Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.20 seconds)

Mechelec Engineers And Manufacturers vs M/S. Basic Equipment Corporation on 1 November, 1976

"17. Accordingly, the principles stated in para 8 of Mechelec case [Mechelec Engineers & Manufacturers v. Basic Equipment Corpn., (1976) 4 SCC 687] will now stand superseded, given the amendment of Order 37 Rule 3 and the binding decision of four Judges in Milkhiram case [Milkhiram (India) (P) Ltd. v. Chamanlal Bros., AIR 1965 SC 1698 : (1966) 68 Bom LR 36] , as follows:
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 581 - M H Beg - Full Document

Milkhiram (India) Private Ltd. And Ors. vs Chamanlal Bros. on 23 April, 1965

"17. Accordingly, the principles stated in para 8 of Mechelec case [Mechelec Engineers & Manufacturers v. Basic Equipment Corpn., (1976) 4 SCC 687] will now stand superseded, given the amendment of Order 37 Rule 3 and the binding decision of four Judges in Milkhiram case [Milkhiram (India) (P) Ltd. v. Chamanlal Bros., AIR 1965 SC 1698 : (1966) 68 Bom LR 36] , as follows:
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 206 - J R Mudholkar - Full Document

Idbi Trusteeship Services Ltd vs Hubtown Ltd on 15 November, 2016

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in IDBI Trusteeship Services Limited vs. Hubtown Limited (supra) held that Order XXXVII CPC was subject matter of amendment in the year 1976 and the same has resulted in the difference in CS(OS) 297/2019 Page 9 of 15 the law laid down by earlier judgments i.e., principally Mechelec Engineers & Manufacturers vs. Basic Equipment Corpn., (1976) 4 SCC 687.
Supreme Court of India Cites 18 - Cited by 430 - R F Nariman - Full Document
1