Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.25 seconds)
Kk Construction vs Taj Mohammad on 20 November, 2025 cites

Union Of India vs Pramod Gupta (D) By Lrs. & Ors on 7 September, 2005

"One of the main contentions that has been raised by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner as was noted in the previous order also, is regarding the highly belated manner of filing of the amendment application when the case had reached the stage of final hearing. For this, Learned Counsel has cited the decision in the case of Union of India vs. Pramod Gupta (Dead) by LRs and Others (2005) 12 SCC1 (Para 134-136). He has emphasized para-135 on delay and has urged with the help of a chart handed over today during the course of the hearing to indicate that the delay is spread over to 2369 days and even after the change of the counsel, to 1529 days. This is almost similar in relation to all the Petitions.
Supreme Court of India Cites 139 - Cited by 942 - S B Sinha - Full Document

Vijay Hathising Shah vs Gitaben Parshottamdas Mukhi . on 25 February, 2019

The contention therefore, is that such inordinate delay without any explanation or reason should not have been entertained by the State Commission and it is pointed out that even while recording findings, the State Commission, even though has accepted the amendment, as not causing any prejudice to the Petitioners, yet, it has not recited any opinion on the issue of the attempt of amendment being made at the fag end of the proceedings when the Complaint had been finally proceeded for hearing. The submission is that the Apex Court judgment referred to above coupled with the case of Vijay Hathising Shah & Anr. vs. Gitaben Parshottamdas Mukhi & Ors. (2019) 5 SCC 360 (Para-9), urges that the delay should not be condoned. Even though it has been argued that there is a failure to carry out the amendments, yet there are other facts also which are pointed out by the Learned Counsel for the Respondents.
Supreme Court of India Cites 0 - Cited by 41 - A M Sapre - Full Document
1