Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.95 seconds)
Official Trustee Of West Bengal vs The Wardens Of The Armenian Holy Church ... on 4 July, 2018 cites

Century Flour Mills Ltd. vs S. Suppiah And Ors. on 11 March, 1975

Mr. Mitra has submitted that in the event that the Court is of the view that there has been a violation of an order of injunction, it can direct status quo ante and not eviction of the persons in lawful possession. Mr. Mitra, in this regard, has relied upon a full bench decision of the Madras High Court in Century Flour Mills Ltd. v. S. Suppiah and others reported in AIR 1975 Mad 270, a Division Bench decision of this Court in Sujit Pal v. Prabir Kumar Sun and others reported in AIR 1986 Cal 220, and a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Delhi Development Authority v. Skipper Construction Co. (P) Ltd. reported in (1996) 4 SCC 622. In all the said three decisions, it has been held that, the Courts in India are not only Courts of law but also Courts of equity. There is no embargo on the power of the Court from doing justice in exercise of its inherent power. The Court is not powerless to compel a party to comply, with power of injunction and if required restore possession. All the Court is concerned with is to prevent abuse of process of the Court and doing justice, by immediately intervening in circumstances requiring such intervention by the Court. Since the transfer has taken place in violation of order of the High Court, the said transactions are not valid and recognised. The parties are put back in the same position as they stood prior to order passed by the Ld. Single Judge, dated 15 June 2015.
Madras High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 130 - Full Document

Sujit Pal vs Prabir Kumar Sun And Ors. on 2 September, 1985

Mr. Mitra has submitted that in the event that the Court is of the view that there has been a violation of an order of injunction, it can direct status quo ante and not eviction of the persons in lawful possession. Mr. Mitra, in this regard, has relied upon a full bench decision of the Madras High Court in Century Flour Mills Ltd. v. S. Suppiah and others reported in AIR 1975 Mad 270, a Division Bench decision of this Court in Sujit Pal v. Prabir Kumar Sun and others reported in AIR 1986 Cal 220, and a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Delhi Development Authority v. Skipper Construction Co. (P) Ltd. reported in (1996) 4 SCC 622. In all the said three decisions, it has been held that, the Courts in India are not only Courts of law but also Courts of equity. There is no embargo on the power of the Court from doing justice in exercise of its inherent power. The Court is not powerless to compel a party to comply, with power of injunction and if required restore possession. All the Court is concerned with is to prevent abuse of process of the Court and doing justice, by immediately intervening in circumstances requiring such intervention by the Court. Since the transfer has taken place in violation of order of the High Court, the said transactions are not valid and recognised. The parties are put back in the same position as they stood prior to order passed by the Ld. Single Judge, dated 15 June 2015.
Calcutta High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 71 - M M Dutt - Full Document

Delhi Development Authority vs Skipper Construction Company(P) Ltd. & ... on 6 May, 1996

Mr. Mitra has submitted that in the event that the Court is of the view that there has been a violation of an order of injunction, it can direct status quo ante and not eviction of the persons in lawful possession. Mr. Mitra, in this regard, has relied upon a full bench decision of the Madras High Court in Century Flour Mills Ltd. v. S. Suppiah and others reported in AIR 1975 Mad 270, a Division Bench decision of this Court in Sujit Pal v. Prabir Kumar Sun and others reported in AIR 1986 Cal 220, and a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Delhi Development Authority v. Skipper Construction Co. (P) Ltd. reported in (1996) 4 SCC 622. In all the said three decisions, it has been held that, the Courts in India are not only Courts of law but also Courts of equity. There is no embargo on the power of the Court from doing justice in exercise of its inherent power. The Court is not powerless to compel a party to comply, with power of injunction and if required restore possession. All the Court is concerned with is to prevent abuse of process of the Court and doing justice, by immediately intervening in circumstances requiring such intervention by the Court. Since the transfer has taken place in violation of order of the High Court, the said transactions are not valid and recognised. The parties are put back in the same position as they stood prior to order passed by the Ld. Single Judge, dated 15 June 2015.
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 540 - B P Reddy - Full Document
1   2 Next