Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.51 seconds)
Uma Shankar @ Umashankar Nirmal vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. ... on 16 November, 2022 cites

Shiji @ Pappu & Ors vs Radhika & Anr on 14 November, 2011

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is evident that under the order of this Court dated 28.09.2022, the parties had appeared before the trial court and filed a compromise, which has been duly verified by the trial court and a verification report in this regard along with the original compromise deed has been furnished by the trial court, which is also available on record. The dispute between the parties appears to be personal in nature. Thus, having regard to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab reported in (2012)10 SCC 303, Shiji and others Vs. Radhika and others Manu/ SC/1341/2011, Manoj Sharma Vs. State of U.P. (2008)16 SCC1, Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab reported in (2014)6 SCC 466, Yogendra Yadav Vs. State of Jhakhand reported in (2014) 9 SCC 653 as well as in a recent case decided by Hon'ble the Supreme Court on 4.10.2017 passed in Crl. Appeal No. 1723 of 2017, arising out of SLP (Crl.)
Supreme Court of India Cites 30 - Cited by 3214 - T S Thakur - Full Document

Sunderdeep Engineering College Thr ... vs State Of U.P. And Another on 18 June, 2010

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is evident that under the order of this Court dated 28.09.2022, the parties had appeared before the trial court and filed a compromise, which has been duly verified by the trial court and a verification report in this regard along with the original compromise deed has been furnished by the trial court, which is also available on record. The dispute between the parties appears to be personal in nature. Thus, having regard to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab reported in (2012)10 SCC 303, Shiji and others Vs. Radhika and others Manu/ SC/1341/2011, Manoj Sharma Vs. State of U.P. (2008)16 SCC1, Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab reported in (2014)6 SCC 466, Yogendra Yadav Vs. State of Jhakhand reported in (2014) 9 SCC 653 as well as in a recent case decided by Hon'ble the Supreme Court on 4.10.2017 passed in Crl. Appeal No. 1723 of 2017, arising out of SLP (Crl.)
Allahabad High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 122 - K Murari - Full Document

Gian Singh vs State Of Punjab & Anr on 24 September, 2012

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is evident that under the order of this Court dated 28.09.2022, the parties had appeared before the trial court and filed a compromise, which has been duly verified by the trial court and a verification report in this regard along with the original compromise deed has been furnished by the trial court, which is also available on record. The dispute between the parties appears to be personal in nature. Thus, having regard to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab reported in (2012)10 SCC 303, Shiji and others Vs. Radhika and others Manu/ SC/1341/2011, Manoj Sharma Vs. State of U.P. (2008)16 SCC1, Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab reported in (2014)6 SCC 466, Yogendra Yadav Vs. State of Jhakhand reported in (2014) 9 SCC 653 as well as in a recent case decided by Hon'ble the Supreme Court on 4.10.2017 passed in Crl. Appeal No. 1723 of 2017, arising out of SLP (Crl.)
Supreme Court of India Cites 81 - Cited by 53834 - R M Lodha - Full Document
1