Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.20 seconds)

Fiza Developers & Inter-Trade P.Ltd vs Amci (I) P.Ltd.& Anr on 27 July, 2009

32.Be that as it may, Hon'ble Supreme Court recently in Fiza Developers & Inter-Trade (P) Ltd. Vs. AMCI (India) (P) Ltd. reported in (2009) 17 SCC 796 held that an application in the nature of instant OP which is http://www.judis.nic.in 16 under Section 34 of A & C Act is a summary procedure and this principle laid down by Supreme Court in Fiza Developers & Inter-Trade (P) Ltd. Vs. AMCI (India) (P) Ltd. was subsequently reiterated in Emkay Global Financial Services Limited Vs. Girdhar Sondhi reported in (2018) 9 SCC 49. While referring to the Fiza Developers principle, Supreme Court in Emkay Global has held that Fiza Developers principle is a step in the right direction towards expeditious disposal of petitions under Section 34 of A & C Act.
Supreme Court of India Cites 10 - Cited by 96 - Full Document

The State Of Bihar vs Bihar Rajya Bhumi Vikas Bank Samiti ... on 30 July, 2018

33.To be noted, State of Bihar Vs. Bihar Rajya Bhumi Vikas Bank Samiti reported in (2018) 9 SCC 472 is an authority, case law for proposition that notice under Sub-Section 5 of Section 34 of A & C Act is not mandatory and is only directory clause. However, in Bhumi Vikas, the Supreme Court has referred to Fiza Developers and held that endeavour shall be made for disposal of Section 34 of A & C Act application within prescribed time line.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 37 - Cited by 84 - R F Nariman - Full Document

Associate Builders vs Delhi Development Authority on 25 November, 2014

26.As mentioned supra, there were as many as 55 exhibits marked on the side of the claimant/contractor and as many as 30 exhibits marked on the side of the Southern Railway before AT. These exhibits have been analysed by AT in dealing with 13 different issues and answered the claims made under eight different heads. It is well settled that AT is the best Judge of the quality and quantity of evidence as has been held in Hodgkinson principle (Hodgkinson Vs. Fernie, the reference being 140 ER 712) though written in 1857, the same can safely be followed as Hon'ble Supreme Court very recently in the oft-quoted Associate Builders Vs. Delhi Development Authority case reported in (2015) 3 SCC 49 has quoted the same with approval. This puts an end to the second ground of attack or in other words, fire in the second ground on which instant OP is predicated stands doused.
Supreme Court of India Cites 55 - Cited by 2182 - R F Nariman - Full Document

M/S Emkay Global Financial Services ... vs Gindhar Sondhi on 20 August, 2018

32.Be that as it may, Hon'ble Supreme Court recently in Fiza Developers & Inter-Trade (P) Ltd. Vs. AMCI (India) (P) Ltd. reported in (2009) 17 SCC 796 held that an application in the nature of instant OP which is http://www.judis.nic.in 16 under Section 34 of A & C Act is a summary procedure and this principle laid down by Supreme Court in Fiza Developers & Inter-Trade (P) Ltd. Vs. AMCI (India) (P) Ltd. was subsequently reiterated in Emkay Global Financial Services Limited Vs. Girdhar Sondhi reported in (2018) 9 SCC 49. While referring to the Fiza Developers principle, Supreme Court in Emkay Global has held that Fiza Developers principle is a step in the right direction towards expeditious disposal of petitions under Section 34 of A & C Act.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 33 - Cited by 177 - R F Nariman - Full Document
1