Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 12 (0.47 seconds)
Sh. Chaman Lal S/O Sh. Budh Ram Mahat vs Sh.Budhi Singh S/O Late Sh. Nanak Chand ... on 28 October, 2016 cites

Mahendra Pratap Singh vs Sarju Singh & Anr on 20 November, 1967

14. Plea of revisionist in revision petition that judgments passed by learned Trial Court and affirmed by learned First Appellate Court are perverse ipso facto and on this ground revision petition be accepted is also rt rejected being devoid of any force for reasons hereinafter mentioned. It is well settled law that High Court can interfere in revision petition only when following factors are established: (1) Where decision is grossly erroneous (2) Where there is no compliance of provision of law (3) Where finding of fact is not based upon evidence (4) Where material evidence of parties is not considered (5) Where judicial discretion is exercised arbitrarily or perversely. See AIR 1968 SC 707 title Mahendra Pratap Singh Vs. Sarju Singh.
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 373 - M Hidayatullah - Full Document

K. Chinnaswamy Reddy vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 25 July, 1962

See AIR 1962 SC 1788 title Chinnaswamy Reddy Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh. Above stated facts are not established by revisionist in accordance with law. Even as per section 118 of Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 there is presumption unless contrary is proved relating to (1) Consideration (2) Date (3) Time of acceptance (4) Time of transfer (5) Order of endorsements (6) Stamps (7) Holder is holder in due course.
Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 678 - K N Wanchoo - Full Document
1   2 Next