Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.20 seconds)
Thankamma vs Ponnamma on 27 July, 2021 cites

Banwari Lal vs Smt. Chando Devi (Through L.R.) And ... on 11 December, 1992

13. When the amending Act introduced a proviso along with an Explanation to Rule 3 of Order XXIII saying that where it is alleged by the one party and denied by the other that an adjustment or satisfaction has been arrived at, "the Court shall decide the question", the Court before which a petition of compromise is filed and which has recorded such compromise, has to decide the question whether an adjustment or satisfaction had been arrived at on the basis of any lawful agreement'(See Banwari Lal v. Chando Devi(SMT)(THROUGH LRs.) and another[(1993)1 SCC 581].
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 238 - N P Singh - Full Document

Teena M.Ansari vs Rinoj Eappen on 9 December, 2019

has got a certain solemnity attached to the mediation process, as held in Teena's case (supra). Hence, the allegation of fraud as against the mediation process is clearly unsustainable and an appeal challenging the compromise decree passed by a competent court of jurisdiction by way of mediation process in accordance with rules, is not maintainable under Section 96(3) of the Code. Assuming for arguments sake, even if the delay was condoned by the first appellate court, still an appeal challenging a compromise decree duly obtained by way of mediation process was unsustainable before the first appellate court in view of Section 96(3) of the Code.
Kerala High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 3 - B P Kumar - Full Document
1