Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 30 (0.27 seconds)Section 100 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Section 155 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Section 3 in The Limitation Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
The Limitation Act, 1963
Section 5 in The Limitation Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
Kshitish Chandra Purkait vs Santosh Kumar Purkait & Ors on 7 May, 1997
"It has to be kept in view that the learned Single Judge was exercising jurisdiction under Section 100 C.P.C. as it was amended in 1976. A mere look at the said provision shows that the High Court can exercise its jurisdiction under Section 100 C.P.C. only on the basis of substantial question of law which are to be framed at the time of admission of the second appeal and the second appeal has to be heard and decided only on the basis of such duly framed substantial question of law. The impugned judgment shows that no such procedure was followed by the learned Single Judge. it is held by a catena of judgments by this Court, some of them being Kshitish Chandra Purkait vs. Santesh Kumar Purkait and others JT 1997 (5) SC 202 and Sheel Chand v. Prakash Chand JT 1998 (6) SC 192, that the judgment rendered by the High Court under Section 100 C.P.C. without following the aforesaid procedure cannot be sustained. On this short ground alone, this appeal is required to be allowed."
Dnyanoba Bhaurao Shemade vs Maroti Bhaurao Marnor on 5 February, 1999
In the case of DNYANOBA BHAURAO SHEMADE vs. MAROTI BHAURAO MARNON reported in JT 1999 (1) SC 266, the Apex Court, in paragraph 11, held as under:-