Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.36 seconds)
Sushil Vidyarthi vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 11 March, 2002 cites

Malik Brothers vs Narendra Dadhich & Ors on 25 August, 1999

9. Learned Counsel has also relied upon (1999) 6 SCC 552, Malik Brothers v. Narendra Dadhich and Ors., wherein it has been held that it is necessary to bear in mind a Public Interest Litigation is usually entertained by a Court for the purpose of redressing public injury, enforcing public duty, protecting social rights and vindicating public interest. The real purpose of entertaining such application is the vindication of the rale of law, effective access to justice to the economically weaker class and meaningful realisation of the fundamental rights.
Supreme Court of India Cites 9 - Cited by 22 - S S Ahmad - Full Document

Pannalal Bansilal Pitti & Ors. Etc vs State Of Andhra Pradesh & Anr on 17 January, 1996

6. After recording of the arguments of learned Counsel of respondents while replying to the arguments of Sri Ravi Mehrotra appearing for Union of India and Sri A.K. Srivastava, Chief Standing Counsel for State of U.P., learned Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon Para 27 of the judgment reported in (1996) 2 SCC 498, Pannalal Bansilal Pitti and Ors. v. State of A.P. and Anr., which is quoted below :-
Supreme Court of India Cites 33 - Cited by 133 - K Ramaswamy - Full Document

Dr M. Ismail Frauqui And Ors. vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 24 October, 1994

21. While examining the judgment of Dr. M. Ismail Faruqui and others (supra), we find that all the litigations will revolve around this judgment specially in light of the conclusions and result contained in the judgment. Further we are of the considered opinion that the petitioner must have made his earnest efforts to find out under what circumstances how and why this status quo is being maintained at Ayodhya.
Supreme Court of India Cites 74 - Cited by 24 - J S Verma - Full Document
1