M/S. Ashutosh Roy Prafulla Kumar Roy And ... vs Md. Iqbal Khan And on 25 November, 2025
M/S. Ashutosh Roy Prafulla Kumar Roy And ... vs Md. Iqbal Khan And on 25
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 179 (0.75 seconds)The Bengal Coal Company, Limited vs Apcar Collieries, Limited And Ors. on 28 November, 1924
This is an appeal from an order recording a compromise or a partial settlement of a suit under Order XXIII, Rule
Jaspal Singh Chandhok vs Sri Gobin Chand Seal on 11 September, 2025
also not
have been there in the compromise if the parties intended to treat the
otherwise partial eviction of the respondent-tenant as complete satisfaction ... date of compromise since the eviction of the
respondent till that point of time was only partial, as instead of vacating the
entire tenanted shop
Jaspal Singh Chandhok vs Sri Gobin Chand Seal on 11 September, 2025
also not
have been there in the compromise if the parties intended to treat the
otherwise partial eviction of the respondent-tenant as complete satisfaction ... date of compromise since the eviction of the
respondent till that point of time was only partial, as instead of vacating the
entire tenanted shop
Sarda Devi Chowdhary vs Sushil Chowdhury And Ors on 1 December, 2023
1993 in partial modification of
Mittal Settlement being Annexure "G" of the present plaint. Any decree or order
including compromise decree creating
Azam Khan vs Umedali Moral And Ors. on 14 August, 1924
that the sale could not be partially set aside. The learned Subordinate Judge has given effect to the compromise between some of the parties ... benamidar for Judgment-debtor No. 2. Whether the sale is partially or entirely set aside, it is of no concern to him. We think that
Gurdeo Singh And Ors. vs Chandrika Singh And Ors. on 10 April, 1907
them to claim the benefit of the principle of subrogation, and that partial payment was not sufficient to entitle them to succeed to the rights ... inasmuch as on the 18th June 1889, they entered into a compromise with their mortgagors, by which they undertook to reduce their claim for future
Gurdeo Singh And Chandrikah Singh vs Chandrikah Singh And Rashbehary Singh on 10 April, 1907
them to claim the benefit of the principle of subrogation, and that partial payment was not sufficient to entitle them to succeed to the rights ... inasmuch as on the 18th June 1889, they entered into a compromise with their mortgagors, by which they undertook to reduce their claim for future
Sashi Kantha Acharjee And Ors. vs Promode Chandra Roy And Ors. on 24 August, 1931
Sureswar v. Mahesrani A.I.R. 1921 P.C. 107 a surrender partial as distinguished from a total relinquishment of the widow's interest ... ground that it was an arrangement made in performance of a family compromise following upon a dispute between the widow and the next reversioner
Kumud Nath Roy Chaudhry vs Rai Jatindra Nath Chaudhry on 13 January, 1911
further been contended that as five thousand rupees was paid in partial satisfaction of the judgment-debt for which the brothers are jointly liable ... paid any share of this sum. It further appears that the compromise attempted with the decree-holder fell through, and there is nothing to show