Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.42 seconds)
Iqbal Singh vs Madan Pal Deceased Th Lrs Usha Rani And ... on 24 November, 2022 cites

Satish Batra vs Sudhir Rawal on 18 October, 2012

"Learned First Appellate Court has first relied upon the judgment passed in the case of Satish Batra (Supra). This Court has carefully read the aforesaid judgment. The aforesaid judgment is rather helps the defendants- appellants and not the plaintiff-respondent company. In the aforesaid judgment, Hon'ble the Supreme Court was examining the correctness of the Division Bench judgment of the Delhi High Court, in which out of total earnest money of ₹ 7,00,000/-, 50,000/- was ₹ permitted to be forfeited whereas 6,50,000/- was ordered to be ₹ refunded. The Supreme Court after examining the contract found that earnest money was paid on two different dates i.e. ₹ ₹ 4,00,000/- on 29.11.2005 and 3,00,000/- on 30.11.2005. The Supreme Court held after discussing various judgments of the Court that intended seller was justified in forfeiting the amount of 10% i.e. 7,00,000/-, therefore, the trial Court as well as ₹ First Appellate Court have not applied the aforesaid 8 of 10 ::: Downloaded on - 26-12-2022 15:20:22 ::: RSA-5437-2015 (O&M) & -9- RSA-6241-2015 (O&M) judgments in correct perspective.
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 239 - K Radhakrishnan - Full Document

M/S. Kailash Nath Associates vs Delhi Development Authority & Anr on 9 January, 2015

18. This Court in Regular Second Appeal No.4698 of 2017, titled as "Om Prakash and others Vs. M/s Ganga Developers Pvt. Ltd.", decided on 22.01.2020, after discussing the various judgments passed by the Supreme Court including M/s Kailash Nath Associates Vs. Delhi Development Authority (2015) 2 SCC (Civil) 502, Shree Hanuman Cotton Mills Vs. Tata Air Craft Ltd., (1969) 3 SCC 522 and Satish Batra (supra) has held as under:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 26 - Cited by 564 - R F Nariman - Full Document

Shree Hanuman Cotton Mills & Ors vs Tata Air-Craft Ltd on 28 October, 1969

The First Appellate Court has further relied upon a judgment passed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Videocon Properties Ltd. (Supra). In the aforesaid judgment, the Supreme Court was examining the order passed by a Division Bench of Bombay High Court arising from interim order passed by the learned Single Judge. In the aforesaid case, earnest money had been refunded. Suit for recovery was filed by the intended purchaser who was a builder for grant of interest. In the aforesaid circumstances, learned Single Judge ordered creation of charge under Section 55(6)(b) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 which order was modified by the Division Bench. The Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the Division Bench and restored the order of the learned Single Judge. The aforesaid judgment nowhere lays down that the earnest money as per the contract cannot be forfeited."
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 184 - C A Vaidyialingam - Full Document
1