Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 33 (0.29 seconds)
Darsana Bai (Died) vs Nepc India Limited on 23 January, 2014 cites

Kiran Singh And Others vs Chaman Paswan And Others on 14 April, 1954

(ii) Sri Rajah Ravu Venkata Mahipathi Gangadhara Rama Rao Bahadur Garu, Yuvarajah of Pithapuram and another Vs. The Province of Madras, represented by the Collector of East Godavari, Coconada ([946] II M.L.J. 282) In the judgment rendered in Kiran Singh and others V. Chaman Paswan and others, supra, it is held that the principle that underlies Section 11 of the Suits Valuation Act 1887 is that a decree passed by the Court which would have had no jurisdiction to hear the suit or appeal but for overvaluation or undervaluation, is not to be treated as what it would be but for the Section, null and void and that an objection to jurisdiction based on overvaluation or undervalution should be dealt with under that Section and not otherwise. The same principle has been adopted in Section 21 C.P.C. It is further held that the words "unless the overvaluation or undervaluation thereto has prejudicially affected the disposal of the suit or appeal on its merits" in Section 11 of the Suits Valuation Act, clearly shows that the decree passed in such cases are not liable to be interfered with by an appellate Court.
Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 1029 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next