The issue of possession is decided only on the basis of evidence. ..
The marriage of a woman in accordance with the Hindu rites with a man having legal spouse, after coming into force of HMA is a complete nullity in the eye of law and she is not entitled to the benefit of Section 125 of CrPC..
The High Court on a reasonable assessment of the situation, rightly came to the conclusion that the requisite degree of the mental-disorder which alone would justify dissolution of marriage has not be established and the decree of dissolution of marr..
Before declaring the Judgment the Court very well explained the provisions of Order 37, even with reference to Order 9. The Supreme Court held that, though appellant has shown sufficient cause for his absence on the date of passing ex parte decree, s..
Landlord does not have the right to give eviction orders at any of the branches of the government’s postal service...
The High Court dismissed the writ petitions and upheld the decision of the Administrative Tribunal regarding the maintainability of the original applications. The Code of Civil Procedure cannot be applied to the proceedings before the Administrative ..
In this judgement, CPC does not apply to HRC orders ..
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal & set aside the judgement of HC given in second appeal. ..
..
The High Court ultimately held that such an application for eviction was maintainable. Hence the appeal to this Court Allowing the appeal and remitting the case back to the Rent Controller. ..
Petition dismissed due to lack of evidence by petitioner...
Before declaring the Judgment the Court very well explained the provisions of Order 37, even with reference to Order 9. The Supreme Court held that, though appellant has shown sufficient cause for his absence on the date of passing ex parte decree, s..
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal & upheld the decision of the HC. It held that a suit against a public officer of Government until and unless the statutory period of 2 months has expired after delivering the notice under Section 80 of CPC, 1908..
The High Court allowed the appeal & set aside the decree of the Trial Court. It observed that by virtue of the office, the Executive Engineer has the right to file a plaint to protect the interests of the Government as provided under Order 27 Rule 2 ..
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the right of the board to appeal in High Court as the right to appeal was available to the respondent at the time of initiation of the dispute before the amendment which wasn’t preserved thereof. ..
In SC's opinion the plaintiff was entitled to file an application/appeal under Order 44 Rule 1 of the Code and seek permission from the Appellate Court to allow him to file an appeal as an indigent person. The dismissal of the application made under ..
The Supreme Court decreed the appeal filed by the Appellant and condoned his delay of 546 days in filing the First appeal. ..
The Honorable Supreme Court pointed out the mistake made by the Trial Court and the High Court and gave a judgment setting aside the decree passed by the High Court...
Before declaring the judgment the court very well explained the provisions under Order 33 before and after the amendment. It referred several cases as well. It finally held that, person refers to one who is capable of filing a suit and Order 33 being..
High Court gave a new judgment setting aside the order passed by the Trial Court considering the claims of the appellant. ..
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
