Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.23 seconds)Hari Steel And General Industries Ltd vs Daljit Singh on 24 April, 2019
The case of Hari
Steel (supra) has also been relied upon to contend that the
relief under Order XII Rule 6 is discretionary and the Court
should not deny the valuable right of the Defendant to
contest the suit, meaning thereby, the discretion should be
used only when there is a clear, categorical and unconditional
admission and such right should not be exercised to deny
valuable right of a Defendant to contest the claim based on
defense taken.
Himani Alloys Ltd vs Tata Steel Ltd on 5 July, 2011
Reliance has also been placed on the
judgment of Himani Alloys Limited (supra) and it has been
urged by Appellant that in case the admission is not of the
amount as alleged and not categoric and clear, the decree
22
under Order XII Rule 6 cannot be directed.
R. Kanthimathi And Anr. vs Beatrice Xavier (Mrs) on 8 February, 2000
In view
of the said distinction drawn it was urged that judgment of R.
Kanthimathi (supra) is of no help to the Appellant.
S.M. Asif vs Virendra Kumar Bajaj on 12 August, 2015
In our view, the
facts of the case in hand and the judgment in S.M. Asif
(supra) are altogether similar, therefore, the ratio of the said
judgment rightly applies to the present case. Consequently,
the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court, as
confirmed by the High Court, only on admission of fact
without considering the defense in exercise of power under
Order XII Rule 6 of CPC is hereby setÂaside. The matter is
remitted back to the Trial Court to decide the suit as
26
expeditiously as possible affording due opportunity to the
parties to record evidence that shall be appreciated by the
Court on merit.
Section 53 in The Registration Act, 1908 [Entire Act]
Section 53 in The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882 [Entire Act]
The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882
Shrimant Shamrao Suryavanshi And ... vs Pralhad Bhairoba Suryavanshi (D) By ... on 22 January, 2002
Further, relying upon the judgment of
Shrimant Shanrao Suryavanshi (supra), it has been
contended that when a possession is with the Appellant by
virtue of a part performance of agreement to sell as
prescribed under Section 53 of the Transfer of Property Act,
1882, he has right to defend or protect his possession.
Section 58 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
1