Advanced Search Results

P.Baskaran. Vs. P.Soundararjan

Court : Chennai

Subject : Civil

Acts : Specific Relief Act 1963 - Section 28 (1); Limitation Act - Section 5

2011 are allowed and the Civil Revision Petition No.705 of 2012 is dismissed. No costs. 22.02.2012 [R.S.RAMANATHAN, J.] Specific Relief Act 1963 - Section 28 (1) -- The decree was passed on 17.9.2010. The Court below permitted the Decree holder … No.II, Poonamallee and allow the above C.R.P. Prayer in C.R.P.No.705 of 2012:Civil Revision Petition has been filed under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code to set aside the order dated 8.3.2011 passed in I.A.No.945 of 2010

S. Jahanara W/O. S. Abid Rep. by Her P.A. Holder and Husband Sri. S. A ...

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Contract

Acts : Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Sections 27(1), 28, 28(1) and 28(2); Specific Relief Act, 1877 - Sections 35; Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act

Reported in : 2008(1)KarLJ42; 2007(5)AIRKarR83:AIR2007NOC2229.

to for convenience as the Trial Court), on I.A.No. 28 in O.S.No. 76/1985 filed under Section 28(1) of Specific Relief Act, 1963.2. Before proceeding further, I set here below the relevant facts of the case:The petitioner - plaintiff had filed … Chickmagalur (henceforth referred to for convenience as the Trial Court), on I.A.No. 28 in O.S.No. 76/1985 filed under Section 28(1) of Specific Relief Act, 1963.2. Before proceeding further, I set here below the relevant facts of the

L. Venkata Krishna Reddy (Died) and ors. Vs. M. Anjappa (Died) Per L.R ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : Contract

Acts : Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Sections 28; Limitation Act - Sections 5 - Scheduled - Article 54; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Sections 115 - Order 9, Rule 13 - Order 21, Rule 32

Reported in : AIR2009AP179; 2009(15)ALT599

execution petition on that ground alone. It is also contended that in view of Section 28 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, the Court below ought to have held that the contract was deemed to have been rescinded on the … to have dismissed the execution petition on that ground alone. It is also contended that in view of Section 28 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, the Court below ought to have held that the contract was

Yella Simhachalam Vs. Siripuram Somulu

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : PropertyContract

Acts : Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Sections 28, 28(1), 28(2), 28(3) and 28(4); Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Sections 115 and 151 - Order 21, Rule 32(5); Limitation Act - Schedule - Article 137

Reported in : 2001(5)ALD469; 2001(5)ALT235

Sharma, 1987 (2) APLJ 114, and had submitted that the scope and object of Section 28 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 had been well explained by the Division Bench of this Court and the Court below had totally ignored … Consequently the present application IA No. 784 of 1985 in OS No. 133 of 1973 was filed under Section 28 of the specific Relief Act read with Section 151 CPC praying rescinding of the contract on the

Kumar Dhirendra Mullick and ors. Vs. Tivoli Park Apartments (P) Ltd.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Trusts and SocietiesProperty

Acts : Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Sections 28 and 28(1); Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Sections, 151 - Order 9 Rule 13; Specific Relief Act, 1877 - Sections 35; Constitution of India - Article 142

Reported in : 2005(1)ALD74(SC); 2005(5)ALLMR(SC)180; (SCSuppl)2005(1)CHN187; 2004(5)CTC468; 2005(1)CTLJ1(SC); [2005(2)JCR187(SC)]; (2005)2MLJ65(SC); RLW2005(1)SC141; 2004(9)SCALE184; (20

order of 2nd Assistant District Judge, Alipore, Calcutta, rescinding the agreement dated 16.8.1980 under section 28 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1963 Act'). 2. Briefly, the facts are as follows. Appellants herein are the … and setting aside the order of 2nd Assistant District Judge, Alipore, Calcutta, rescinding the agreement dated 16.8.1980 under section 28 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1963 Act'). 2. Briefly, the facts

Chanda (Dead) Through Lrs. Vs. Rattni and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : PropertyContract

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Sections 115 - Order 21, Rule 12; Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Sections 28 and 28(1); Specific Relief Act, 1877 - Sections 35 and 35(3)

Reported in : AIR2007SC1514; 2007(3)ALLMR(SC)341; 2007(2)AWC1903(SC); 2007(3)CTC773; [2008(1)JCR87(SC)]; JT2007(5)SC28; (2007)3MLJ799(SC); 2007(5)SCALE53

purchaser of the suit land. On 8.9.1998, the judgment debtors-respondents moved an application under Section 28 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (for short the 'Act') with a prayer that the agreement to sell dated 25.3.1989 be rescinded since the … of a learned Single Judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissing the revision petition filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short the 'Code').2. Background facts as projected by the

Maruti Vishnu Kshirsagar Vs. Bapu Keshav Jadhav

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Contract

Acts : Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Sections 28; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Sections 148; ;Specific Relief Act, 1877 - Sections 35

Reported in : AIR1970Bom398; (1970)72BOMLR615; 1970MhLJ907

liabilities under the contract. This scheme of Section 35 has been better clarified in Section 28 of the Specific. Relief Act, 1963. The relevant parts of Section 28 provide:-- '28(1) Where in any suit a decree for specific performance, of … extend the time fixed for payment of Rs. 700. In that connection, he observed that the provisions of Section 148 of the Code of Civil Procedure were not applicable to the decree that was made in favour

M. Sakuntala Devi Vs. V. Sakuntala and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : PropertyContract

Acts : Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Sections 28

Reported in : AIR1978AP337

retained the jurisdiction to grant further time, if necessary. He invited out attention to Section 28 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. He relied upon the decisions in Abdul Shaker Saheb v. Abdul Rahiman Saheb ILR 46 Mad 148: (AIR … out. The Court always retained the jurisdiction to grant further time, if necessary. He invited out attention to Section 28 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. He relied upon the decisions in Abdul Shaker Saheb v. Abdul

Bhupinder Kumar Vs. Angrej Singh

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Property

Acts : Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Sections 28 and 28(1); Limitation Act; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Order 21, Rule 12

Reported in : 2010(2)MhLJ1(SC); (2009)8MLJ417(SC); 2009(12)SCALE4; (2009)8SCC766; 2009(9)LC4113(SC); [2009] 13 SCR 978

the balance sale price in Court. The judgment debtor-respondent also moved an application under Section 28 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 with a prayer that the agreement to sell dated 20.11.1990 be rescinded since the plaintiff had failed to … time, the Executing Court rightly declined to extend the time and rescinded the contract - Appeal dismissed - Sections 28 & 10:[P. Sathasivam & Deepak Verma, JJ] Rescission of contract for sale/lease of immovable property after decree of

Raju Naidu Vs. M. Kolandaisamy and Another

Court : Chennai

Subject : Contract

Acts : Specific Relief Act, 1963 -- Sections 28; Indian Contract Act, 1872 -- Sections 46

Reported in : 1998(2)CTC585

of the Punjab and Haryana in Omkar Nath v. Basheer, , has held as follows:-'Section 28 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 inter alia provides that wherein any suit a decree for specific performance of the contract for sale of … the petitioner has filed the above Application in E.A.No. 161 of 1993 in E.P.No. 48 of 1992 under Section 28 of the Specific Relief Act, to have the contract rescinded on account of the default on the