Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.55 seconds)
Shri Pradip Vaid S/O Shri S.C. Vaid vs Universal Constructors (Proprietor ... on 7 March, 2005 cites

Ashan Devi & Anr vs Phulwasi Devi & Ors on 19 November, 2003

In Ashan Devi's case (supra) even as the Supreme Court had held that the Executing Court was justified in recording evidence and adjudicating claims of third party, it can't be stretched to mean that it was to be done in every case and even those cases which were liable to be rejected under the proviso to Rule 58. Therefore, none of these judgments are of any help to Appellant.
Supreme Court of India Cites 10 - Cited by 66 - Full Document

Canara Bank vs Gurmukh Singh & Ors. on 5 October, 1999

19. The appellant has relied on AIR 2003 Kerala 45, Anthony v. Kunjavarankutty Hajee and Anr.; 2003 (VIII) SLT 385, Ashan Devi and Anr. v. Phulwasi Devi and Ors. 1999 (51) DRJ 491, Canara Bank v. Gurmukh Singh and Ors.; AIR 1978 Madras 270, Southern Steelmet and Alloys Ltd. v. B.M. Steel, Madras; AIR 1989 Madras 311, Alamelu Ammal v. Chinnaswamy Reddiar, to contend that his rights in the flat which was auctioned in satisfaction of decree, ought to have been determined by the Executing Court in objections filed by the appellant.
Delhi High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 8 - V Sen - Full Document

Southern Steelmet And Alloys Ltd. vs B.M. Steel, Madras on 1 February, 1978

19. The appellant has relied on AIR 2003 Kerala 45, Anthony v. Kunjavarankutty Hajee and Anr.; 2003 (VIII) SLT 385, Ashan Devi and Anr. v. Phulwasi Devi and Ors. 1999 (51) DRJ 491, Canara Bank v. Gurmukh Singh and Ors.; AIR 1978 Madras 270, Southern Steelmet and Alloys Ltd. v. B.M. Steel, Madras; AIR 1989 Madras 311, Alamelu Ammal v. Chinnaswamy Reddiar, to contend that his rights in the flat which was auctioned in satisfaction of decree, ought to have been determined by the Executing Court in objections filed by the appellant.
Madras High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 18 - Full Document

Alamelu Ammal vs Chinnaswamy Reddiar on 2 December, 1988

19. The appellant has relied on AIR 2003 Kerala 45, Anthony v. Kunjavarankutty Hajee and Anr.; 2003 (VIII) SLT 385, Ashan Devi and Anr. v. Phulwasi Devi and Ors. 1999 (51) DRJ 491, Canara Bank v. Gurmukh Singh and Ors.; AIR 1978 Madras 270, Southern Steelmet and Alloys Ltd. v. B.M. Steel, Madras; AIR 1989 Madras 311, Alamelu Ammal v. Chinnaswamy Reddiar, to contend that his rights in the flat which was auctioned in satisfaction of decree, ought to have been determined by the Executing Court in objections filed by the appellant.
Madras High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 9 - Full Document
1