Advanced Search Results

Mahendra Pratap Singh (Deceased) and Another Vs. Smt. Padam Kumari Dev ...

Court : Allahabad

Subject : Property

Acts : Indian Contract Act, 1872 - Sections 183; Power of Attorney Act, 1882 - Sections 2; Advocates Act, 1961 - Sections 35; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Sections 77 - Order 3, Rule 1 - Order X, Rules 2 and 4 - Order 26, Rules 7, 13 and 20 - Order 32, Rules 1 to 14, 15, 16 and 21 - Order 32A, Rules 1, 2 and 3; Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 109 and 165

Reported in : AIR1993All143

for his perusal.71. Order accordingly. Contract - power of attorney and client counsel relationship - Section 183 of Contract Act, 1872, Section 2 of Powers of Attorney Act, 1882, Section 35 of Advocates Act, 1961, Order 32 A Rule 1

K. Ramachandra Rao and ors. Vs. State of A.P. Rep. by Public Prosecuto ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Sections 7, 9, 138, 139, 142 and 143 to 147; Powers of Attorney Act, 1882 - Sections 2; Contract Act, 1872 - Sections 183; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 2, 5, 39, 142, 190, 190(1) 190(2) 192, 195 to 199, 200, 313 and 313(1); Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 60; Negotiable Instruments (Amendment and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2002; General Clauses Act; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 202, 497 and 498

Reported in : 2005(2)ALT607; III(2005)BC111; 2005(2)CTC417; [2005(3)JCR390(AP)]

hearing before one of us (C.Y. Somayajulu, J.), since Powers of Attorney Act, 1882, and Section 183 of Contract Act, 1872, recognizing the principle QUI FACIT PER ALIUM FACIT PER SE were not considered while rendering the said decision,

K.S. Ramachander Rao Vs. State of A.P. and anr.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Sections 138, 141 and 148; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 190 and 200; Power of Attorney Act, 1882 - Sections 2; Contract Act, 1872 - Sections 183; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 497 and 498

Reported in : 2005(2)ALD572; 2005(1)ALD(Cri)498

hearing before one of us (C.Y. Somayajulu, J.), since Powers of Attorney Act, 1882, and Section 183 of Contract Act, 1872, recognizing the principle Qui Facit Per Alium Facit Per Se were not considered while rendering the said decision,

Kailash Nath Agarwal and ors. Vs. Pradeshiya Industrial and Investment ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : SICA

Acts : Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 - Sections 3, 3(1), 15 to 19, 22, 22(1), 22(3) and 25; Uttar Pradesh Public Money (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1972 - Sections 3(2) and 3(4); Indian Contract Act, 1872 - Sections 128; Uttar Pradesh Public Demands (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1972; Uttar Pradesh Land Revenue Act, 1901 - Sections 183; Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 - Sections 287A; Companies Act, 1956; State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 - Sections 29 and 31; Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) (Amendment) Act, 1994; Representation of People Act, 1951

Reported in : AIR2003SC1886; II(2003)BC296(SC); (2003)3CompLJ103(SC); JT2003(2)SC115; 2003(2)SCALE160; (2003)4SCC305; [2003]1SCR1159; (2003)2UPLBEC1198; MANU/SC/0114/2003

Section 22(3) of the Act but the appellants had not availed of that remedy.Section 128 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 provides that the liability of the surety is co-extensive with that of the principal debtor, unless it is … or otherwise enforce an arbitration agreement in in respect of the amount so paid, and the provisions of Section 183 of the Uttar Pradesh Land Revenue Act, 1901, or Section 287-A of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolitionand Land

Subhash Chand Aggarwal (Deceased) Thr His Lrs vs.yashveer Singh & ...

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

well settled that General Power of Attorney executed for a consideration is irrevocable under Section 202 of the Contract Act, 1872 and such a power of attorney cannot be revoked even upon the death of the executant. Section 202 … of an immovable property cannot be revoked. In Suraj Lamp and Industries Private Limited v. State of Haryana, 183 (2011) DLT1(SC), the Supreme Court held that General Power of Attorney transactions convey limited rights under Section 53A

M/S Gupta International & Ors vs.ashok Kumar Singhal & Anr.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

attorney given for consideration is irrevocable under Section 202 of CS(COMM) No.1666/2016 Page 24 of 30 the Indian Contract Act, 1872 , and in the present case, it is seen that the documentation has been executed on 3.7.2000 before … the judgment in the case of Suraj Lamps & Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Haryana and Anr. 183 (2011) DLT1(SC), and as per which judgment the Supreme Court overruled the Division Bench judgment of this Court

In Re Interplay Between Arbitration Agreements Under The Arbitration A ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Arbitration

of three statutes - the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 19961, the Indian Stamp Act 18992, and the Indian Contract Act 1872.3 The Stamp Act imposes duty on “instruments”. An instrument which is unstamped or insufficiently stamped is inadmissible in … The procedure under the Stamp Act ............................................................................................ 27 b. The difference between inadmissibility and voidness .................................................................. 32 c. Section 35 of the Stamp Act renders a document inadmissible and not void .............................. 34 iii. The purpose of … registered under the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, or under Act, 19 of 1838, or the India Registration of Ships Act, 1841, as amended by subsequent

Praveen Talwar vs.naresh Kumar Mittal & Ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

and above the price paid of Rs. 2,00,000/-, are liquidated damages falling under Section 74 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, and that under Section 74 of the Contract Act there cannot be a claim for liquidated damages in … placed upon the judgment delivered by this Court in the case of Ram Mehar v. Murari Lal (2011) 183 DLT769which is argued to be on all fours with the facts and issues in the present case. Reliance

Rashik Lal Vs. Ram NaraIn and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Subject : Property

Reported in : (1912)ILR34All273

the 28th of September, 1898; that he was entitled to do so under Section 39 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 (see 18 Madras, 126 ; Punjab Record for 1907, p. 274 ; 10 C.W.N., 923), and that the

Hardip Kaur Vs. Kailash and Another

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

other findings of the Trial Court mentioned in paras 13 and 15 above. 18. Section 202 of the Contract Act, 1872 Section 202 of the Contract Act, 1872 provides that the Power of Attorney coupled with interest is irrevocable and … such facts are perfectly clear. ...” (vii) In Suraj Lamp and Industries Private Limited v. State of Haryana, 183 (2011) DLT 1 (SC), the Supreme Court held that General Power of Attorney transactions do not convey any