Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.19 seconds)
Reliance Industries Limited Rep. By ... vs M. Rajkumari on 23 April, 2001 cites

N. Balakrishnan vs M. Krishnamurthy on 3 September, 1998

In the decision relied on by the counsel for the petitioner reported in N. Balakrishnan v. H. Krishnamurthy, , the Supreme court had said that condonation of delay is a matter of discretion of the Court and when there is latches on the part of the application the Court should compensate by imposing terms. But the Supreme Court has also said in this case in a pithy sentence, "Length of delay is no matter, acceptability of the explanation is the only criterion".
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 2563 - Full Document

Sri Veera Hanuman Rice And Flour Mill And ... vs State Bank Of India, Ramachandrapuram, ... on 24 April, 2000

In the decision reported in Sri Veera Hanuman Rice and Flour Mill v. State Bank of India, 2000 AIR SCW 2575, the Supreme Court held that while indulgence should be shown in considering claims of parties there is no justification to ignore the subsequent facts and the realities of the situation. The laws of limitation may sometimes harshly affect the particular party. It cannot be denied while considering the matters that fall under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, discretion also has to be exercised cautiously.
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 9 - Full Document

Suryanarayana Paper And Boards Pvt. ... vs V. Padmakumar And Others on 21 April, 1995

He also referred to the decision reported in Suryanarayana Paper and Boards Pvt. Ltd., v. V. Padmakumar, 1997 (88) Com. Cases 684 where this Court had held that the residence of a company in India is where its registered office is located and it is desirable that normally case should be filed where the registered office is situated. He submitted that third party's rights will suffer when the ex parte decree is not set aside and to advance the interest of justice the Court should accept the cause offered by the petitioner for the delay and order the application as prayed for.
Madras High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 21 - Full Document
1