Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Deodhar Vs. Parag and Ors.

Deodhar vs Parag and Ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Supreme Court of India Decided Feb 29, 2016
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/69348

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Supreme Court of India
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Deodhar

Respondent

Parag and Ors.

Excerpt

non-reportable in the supreme court of india civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal no.1909 of2016(arising out of slp (c) no.3402 of 2016) deodhar appellant versus parag & ors. respondents with civil appeal no.1911 of2016(arising out of slp (c) no.3567 of 2016) with civil appeal no.1912 of2016(arising out of slp (c) no.3987 of 2016) judgmentkurian,j.1. leave granted.2. the appellants are before this court aggrieved by the order passed by the high court, staying the declaration of election of director of respondent no.3-bank in general category.3. it is seen that the interim orders have been passed just two days prior to voting. we find it difficult to agree with the stand taken by the high court that the result of election should not be declared. whether the writ petitions could have been entertained at all is a larger question to be considered by the high court.4. be that as it may, the impugned interim orders dated 08.01.2016 in w.p.no.67/2016, w.p. no.69/2016 and w.p. no.66/2016 passed by the high court are, therefore, set aside. the election officer is directed to declare the results of the election which have been kept pending pursuant to the impugned order passed by the high court, making it subject to the result of the final outcome of the writ petitions.5. the appeals are allowed to the above extent with no order as to costs. .................j.[kurian joseph]. ......................j.[rohinton fali nariman]. new delhi; february29 2016

Full Judgment

NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.1909 OF2016(Arising out of SLP (C) No.3402 of 2016) DEODHAR APPELLANT VERSUS PARAG & ORS. RESPONDENTS WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.1911 OF2016(Arising out of SLP (C) No.3567 of 2016) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.1912 OF2016(Arising out of SLP (C) No.3987 of 2016)

JUDGMENT

KURIAN,J.

1. Leave granted.

2. The appellants are before this Court aggrieved by the order passed by the High Court, staying the declaration of election of Director of respondent No.3-Bank in General Category.

3. It is seen that the interim orders have been passed just two days prior to voting. We find it difficult to agree with the stand taken by the High Court that the result of election should not be declared. Whether the writ petitions could have been entertained at all is a larger question to be considered by the High Court.

4. Be that as it may, the impugned interim orders dated 08.01.2016 in W.P.No.67/2016, W.P. No.69/2016 and W.P. No.66/2016 passed by the High Court are, therefore, set aside. The Election Officer is directed to declare the results of the election which have been kept pending pursuant to the impugned order passed by the High Court, making it subject to the result of the final outcome of the writ petitions.

5. The appeals are allowed to the above extent with no order as to costs. .................J.

[KURIAN JOSEPH]. ......................J.

[ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN]. NEW DELHI; FEBRUARY29 2016

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial