Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 35 (0.28 seconds)Section 107 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872
L.I.C. Of India vs Anuradha on 26 March, 2004
22. The judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the matter
of Bhanumati Dayaram Mhatre (supra) relied upon by the counsel for
the respondent does not take into consideration the judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Anuradha (supra). The
respondent thus cannot be extended any benefit of the above judgment to
support his case.
Article 14 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987
Section 3 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
A. K. Kraipak & Ors. Etc vs Union Of India & Ors on 29 April, 1969
15 Rules of "natural justice" are not embodied rules. The
37 of 48
::: Downloaded on - 25-12-2022 09:55:30 :::
CWP-24292-2016 -38-
phrase "natural justice" is also not capable of a precise
definition. The underlying principle of natural justice,
evolved under the common law, is to check arbitrary
exercise of power by the State or its functionaries.
Therefore, the principle implies a duty to act fairly, i.e. fair
play in action. As observed by this Court in A.K. Kraipak &
Ors. Vs. Union of India, (1969) 2 SCC 262, the aim of rules
of natural justice is to secure justice or to put it negatively to
prevent miscarriage of justice. These rules can operate only
in areas not covered by any law validly made.
Section 101 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Automotive Tyre Manufactureres Assn vs The Designated Authority & Ors on 7 January, 2011
33. It would also be essential to refer to the extract of the
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Automotive
Tyre Manufacturers Association Vs. Designated Authority and others,
reported as (2011) 2 SCC 258. The relevant extract is reproduced
hereinbelow:-