Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.23 seconds)Major S. S. Khanna vs Brig. F.J. Dillon on 14 August, 1963
S.S. Khanna's case, (AIR 1964 SC 497) (supra) and in this context, he also cited the above referred other decisions of Rajasthan, Orissa and Punjab and Haryana High Courts.
C.I.T. Central, Calcutta vs National Taj Traders on 27 November, 1979
In Commr. of Income-tax v. National Taj Traders, AIR 1980 SC 485 in para 10, their Lordships have held that--
The State Of Bihar vs Hiralal Kejriwal And Another on 14 September, 1959
In State of Bihar v. Hiralal Kejriwal, AIR 1960 SC 47 in para 6, their Lordships have held:
Aswini Kumar Ghose And Anr. vs Arabinda Bose And Anr. on 12 December, 1952
Similarly, in Ashwani Kumar Ghose v. Arbindra Bose, AIR 1952 SC 369 in para 55, their Lordships have held:
Yaqoob Ali vs Firm Haji Taj Khanji Ibrahimji, Udaipur on 7 November, 1982
4. Shri R.K. Pandey counsel for the applicant contended that despite the final judgment and decree passed by the trial Court, this revision has not become infructuous and he submitted that the revision may be heard on merits and be decided accordingly. In support of his contention, he submitted that the provisions of Section 115, C.P.C. give ample and unfettered powers to this Court to decide the revision notwithstanding the fact that a final decree has been passed against which a regular appeal lies. In support of his contention, he cited authorities right from different High Courts in this country to the Supreme Court of India. He, however, based his arguments on the decisions reported in Yaqoob Ali v. Firm Haji Tajkhanji Ibrahimji, Udaipur, AIR 1984 Raj 1, Assanand v. Harish Kumar, AIR 1983 Punj & Har 23, Shrikishan Bharadwaj v. Manoharlal Gupta, (AIR 1977 Delhi 226), Smt. Pushpa Rani v. Ramchandra, AIR 1977 Orissa 23, Damodar v. Santosh Singh. 1978 Jab LJ 769 and Maj.'
Raj Krushna Bose vs Binod Kanungo And Others on 4 February, 1954
Similarly, in Raj Krushna Bose v. Vinod Kanungo, AIR 1954 SC 202 in para 11, it has been held--
Madanlal Fakirchand Dudhediya vs Shree Changdeo Sugar Mills Ltd on 20 March, 1962
Similarly, in Madanlal Fakirchand v. Shri Changdeo Sugar Mills, Limited, AIR 1962 SC 1543 in para 17, their Lordships have held that-- .
Section 105 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
K.M. Nanavati vs The State Of Bombay on 5 September, 1960
Similarly, in K.M. Nanawati v. State of Bombay, AIR 1961 SC 112 in para 80(6)(e), it is laid down that--
1