Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 17 (1.51 seconds)

Sri Ananta Prasad Sahu @ Sri Ananta Lal ... vs Sri Gopal Sahu @ Sri Golao Lal Sahu on 24 September, 2019

10.2. Mr. Islam, learned counsel for the respondent No.1 has rightly pointed this out and the decision referred by him in Mrs. Sarzina Begum (supra) and in Ananta Prasad Sahu (supra) also strengthen his submission and as such, the substantial question of law in Issue No.(2) has to be answered in negative and accordingly, the same stands answered.
Gauhati High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Ramesh Hiranand Kundanmal vs Municipal Corporation Of Greater ... on 4 March, 1992

10.3. That, regarding the submission of Mr. Mahanta, the learned Senior Counsel for the appellants‟/defendants‟, I find that the law relating to joinder and non-joinder of necessary parties is well settled in catena of decisions of Hon‟ble Supreme Court. Basically two tests are to be satisfied for determining the question as to who is a necessary party. Reference in this context can be made to decision of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in Ramesh Kundanmal vs. Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay reported in (1992)2 SCC 524. In the said case, wherein, in Paragraph 6, Hon‟ble Supreme Court has observed thus:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 448 - M F Beevi - Full Document
1   2 Next