Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.27 seconds)Metro Marins & Anr vs Bonus Watch Co. Pvt. Ltd. & Ors on 10 September, 2004
11. The essential of appointment of receiver in such circumstances as observed by the Apex Court in , Metro Marins and Anr. v. Bonus Watch Co. (P) and Ors. has not been made out. In the present case, ad interim relief granted in terms of prayer (c) and (d) has been in existence since the date of interim order and it remained intact till this date is correct and appropriate order.
M/S. Atma Ram Properties (P) Ltd vs M/S. Federal Motors Pvt. Ltd on 10 December, 2004
As held by this Court in Atma Ram Property (P) Ltd. v. Federal Motors (P) Ltd., once a decree for eviction has been passed, in the event of execution such reasonable terms, as would in the opinion of the Appellate Court reasonably compensate the decreeholder for loss occasioned by delay in execution of the decree by the grant of stay in the event of the appeal being dismissed."
Amita Kaushish & Ors vs Sanjay Kaushish & Ors on 16 November, 1995
Shashibushan Prasad Misilra & Anr vs Babuji Rai & Ors on 27 November, 1968
The Apex Court in Shashibhushan Prasad (supra) observed as under :
Sri Ramnik Vallabhdas Madhvani And Ors vs Taraben Pravinlal Madhvani on 5 November, 2003
15. Notably, the Apex Court, in Ramnik Vallabhdas (supra) in para 20 at page 510, observed while dealing with the final hearing of the civil appeal, as under:
Anderson Wright And Co. vs Amar Nath Roy And Ors. on 19 April, 2005
The Apex Court in another judgment Anderson ors. Wright and Co. v. Amar Nath Roy and Ors., J. T. 2005(11) SC 3, referring to earlier Supreme Court's judgment Atma Ram Properties (P) Ltd. v. Federal Motors (P) Ltd. observed as under :
Madanlal Agarwal vs Smt. Kamlesh Nigam on 6 February, 1975
In Madanlal Agarwal v. Smt. Kamlesh Nigam
Even apart from that, the basic reason, we think, was that the trial Court would not lose jurisdiction to deal with collateral matters which would not be towards further trial or the suit on merits, but which would only be collateral or incidental to the suit being kept alive. We may illustrate the said point as under.
Rameshwar vs Vth Additional District Judge, Basti ... on 28 May, 1998
In Rameshwar v. Vth Addl. District Judge, Basti and Ors., AIR 1999 All. 1
In such circumstances it is the duty and responsibility of the learned Court below to examine the scope and ambit of the stay granted having regard to the interlocutory matters which would have no impact on the said decision and shall not affect the decision on merits of the case."
Dilip Kumar Biswas vs Kamalendu Chanda on 24 June, 1986
In Dilip Kumar Biswas v. Kamalendu Chanda
Having gone through the Judgment, I respectfully agree with the view taken by their Lordships and hold that notwithstanding the stay order passed by this Court the learned Munsif was competent to entertain and dispose of the application for ad interim injunction."
1