Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.98 seconds)
Varadarajan vs Muthu Venkatapathi Reddy And Ors. on 16 September, 1952 cites

Mutha Korakki Chetty And Anr. vs Mahomad Madar Ammal And Ors. on 1 October, 1919

9. To a similar effect are the observations of Abdur Rahim O.C.J. in -- 'Muthu Korakki Chetti v. Mahammad Madar Ammal', AIR 1920 Mad 1 (PB) (C) at pp. 197 and 193. The question that arose in that case was as to the time from which the period of three years had to be computed under Article 180, Limitation Act and therefore it was necessary to find when the sale became absolute. At pp. 5-6,the learned Officiating Chief Justice observes:
Madras High Court Cites 30 - Cited by 41 - Full Document

Charitter Shukul vs Lal Behari Singh And Anr. on 12 December, 1933

In -- 'Charitter Shukul v. Lal Behari Singh', AIR 1934 All 433 (B) an application was filed on behalf of a minor judgment-debtor for setting aside the sale and a compromise was effected on his behalf whereby the application was withdrawn and the sale was confirmed. In a suit subsequently filed on behalf of the miner the compromise itself was questioned and set aside. By reason of setting aside the compromise it was held, that the declaratory decree holding the compromise to be not binding on the minor, all that follows therefrom including the order confirming the sale must also be null and void.
Allahabad High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1