Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.30 seconds)
Ponnamma vs Akhila Gopinath on 13 March, 2019 cites

M/S S.J.S. Business Enterprises (P) Ltd vs State Of Bihar And Ors on 17 March, 2004

11. It is also one of the contentions of the petitioner that OP 2694/2018 itself is the result of a collusion between the Original Petitioner and the respondents. This contention, as rightly held by the court below, is irrelevant so long as the petitioner has failed to establish that she has absolute right and transferable interest in the property. A few decisions brought to our notice by the learned counsel for the petitioner, in M/s. S.J.S.Business Enterprises (P) Ltd. Vs. State of Bihar And Ors. [(2004) 7 SCC 166], Indian Bank v. Satyam Fibres (India) Pvt. Ltd., [(1996) 5 SCC 550], Prestige Lights Ltd. v. State Bank of India [(2007) 8 SCC 449], K.D.Sharma v. Steel Authority of India Ltd. and Ors. [(2008) 12 SCC 481] , O.P.(FC) No.85/2019 9 G.Jayashree and Ors. v. Bhagwandas S.Patel and Ors. [(2009) 3 SCC 141] holding that fraud and collusion will not create legal interests on the parties, have no relevance so far as the facts of this case are concerned, especially because the petitioner has not been able to substantiate that she acquired any absolute right in the property in terms of Ext.A1 Will other than a limited interest not capable of surviving her.
Supreme Court of India Cites 9 - Cited by 326 - R Pal - Full Document

Indian Bank vs M/S Satyam Fibres (India} Pvt.Ltd on 9 August, 1996

11. It is also one of the contentions of the petitioner that OP 2694/2018 itself is the result of a collusion between the Original Petitioner and the respondents. This contention, as rightly held by the court below, is irrelevant so long as the petitioner has failed to establish that she has absolute right and transferable interest in the property. A few decisions brought to our notice by the learned counsel for the petitioner, in M/s. S.J.S.Business Enterprises (P) Ltd. Vs. State of Bihar And Ors. [(2004) 7 SCC 166], Indian Bank v. Satyam Fibres (India) Pvt. Ltd., [(1996) 5 SCC 550], Prestige Lights Ltd. v. State Bank of India [(2007) 8 SCC 449], K.D.Sharma v. Steel Authority of India Ltd. and Ors. [(2008) 12 SCC 481] , O.P.(FC) No.85/2019 9 G.Jayashree and Ors. v. Bhagwandas S.Patel and Ors. [(2009) 3 SCC 141] holding that fraud and collusion will not create legal interests on the parties, have no relevance so far as the facts of this case are concerned, especially because the petitioner has not been able to substantiate that she acquired any absolute right in the property in terms of Ext.A1 Will other than a limited interest not capable of surviving her.
Supreme Court of India Cites 17 - Cited by 391 - S S Ahmad - Full Document

M/S Prestige Lights Ltd vs State Bank Of India on 20 August, 2007

11. It is also one of the contentions of the petitioner that OP 2694/2018 itself is the result of a collusion between the Original Petitioner and the respondents. This contention, as rightly held by the court below, is irrelevant so long as the petitioner has failed to establish that she has absolute right and transferable interest in the property. A few decisions brought to our notice by the learned counsel for the petitioner, in M/s. S.J.S.Business Enterprises (P) Ltd. Vs. State of Bihar And Ors. [(2004) 7 SCC 166], Indian Bank v. Satyam Fibres (India) Pvt. Ltd., [(1996) 5 SCC 550], Prestige Lights Ltd. v. State Bank of India [(2007) 8 SCC 449], K.D.Sharma v. Steel Authority of India Ltd. and Ors. [(2008) 12 SCC 481] , O.P.(FC) No.85/2019 9 G.Jayashree and Ors. v. Bhagwandas S.Patel and Ors. [(2009) 3 SCC 141] holding that fraud and collusion will not create legal interests on the parties, have no relevance so far as the facts of this case are concerned, especially because the petitioner has not been able to substantiate that she acquired any absolute right in the property in terms of Ext.A1 Will other than a limited interest not capable of surviving her.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 404 - C K Thakker - Full Document

K.D.Sharma vs Steel Authorities Of India Ltd.& Ors on 9 July, 2008

11. It is also one of the contentions of the petitioner that OP 2694/2018 itself is the result of a collusion between the Original Petitioner and the respondents. This contention, as rightly held by the court below, is irrelevant so long as the petitioner has failed to establish that she has absolute right and transferable interest in the property. A few decisions brought to our notice by the learned counsel for the petitioner, in M/s. S.J.S.Business Enterprises (P) Ltd. Vs. State of Bihar And Ors. [(2004) 7 SCC 166], Indian Bank v. Satyam Fibres (India) Pvt. Ltd., [(1996) 5 SCC 550], Prestige Lights Ltd. v. State Bank of India [(2007) 8 SCC 449], K.D.Sharma v. Steel Authority of India Ltd. and Ors. [(2008) 12 SCC 481] , O.P.(FC) No.85/2019 9 G.Jayashree and Ors. v. Bhagwandas S.Patel and Ors. [(2009) 3 SCC 141] holding that fraud and collusion will not create legal interests on the parties, have no relevance so far as the facts of this case are concerned, especially because the petitioner has not been able to substantiate that she acquired any absolute right in the property in terms of Ext.A1 Will other than a limited interest not capable of surviving her.
Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 513 - C K Thakker - Full Document

G.Jayashree & Ors vs Bhagwandas S.Patel & Ors on 19 December, 2008

11. It is also one of the contentions of the petitioner that OP 2694/2018 itself is the result of a collusion between the Original Petitioner and the respondents. This contention, as rightly held by the court below, is irrelevant so long as the petitioner has failed to establish that she has absolute right and transferable interest in the property. A few decisions brought to our notice by the learned counsel for the petitioner, in M/s. S.J.S.Business Enterprises (P) Ltd. Vs. State of Bihar And Ors. [(2004) 7 SCC 166], Indian Bank v. Satyam Fibres (India) Pvt. Ltd., [(1996) 5 SCC 550], Prestige Lights Ltd. v. State Bank of India [(2007) 8 SCC 449], K.D.Sharma v. Steel Authority of India Ltd. and Ors. [(2008) 12 SCC 481] , O.P.(FC) No.85/2019 9 G.Jayashree and Ors. v. Bhagwandas S.Patel and Ors. [(2009) 3 SCC 141] holding that fraud and collusion will not create legal interests on the parties, have no relevance so far as the facts of this case are concerned, especially because the petitioner has not been able to substantiate that she acquired any absolute right in the property in terms of Ext.A1 Will other than a limited interest not capable of surviving her.
Supreme Court of India Cites 9 - Cited by 159 - S B Sinha - Full Document
1