Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 12 (1.47 seconds)

Maharashtra State Financial ... vs Jaycee Drugs And Pharmaceuticals Pvt. ... on 19 February, 1991

11. Similarly, the decision relied upon by 'GUJARAT STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION VS. NATSON MANUFACTURING CO. PVT. LTD AND ORS.', AIR 1978 SC 1765, 'PRAKASH PLAYING CARDS MANUFACTURING CO., DELHI AND ORS. VS. DELHI FINANCIAL CORPORATION , NEW DELHI', AIR 1980 DEL 48, supra have no application to the fact situation of the case, as in the aforesaid decisions, amended provisions of section 31(1) of the Act have not been noticed.
Supreme Court of India Cites 42 - Cited by 83 - S C Agrawal - Full Document

M/S. O.K. Gaur & Company & Another vs Rajasthan Finance Corporation on 11 July, 2000

Similarly, the decision rendered by High court of Bombay as well as High court of Rajasthan and High court of Punjab and Haryana in 'THE MAHARASHTRA STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION VS. JAYCEE DRUGS & PHARMACEUTICALS PVT. LTD. AND ORS.', AIR 1991 BOM 96, 'O.K. GAUR & 18 COMPANY AND ORS. VS. RAJSTHAN FINANCE CORPORATION', AIR 2001 RAJ 4, 'KIRIL FINE ART AND ORS. VS. THE MAHARASHTRA STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION', AIR 1998 BOM 207, 'MELA RAM VS. SHIROMANI GURUDWARA PARBANDHAK COMMITTEE, ARITSAR', AIR 1992 P & H 252, supra are per incuriam as in the aforesaid decision, the decision of the Supreme Court in Maharashtra State Financial Corporation supra has not been noticed. Therefore, the contention of the appellants that in proceedings under Section 31(1) of the Act, the Trial Court could not have passed a money decree does not deserve acceptance.
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 6 - Cited by 8 - Full Document

A.P. State Financial Corpn vs Gar Re-Rolling Mills on 10 February, 1994

In view of aforesaid enunciation of law by the Supreme Court, the decision relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellants in the case of 'ANDHRA PRADESH STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION VS. GAR RE-ROLLING MILLS AND ORS,', AIR 1994 SC 2151, is of no 17 assistance to he appellants as appellants in the fact situation of the case as in the aforesaid decision the Supreme Court was dealing with the issue of doctrine of election of remedies.
Supreme Court of India Cites 18 - Cited by 233 - K Singh - Full Document

Gujarat State Financial Corporation vs M/S. Natson Manufacturing Co. (P) Ltd. & ... on 29 August, 1978

11. Similarly, the decision relied upon by 'GUJARAT STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION VS. NATSON MANUFACTURING CO. PVT. LTD AND ORS.', AIR 1978 SC 1765, 'PRAKASH PLAYING CARDS MANUFACTURING CO., DELHI AND ORS. VS. DELHI FINANCIAL CORPORATION , NEW DELHI', AIR 1980 DEL 48, supra have no application to the fact situation of the case, as in the aforesaid decisions, amended provisions of section 31(1) of the Act have not been noticed.
Supreme Court of India Cites 17 - Cited by 80 - D A Desai - Full Document

Kiril Fine Art And Ors. vs The Maharashtra State Financial ... on 17 March, 1997

Similarly, the decision rendered by High court of Bombay as well as High court of Rajasthan and High court of Punjab and Haryana in 'THE MAHARASHTRA STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION VS. JAYCEE DRUGS & PHARMACEUTICALS PVT. LTD. AND ORS.', AIR 1991 BOM 96, 'O.K. GAUR & 18 COMPANY AND ORS. VS. RAJSTHAN FINANCE CORPORATION', AIR 2001 RAJ 4, 'KIRIL FINE ART AND ORS. VS. THE MAHARASHTRA STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION', AIR 1998 BOM 207, 'MELA RAM VS. SHIROMANI GURUDWARA PARBANDHAK COMMITTEE, ARITSAR', AIR 1992 P & H 252, supra are per incuriam as in the aforesaid decision, the decision of the Supreme Court in Maharashtra State Financial Corporation supra has not been noticed. Therefore, the contention of the appellants that in proceedings under Section 31(1) of the Act, the Trial Court could not have passed a money decree does not deserve acceptance.
Bombay High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 6 - V S Sirpurkar - Full Document
1   2 Next