Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 14 (0.80 seconds)
Harbans Singh (Dead) Through Lrs vs Rajinder Singh Alias Kartar Singh & Ors on 23 March, 2010 cites

Pukhraj D. Jain & Ors vs G. Gopalakrishna on 16 April, 2004

Learned senior counsel for the appellant placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pukhraj D. Jain & Ors. Vs. G.Gopalakrishna 2004 (3) RCR (Civil) 171, wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court was pleased to lay down, that the plaintiff has to aver in the plaint, that he has always been ready and willing to perform essential terms of contract. This fact is further, to be supported by surrounding circumstances, which must also indicate, that the readiness and willingness, continued from the date of contract till the filing of the suit.
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 93 - G P Mathur - Full Document

Ram Awadh (Dead) By Lrs. & Ors. vs Achhaibar Dubey & Anr. on 1 February, 2000

Therefore, the provision of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (in short the Act) is not applicable. It is to be noted that the decision in Ram Awadh's case (supra) relates to a case where there was only an agreement. After the conveyance, the only question to be adjudicated is whether the purchaser was a bona fide purchaser for value without notice. In the present case the only issue that can be adjudicated is whether the appellants were bona fide purchasers for value without notice. The question whether the appellants were ready and willing is really RSA No.1634 of 1990 18 of no consequence.
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 98 - S P Bharucha - Full Document

Vriddhachalam Pillai vs Chaldean Syrian Bank Ltd., Ananother on 3 December, 1963

In support of this contention, learned senior counsel for the appellant placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Panna Lal Vs. State of Bombay & Ors. AIR 1963 SC 1516, Virdhachalam Pillai Vs. Chaldean Syrian Bank Ltd., Trichur and Anr. AIR 1964 SC 1425 and Smt.Ram Rakhi Vs. Smt. Arti, Anr. AIR 1993 Himachal Pradesh, 137, and judgments of this court in the cases of Abnash Chander Vs. Surat Singh 1992 PLJ 12 and Ram Kishan Vs. RSA No.1634 of 1990 19 Bhagwan Sarup Nagar 2006 (1)RCR (Civil) 440.
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 38 - N R Ayyangar - Full Document

Manjunath Anandappa Urf. Shivappa ... vs Tammanasa & Ors on 13 March, 2003

In support of this contention, that relief of specific performance is discretionary relief, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Manjunath Anandappa Urf. Shivappa Hanasi Vs. Tammanasa & Ors., 2003 (2) RCR (Civil) 713, wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court, was pleased to lay down, that in the absence any materiel on record to show that the vendee had ever asked the vendor to execute the sale deed, no RSA No.1634 of 1990 14 discretionary relief of specific performance could be granted.
Supreme Court of India Cites 22 - Cited by 149 - S B Sinha - Full Document
1   2 Next