Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.38 seconds)Hanumant Singh vs Kiran Kumari & Ors on 10 October, 2011
The relevant observations
made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Hanumant's case
(supra), which can be gainfully followed in the present case,
read as under:-
Padmausundara Rao (Dead) &Ors vs State Of T.N. & Ors on 13 March, 2002
So far as the judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for
the respondent is concerned, there is no dispute about the law laid down
Saluja Mukesh Kumar
RSA NO.239 of 1991 and another 14 2014.02.21 12:21
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
therein, however the same is of no help to the respondent being clearly
distinguishable on facts. It is the settled principle of law that peculiar facts
of each case are to be examined, considered and appreciated first, before
applying any codified or judgemade law thereto. Sometimes, difference of
one circumstance or additional fact can make the world of difference, as
held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Padmausundra Rao and another
Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and others, 2002 (3) SCC 533.
Section 151 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Section 152 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Roshan Lal And Ors. vs Kewal Singh And Ors. on 5 October, 2007
Since this Court had the occasion to deal with similar issue in
Jaswant Singh's case (supra), following the law laid down by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Hanumant Singh's case (supra) and by this Court in
Roshan Lal's case (supra), it would be appropriate to reproduce the relevant
part of only the judgment dated 8.1.2014, for the sake of brevity. The
relevant observations made in the judgment dated 8.1.2014 are as under:-
Mohinder Singh And Ors. vs Karnail Singh And Ors. on 6 August, 2001
Learned counsel for the appellant contends that since the
impugned judgment and decree were passed at the back of the appellant
even without issuing notice to him, the same were not sustainable in law.
Relying upon the judgment of this Court in Mohinder Singh and others v.
Karnail Singh and others, 2002(1) PLR 689, he prays for setting aside the
Saluja Mukesh Kumar
RSA NO.239 of 1991 and another 5 2014.02.21 12:21
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
impugned judgment and decree by allowing the present appeal. He also
submits that the since revision petition was wholly misconceived, the same
may be dismissed.
Mohan Masih vs Smt. Bashiro And Ors. on 5 May, 1988
The argument raised by the learned counsel for the respondents
has been found without any merit and the same is liable to be rejected. The
order passed by the Hon'ble Full Bench in Mohan Masih's case (supra),
being a short one, is being reproduced and reads as under:-
1