The State Of Punjab vs Nathu Ram on 1 May, 1961
The decision in Nathu Ram's case (supra) was referred to in Pandit Siri Chand v. Jagdish Prashad Kishin Chand where the decision was somewhat similar to Rameshjwar Prasad's case (supra).
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 12 (0.22 seconds)Pandit Sri Chand And Ors vs M/S. Jagdish Parshad Kishan Chand on 4 February, 1966
The decision in Nathu Ram's case (supra) was referred to in Pandit Siri Chand v. Jagdish Prashad Kishin Chand where the decision was somewhat similar to Rameshjwar Prasad's case (supra).
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Section 34 in The Specific Relief Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
Dwarka Prasad Singh & Others vs Harikant Prasad Singh & Others on 29 November, 1972
In Dwarka Prasad Singh and Ors. v. Harikant Prasad Singh and Ors. , their Lordships of the Supreme Court observed as under (paragraph 7 of the said AIR):
Baij Nath And Anr. vs Ram Bharose And Ors. on 10 April, 1953
In Baij Nath and Anr. v. Ram Bharose and Ors. , a Full Bench of this Court opined as follows (paragraph 25 of the said A.I.R.):
Rameshwar Prasad And Ors. vs Shyam Beharilal Jagannath And Ors. on 3 May, 1963
7...But this matter stood concluded by the decision of this Court in Rameshwar Prasad v. Shyam Beharilal Jagannath . In that case the appeal had been filed in the High Court not by any one or some of the plaintiffs against the whole decree hut had been filed by all the plaintiffs jointly. One of the appellants died and his legal representatives were not impleaded. It was laid down by this Court that Order 41, Rule 4 could not be invoked because the appellate Court had no power to proceed with the appeal and to reverse and vary the decree in favour of all the plaintiffs or defendants under that rule because if all the plaintiffs or defendants had appealed from the decree and any one of them had died the appeal had abated so far as he was concerned under Order 22, Rule 3.
Teju And Ors. vs Board Of Revenue And Ors. on 4 January, 1977
In Teju and Ors. v. Board of Revenue and Ors. , the Rajasthan High Court laid down as follows (paragraph 5 of the said AIR):
Anwar Khan vs The Deputy Director Of Consolidation ... on 19 September, 1972
95 followed by Rani Dhan Dei Kuer v. Fatima Zuhra AIR 1939 All 698, Baijnath v. Ram Bharose ; Rameshwar Pd. v. Shyam Behari Lal AIR I960 All 741, Anwar Khan v. Dy Director of Consolidation of this Court, and State of Punjab v. Nathu Ram ; Ram Swamp v. Munshi and Dwarka Prasad v. Hari Kanta Prasad of the Supreme Court which laid down the principle that in case the right and interest of the surviving appellants or respondents with the deceased appellant or respondent, as the case may be. Whose legal representatives have not been brought on the record, are joint and indivisible, the appeal cannot be heard at the instance of the surviving appellants or against the surviving respondents.
Netar And Ors. vs Jagta on 1 August, 1984
In Netar and Ors. v. Jagta AIR 1985 Himachal Pradesh 30, the Himachal Pradesh High Court held as under (paragraphs 5, 6 and 7 of the said AIR):