Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 15 (0.33 seconds)

Faqruddin (D) Th.Lrs vs Tajuddin (D) Th.Lrs on 16 May, 2008

20. Learned counsel for respondent though has relied upon the decisions reported in (2008) 8 SCC 13 Faqruddin V. Tajuddin; 2014 (142) DRJ 656 Parminder Singh & Anr. V. Virender Pal Singh Jolly; (1999) 5 SCC 590 Hope Plantations Ltd. V. Taluk Land Board, Peermade & Ors.; and (2005) 7 SCC 190 Ishwar Dutt V. Land Acquisition Collector & Anr etc.; the judgments so referred to by the learned counsel for the respondent only reiterate the law on res-judicata. None of the judgments referred to above are relevant to the issue involved.
Supreme Court of India Cites 24 - Cited by 60 - S B Sinha - Full Document

Cheria Veetil Madhavan Variar (Died) ... vs Chathu Nambiar Of Memenda Amsom Kizhal ... on 25 February, 1950

17. Moreover, both the suits were filed in different capacities, the first being as a co-owner, the second being as an owner against an unauthorized occupant hence had separate a cause of action. A second suit if filed by the plaintiff in different capacity is maintainable as was held in decision reported as AIR 1951 Mad 285 Cheria Veetil Madhavan Variar (Died) & Ors. V. Chathu Nambiar of Memenda Amsom Kizhal Desam & Ors where the former suit was based on the title to the property vested in Tarwad and the second suit being based on the personal right given to the plaintiff under the Kanam document Ex.P2, it was RFA(OS)No.26/2014 Page 8 of 10 held that both the suits since based on different titles give rise to different cause of action(s).
Madras High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 8 - Full Document

Ishwar Dutt vs Land Acquisition Collector And Anr on 2 August, 2005

20. Learned counsel for respondent though has relied upon the decisions reported in (2008) 8 SCC 13 Faqruddin V. Tajuddin; 2014 (142) DRJ 656 Parminder Singh & Anr. V. Virender Pal Singh Jolly; (1999) 5 SCC 590 Hope Plantations Ltd. V. Taluk Land Board, Peermade & Ors.; and (2005) 7 SCC 190 Ishwar Dutt V. Land Acquisition Collector & Anr etc.; the judgments so referred to by the learned counsel for the respondent only reiterate the law on res-judicata. None of the judgments referred to above are relevant to the issue involved.
Supreme Court of India Cites 22 - Cited by 206 - Full Document
1   2 Next