Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 22 (2.12 seconds)
Reserved On: 23.3.2026 vs Of on 22 May, 2026 cites

Banarsi And Ors vs Ram Phal on 17 February, 2003

"30. By applying the ratio in Banarsi [Banarsi v. Ram Phal, (2003) 9 SCC 606], we notice that the impugned judgment [Dharmrao v. Arifa Parveen, 2022 SCC OnLine Kar 1671] has not considered whether a ground is made out for modifying a decree or not. The High Court has disturbed a finding of fact, leading to modifying the ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 12:43:10 :::CIS 23 2026:HHC:19291 decree of the trial court in OS No. 212 of 2013 without there being an appeal/cross-appeal. To this extent, the findings of the High Court are not tenable in the facts and circumstances of this case. The other reasons assigned by .
Supreme Court of India Cites 14 - Cited by 268 - R C Lahoti - Full Document

Kondiba Dagadu Kadam vs Savitkibai Sopan Gujar An Dors on 16 April, 1999

of 7.4. Even otherwise, it is required to be noted that as per a catena of the decisions of this Court and even as provided under Section 100 CPC, the second appeal would be maintainable only on a substantial question of law. The rt second appeal does not lie on a question of fact or of law. The existence of "a substantial question of law" is a sine qua non for the exercise of the jurisdiction under Section 100 CPC. As observed and held by this Court in Kondiba Dagadu Kadam [Kondiba Dagadu Kadam v. Savitribai Sopan Gujar, (1999) 3 SCC 722], in a second appeal under Section 100 CPC, the High Court cannot substitute its own opinion for that of the first appellate court, unless it finds that the conclusions drawn by the lower court were erroneous, being:
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 739 - Full Document

Choudhary Sahu (Dead) By Lrs vs State Of Bihar on 14 December, 1981

15. Order 41 Rule 22 of the CPC enables the respondent to support the decree, but if he wants to challenge any part of the decree, he has to file cross-objections. It was held in Choudhary Sahu v. State of Bihar, (1982) 1 SCC 232: 1981 SCC OnLine SC 445 that the respondent can support a decree, but he cannot challenge the decree. It was observed at page 235: -
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 29 - R B Misra - Full Document
1   2 3 Next