Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 23 (0.49 seconds)
M.Pandia Nadar vs Sivakamasundari on 30 April, 2015 cites

Akki Guru Basappa And Anr. vs Vuluvathi Setra Santhappa And Ors. on 12 December, 1924

In the light of the above discussions and in view of the principles laid down Akki Guru Basappa and another vs. Vuluvathi Setra Santhappa and others (MANU/TN/0285/1924) and Hamda Ammal vs. Avadiappa Pathar and three others ((1991) , this Court is of view that since the sale agreement as well as the sale deeds have been executed before the filing of the suit, but it was registered after the filing of the suit, it does not hit by the principle of lis pendens.
Madras High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 9 - Full Document

Hamda Ammal vs Avadiappa Pathar And 3 Others on 7 November, 1990

48. The learned Senior Counsel has also relied upon the decision in Hamda Ammal vs. Avadiappa Pathar and three others ((1991) 1 SCC 715), wherein, the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed that 'in the above case this Court has gone even to the extent that not only a sale deed but even an agreement of sale will prevail over attachment before judgment made subsequent to such agreement of sale. We do not want to express any opinion with regard to the case of an agreement for sale, but we are of the confirmed opinion that a sale deed having been executed prior to attachment before judgment, though registered subsequently will prevail over attachment before judgment.'
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 104 - T K Thommen - Full Document

Kaliyaperumal Nadar vs Santhanam Chettiar And Anr. on 18 April, 1995

In this regard, the learned Senior Counsel for the first respondent has relied on the decisions in Thiruvengadam Pillai vs. Navaneethammal and another (2008) 4 SCC 530) and Kaliyaperumal Nadar vs. Santhanam Chettiar and another (1995 (II) CTC 313), and the principles laid down are only applicable to the persons, who have approached the Court with clean hands and not otherwise. Since this Court is of view that the first respondent has not approached the Court with clean hands, she is not entitled for any kind of relief.
Madras High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 3 - Full Document

Thiruvengada Pillai vs Navaneethammal & Anr on 19 February, 2008

In this regard, the learned Senior Counsel for the first respondent has relied on the decisions in Thiruvengadam Pillai vs. Navaneethammal and another (2008) 4 SCC 530) and Kaliyaperumal Nadar vs. Santhanam Chettiar and another (1995 (II) CTC 313), and the principles laid down are only applicable to the persons, who have approached the Court with clean hands and not otherwise. Since this Court is of view that the first respondent has not approached the Court with clean hands, she is not entitled for any kind of relief.
Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 260 - R V Raveendran - Full Document
1   2 3 Next