Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 28 (1.66 seconds)Section 26 in The Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Saranpal Kaur Anand vs Praduman Singh Chandhok on 28 March, 2022
In light of the above, it is pertinent to mention that since
the plaintiff was aware of the existence of the sale deed in
question in favour of defendant no.2 whether by virtue of
mistake or fraud, then also the appropriate suit should have
been instituted by the plaintiff within a period of 3 years
from that date i.e. till June'1995 rather the present suit has
been instituted in the year May'1996. At this stage, it is
further pertinent to mention that, the plaintiff has acted
against his own interests by not instituting the appropriate
suit within time prescribed and as such the plaintiff has not
acted in diligent and reasonable manner. At this stage, it is
further noteworthy that, defendant no.1 has correctly
placed reliance in the judgment of Saranpal Kaur Anand vs
Praduman Singh Chandhok [(2022) 8 SCC 401], wherein it
has been held as follows:
Ranganayakamma & Anr vs K.S. Prakash (D) By Lrs. & Ors on 16 May, 2008
Further, Ld. counsel for defendant has correctly
placed reliance in the case of Ranganayakamma & Ors.
Vs. K.S. Prakash (dead) by LRs & Ors. CA no.3635 of
2008, wherein it was observed that, Order 6 Rule 4 CPC
requires that complete particulars of fraud must be stated
in the pleadings. It has been further observed that if a
document is prima facie valid, a presumption arises in
regard to its genuineness and the onus of proving
otherwise lies on the person challenging the genuineness
of such a registered document.
M/S. Shakti Bhog Food Industries Ltd. vs The Central Bank Of India on 5 June, 2020
In this
regard plaintiff side has placed reliance on the case of
Shakti Bhog Food Industries Limited vs. Central Bank of India
&Anr., [(2020) 17 SCC 260], wherein it was held that, under
Article 113, the limitation of three (3) years is to be computed
from the last day when the cause of action arose and not the
first day when the cause of action arose.
Article 113 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988
L.I.C. Of India & Anr vs Ram Pal Singh Bisen on 16 March, 2010
f). LIC Vs. Ram Pal Singh Bisen, (2010) 4 SCC 491.
Man Kaur(Dead)By Lrs vs Hartar Singh Sangha on 5 October, 2010
g). Man Kaur Vs. Hartar Singh Sangha, (2010) 10 SCC
Saradamani Kandappan vs S. Rajalakshmi & Ors on 4 July, 2011
b). Saradamani Kandappan Vs. S Rajalakshmi & Ors.
(2011) 12 Sec 18.