Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.20 seconds)The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Section 115 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Ramkarandas Radhavallabh vs Bhagwandas Dwarkadas on 20 November, 1964
In the case of Ramkaran Das (supra), the Supreme Court has held, inter alia, by relying on an earlier decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Manoharlal v. Hiralal , that the inherent powers are to be exercised by the Court in very exceptional circumstances for which the Code lays down no procedure.
Nain Singh vs Koonwarjee And Ors. on 2 April, 1970
43. The Supreme Court in the case of Nain Singh (supra) has held that the court cannot make use of Section 151 C.P.C. where a party had his remedy provided elsewhere in the Code and he neglected to avail himself of the same. Power cannot be exercised as an appellate power.
Sadhuram Bansal vs Pulin Behari Sarkar & Ors on 26 April, 1984
In this context the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Sadhuram Bansal v. Pulin Behari Sarkar may be looked into.
Golam Hossein Cassim Arif vs Fatima Begum on 4 April, 1910
In the case of Golam Hossein Cassim Ariff v. Fatima Begum reported in 16 CWN 394 it has been held that a sale by receiver under direction of Court is not a sale by Court and in such a sale, the Court does not grant a sale certificate nor does it confirm the sale.
Section 151 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
The Balrampur Sugar Co. vs Chalachhitra Bharati And Ors. on 8 September, 1980
In the case of Balarampur Sugar Co. (supra) a Single Bench of this Court has held that in a case of plain and simple money transaction creditor is not entitled to ask for appointment of a Receiver until and unless some grounds have made out in the petition itself.