Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 21 (0.61 seconds)

Mahanth Ram Das vs Ganga Das on 7 February, 1961

9. The Supreme Court in Mahanth Ram Das versus Ganga Das AIR 1961 SC 882, had examined the question whether the courts have the inherent power to extend the time when a case is not covered by any specific provision. In the said case time for payment of deficient court fee as fixed had expired. The order fixing the time was peremptory. Referring to the powers of the Court to extend the time, when by an earlier order a specific time limit was fixed and had expired, it was observed as under:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 181 - M Hidayatullah - Full Document

Ganesh Prasad Sah Kesari & Anr vs Lakshmi Narayan Gupta on 18 April, 1985

In Ganesh Prashad Sah Kesari versus Lakshmi Narayan Gupta (1985) 3 SCC 53, the Supreme Court observed that when a time is fixed or granted by a court for doing any prescribed act or thing, the court in its discretion can enlarge the time fixed though the period originally fixed/granted had expired. Time once fixed, does not whittle down the discretion of the court to further extend the time. In the said case the question was whether a court can extend the time to enable a tenant to deposit rent.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 99 - D A Desai - Full Document

Shethia Mining & Manufacturing ... vs Khas Dharmaband Colliery Company Pvt. ... on 30 April, 1982

11. The Calcutta High Court in Sethia Mining & Manufacturing Corporation Ltd versus Khas Dharmaband Colliery Company Pvt Ltd AIR 1982 Cal. 413 examined the question whether after passing an order fixing specific time, the court becomes functus officio and has no jurisdiction to entertain a WPC NOS.8801-02/2009 Page 8 prayer for extension of time. It was observed that courts in procedural matters do pass conditional or even peremptory orders but these orders are in terrorem for purpose of compelling a litigant to comply with the procedure and avoid prolongation of a suit or proceeding. It would be incorrect to state that the court is rendered powerless to extend time initially granted.
Calcutta High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 10 - M M Dutt - Full Document

Marketing And Advertising Associates ... vs Telerad Private Ltd. on 13 January, 1969

Similar view has also been expressed by the Bombay High Court in the case of Marketing and Advertising Associates Pvt. Ltd versus Telerad Private Ltd. (1969) 39 Comp. cases 436 (Bom). While dealing with the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959, it was observed that in procedural matters time granted and fixed by the court can be extended. In the said case by a consent order, time was fixed for payment of amounts in a petition for winding up. There was a default.
Bombay High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 13 - Full Document

Hukma And Ors. vs Manga And Ors. on 5 February, 2003

12. The Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Hukma and others versus Manga and others AIR 2003 P&H 287 examined Sections 148 and 149 of the Code and has observed that extension of time to pay court fee when the extended time originally granted has expired, exists and the power to further extend time is not exhausted.The court retains the power to grant further extension. Time in such cases can also be enlarged even where the first extension of time has expired.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 7 - Full Document

Salem Advocate Bar Association,Tamil ... vs Union Of India on 2 August, 2005

In Kailash versus Nankhu AIR 2005 SC 2441 and Salem Advocate Bar Association, Tamilnadu versus Union of India AIR 2005 SC 3353 it has been held that there may be many cases where non-grant of extension would amount to failure of justice. The object of procedural rules is not to promote failure of justice. Procedural rules deserve to be read down to mean that where sufficient cause exists or events are beyond the control of a party, the Court would have inherent power to extend the time.
Supreme Court of India Cites 50 - Cited by 1674 - T Chatterjee - Full Document
1   2 3 Next