Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.19 seconds)
M/S Gtz (India Private Limited) vs Power Electronic Engineers & Ors on 23 September, 2009 cites

Shri Vishwa Nath Sharma vs Shyam Shanker Goela & Anr on 26 February, 2007

The aforesaid proposition of law has been again reiterated by the Apex Court in the case of Vishwa nath Sharma vs. Shyam Sankar Goela reported in (2007) 10 SCC 595. The position, however, will be different if the Government before the disposal of the suit rejects the prayer of permission for transfer in favour of the plaintiff and such decision attains finality for not challenging the same before the appropriate authority prescribed in the Act of 1993 or due to affirmation of the same by the highest Court of the Nation.
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 39 - A Pasayat - Full Document

Purna Chandra Chakrabarty And Ors. vs Kalipada Roy And Anr. on 18 February, 1942

It is now settled law that failure to stamp a document properly does not affect the validity of the transaction embodied therein but merely renders the document inadmissible in evidence. (See Purna Chandra Chakraborty vs. Kalipada Roy reported in 46 CWN 477). However, in view of the provision contained in Section 35 of the Stamp Act, the Court before which such document is produced has the right to regularize such defect on realization of the appropriate stamp duty and the penalty prescribed in the Act. Therefore, the learned Trial Judge erred in law in holding that simply because the agreement was executed on the insufficiently stamped paper, the Court should reject the prayer of injunction. The learned Trial Judge at that stage, could demand from the plaintiff sufficient amount of security to safeguard the interest of the State Revenue but there was no justification of rejecting the prayer of injunction when existence of such agreement and acceptance of earnest money of Rs.5 lakh has been admitted and it has appeared from the materials on record that the defendants Nos.1 and 2 have not returned back the amount of earnest money while cancelling the agreement.
Calcutta High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 9 - Full Document
1