CIVIL
CPC O. 23 R. 3A – Fraud – Scope of the bar under Order XXIII Rule 3A of the C.P.C ?
CPC, 1908 - Order XXIII Rule 3A – Fraud - Scope of the bar under Order XXIII Rule 3A of...
Read more
Limitation – If a suit is based on multiple causes of action, the period of limitation will begin to run from the date when the right to sue first accrues
Limitation Act, 1963, Art.58 - Limitation - If a suit is based on multiple causes of action, the period...
Read moreOwnership – Appellants have failed to prove that the suit land formed part of khasra because they did not adduce any evidence to establish that the land on which restaurant was being run formed part of those khasra numbers – Appellants not owners of suit land
Constitution of India, Art.136 - Delhi Land Reforms Act (1954) S.150(3) - Delhi Municipal Corporation Act (1957)S.507(a) - Delhi Development...
Read moreCPA – District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, should not have passed the order for proceeding ex-parte, before completing the hearing hours of the Consumer Forum, for denying the statutory rights of the petitioner to file the written statement/written objection
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 13 (2) (a) and Section 13 (2 ) (b) (ii) - Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005, ...
Read more
Punjab Rent Act, 1995 – Under the new Rent Act he must establish that his permanent residence is in India and has returned back to the country permanently
East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (III of 1949) Section 13-B - Punjab Rent Act, 1995 (13 of 2012)...
Read moreInsurance – Refusal of claim on flimsy grounds and/or technical grounds
Insurance - Settlement of claims - Insurance companies are refusing the claims on flimsy grounds and/or technical grounds - While...
Read moreCPC O. 47 R. 1 – – Application for review can be maintained on the strength of discovery of new and important matter or evidence which, after exercise of due diligence, was not within the knowledge of the party or could not be produced by it at the time the judgment or order was passed; or on account of some mistake or error apparent on the face of record; or for any other sufficient reason – A review application is not the means for a party to improve its case by belatedly producing material that was available with it all along.
read HERE PLRONLINE 416387 PLRONLINE 416387
Read moreCPC, 1908 – Easmentary rights – Own stand of the petitioner that she in no manner elucidated that how the parking of a mere trolley was causing hindrance and a cause of concern which affects her easmentary rights – Since the suit has been filed by the plaintiff, the onus lay upon her to establish through evidence her case to the hilt and cannot be allowed to create evidence through appointment of Local Commissioner.
Mr. Aman Dhir, for the petitioner. read here PLRonline 461574, PLRonline 461574
Read moreCPC O. 9 R. 2 – Appeal – Appellants did not deposit the costs imposed by way of an earlier order – Taking a serious view of these lapses, the Appellate Court dismissed the appeal as against respondent Nos.2, 3 and 6, by taking recourse to Order 9 Rule 2 CPC – Application seeking recall of the orders dismissed – Order of the Appellate Court, may prove to be fatal, given the fact that they were amongst the plaintiffs in whose favour the suit was partly decreed – In effect, the entire appeal would stand at risk, even if it is continued as against the other respondents – Further, the explanation set out by the appellants in their application demonstrated that the lapses on their part were not serious enough – Order set aside – Petition allowed.
read HERE PLRONLINE 419387 PLRONLINE 419387
Read moreCPC O. 47 R. 1- Postulates that such ‘new and important matter or evidence’, despite exercise of due diligence by the party, could not be produced at the time of passing of the order – In effect, such ‘new or important matter or evidence’ must have been in existence even at the time of disposal of the case but it could not be produced for bonafide reasons – The said expression would not take within its ambit an order which was passed after the disposal of the case with the sole intention of invalidating the basis of such disposed.
read HERE PLRONLINE 416387 PLRONLINE 416387
Read moreRegistration Act, 1908 (16 of 1908) S. 17(2)(vi), 17(1)(b) – Family Settlement – Sometimes, the court applies the rule of estoppel to honour such settlements and on other occasions, the Courts have been devising other possible ways to uphold such settlements.
Registration Act, 1908 (16 of 1908) Section 17(2)(vi), 17(1)(b) – Family Settlement – Parties have admitted that the respondents have...
Read moreSuit for Injunction – Observations made by the Court while deciding the interlocutory application is on the basis of the prima facie opinion of the Court. Such opinion is never final in nature.
Suit for Injunction – Trial Court Court as well as the First Appellate Court while deciding the injunction application, in...
Read more
CPA S. 21 – Concurrent findings of fact – NCDRC should not have interfered
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 S. 21 – Concurrent findings of fact - Plea that NCDRC could not have reappreciated the...
Read moreSet off – For forfeiting the amount of earnest money, the defendant is not required to prove damages.
Set Off – The plea of set off can be availed in a suit for recovery of money where the...
Read more
CPC O. 21 R. 32 – Executing Court is required to arrive at a finding that the JD has wilfully disobeyed the decree – If no such material is there , has ot dismiss the execution petition.
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (V of 1908) Order 21 Rule 32 – Before passing an order under O. 21 R....
Read more