23 July, 2010
(d) The parameters of interference by High Courts in
exercise of their power of superintendence have been
repeatedly laid down by this Court. In this regard the
High Court must be guided by the Principles laid down
by the Constitution Bench of this Court in Waryam
Singh and the principles in Waryam Singh have been
repeatedly followed by subsequent Constitution
Benches and various other decisions of this Court.
Wander Ltd. And Anr. vs Antox India P. Ltd. on 26 April, 1990
6. Learned appellate court in its order dated 16.5.2012, after noticing
the factual matrix of the case, has concluded that the discretion exercised
by the trial court appears to be reasonably practical in the circumstances
of the case. The petitioner has not been able to satisfy that he is in
exclusive possession of the suit land, the petitioner had also suppressed
the material facts. After relying on the ratio of the judgment rendered by
the Honble Apex Court in Wander Ltd. V. Antox India (P) Ltd. 1990 Supp
SCC 727, has concluded that the discretion exercised by the trial court
cannot be found fault with, so dismissed the appeal.
1