Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 24 (0.26 seconds)Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 4 in Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 [Entire Act]
Section 9 in Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 [Entire Act]
Section 10 in Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 [Entire Act]
L. Chandrakumar vs India And Others on 7 September, 1993
12. Sri S.P. Shankar, learned Senior Advocate, contended that, the Division Bench while deciding W.A. 1777/01, by judgment dated 1.7.2006, has accepted the view taken in Suryadev Rai's case and also in the case of L. Chandrakumar v. Union of India and Ors. , and has specifically overruled the objection regarding maintainability of the writ appeal. The learned Senior Counsel submitted that since another Division Bench has already taken the view that the writ appeal as maintainable, we are required to hold that these writ appeals also as maintainable, or the matters to be referred to a Full Bench for its consideration.
Pradip Chandra Parija And Ors vs Pramod Chandra Patanaik And Ors on 4 December, 2001
25. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in a catena of cases has held that if a Bench with a smaller quorum, or a coordinate Bench finds that the law declared by a larger Bench or a co-ordinate Bench as requiring reconsideration on account of not noticing any statutory provision, or amendment of the statute, or the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court under Article 141 of the Constitution of India being not noticed, considered and/or explained, judicial discipline demands that the matter be referred to a larger Bench for decision in the matter, instead of sitting in judgment or expressing any kind of dissent