Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.54 seconds)The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Kasturi & Ors vs State Of Haryana on 12 November, 2002
acquired for widening of the road. Hence, the decision of
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kasturi's case supra, is not
applicable, in the present cases.
Pralhad & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra & Anr on 15 September, 2010
52. The Hon'ble apex Court in Pralhad and Others
versus State of Maharashtra and Another, (2010) 10
Supreme Court Cases, 458, has held that the appellate
Court is empowered to pass any decree or make any order,
which ought to have been passed or made. The relevant
paragraphs 18 to 20 of the judgment are reproduced, as
under:-
Banarsi And Ors vs Ram Phal on 17 February, 2003
In Banarsi v. Ram Phal this Court construing
the provisions of Order 41 Rule 33 CPC held that
this provision confers powers of the widest
amplitude on the appellate court so as to do
complete justice between the parties. This Court
further held that such power is unfettered by
considerations as to what is the subject-matter of
the appeal or who has filed the appeal or
whether the appeal is being dismissed, allowed
or disposed of while modifying the judgments
appealed against. The learned Judges held that
one of the objects in conferring such power is to
avoid inconsistency. inequity and inequality in
granting reliefs and the overriding consideration
is achieving the ends of justice. The learned
Judges also held that the power can be exercised
subject to three limitations: firstly, this power
cannot be exercised to the prejudice of a person
who is not a party before the court; secondly, this
power cannot be exercised in favour of a claim
which has been given up or lost; and thirdly, the
power cannot be exercised when such part of the
decree which has been permitted to become final
by a party is reversed to the advantage of that
party."
Section 6 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [Entire Act]
Section 7 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [Entire Act]
Dinesh Kumar vs Land Acquisition Officer And Another on 7 July, 2023
2. Vide award dated 12.11.2013, the learned trial
Court had decided a batch of 14 land reference petitions,
of
lead case, whereof was Land Reference Petition No.251 of
2008, titled as Dinesh Kumar & Another versus Land
rt
Acquisition Collector & Another, by granting the following
relief, to the petitioners, in the land reference petitions:-
Section 18 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [Entire Act]
Dinesh Kumar And Others vs Land Acquisition Collector on 15 May, 2012
5. For the sake of convenience, the factual position,
as mentioned, in the Reference Petition No.251 of 2008,
of
titled as Dinesh Kumar & Another versus Land Acquisition
Collector, has been taken, as, the learned trial Court has
rt
consolidated the reference petition Nos.247, 248, 249, 250,
252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257, 258, 259 of 2008 and 127 of
2008, with Land Reference Petition No.251 of 2008, vide
orders dated 24.07.2010 and 8.11.2010.
1