And Narayan V The - Judgment Search Results

Shyam Lal Vs. Smt. Shanti Devi

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: AIR2008All174

condoned.11. It is well settled by the pronouncement of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lakshmi Narayan v. S.S. Pandian : AIR2000SC2757 as well as Padma Ben Banushali and Anr. v. Yogendra Rathore and Ors. : … 11. It is well settled by the pronouncement of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lakshmi Narayan v. Pandian AIR2000SC2757 as well as Padma Ben Banushali and Anr.

Binda Kuer Vs. Lalita Prasad Choudhary

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (1936)38BOMLR1256

to enter into any transaction with regard to the plaintiffs' prospects of succeeding to Bajrangi Lal's estate (Amrit Narayan v. Gaya (1917) L.R. 45 I. A. 35 : 20 Bom. L.R. 546. It may well be, especially as … to enter into any transaction with regard to the plaintiffs' prospects of succeeding to the estate : ;Amrit Narayan v. Gaya (1917) L.R. 45 I.A. 35 : s.c. 20 Bom. L.R. 546, followed;;(2) that though in the absence

Eknath Dayaram Wani Vs. Kishordas Thakurdas Sheth

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (1963)65BOMLR595; 1963MhLJ782

section.3. The learned advocate for the appellant has invited my attention to a decision of this Court in Narayan v. Hari : AIR1930Bom505 in support of his submission that the view that I am inclined to take in … 26, Chhuttam Lal v. Dwarka Prasad [1938] All. 192 and Laxmandas v. Chunnilal [1931] A.I.R. Nag. 17, referred to.;Narayan v. Hari (1930) 32 Bom. L.R. 1186 and Sipahimalani v. Fidahussein (1955) 58 Bom. L.R. 344, distinguished.;In construction of

Ganga Ram and anr. Vs. Kanti Lal

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: 1995(2)WLC112; 1994(2)WLN108

arisen in the year 1992 and to avid multiplicity of suit and technicalities. He placed reliance on Raj Narayan v. Indira Gandhi : [1972]3SCR841 . He also contended that the findings of the trial court on the issues … Padam Kumar Kothari 1969 RLW 546, is no more a good law as has been held in Lallu Narayan v. Ratan Chand Lunia 1989 (1) RLR 475. He also contended that the learned appellate court has seriously erred

Bharat Chandra Das Vs. Prangopal Ch. Das

Court: Guwahati

to refer a decision of their Lordships of the Supreme Court reported in AIR 1962 SC 338 (Badri Narayan v. Kamdeo Prasadl. In the said case A. B and C were candidates at an election. A was declared … to refer a decision of their Lordships of the Supreme Court reported in AIR 1962 SC 338 (Badri Narayan v. Where the trial Court has decided two suits having common issues on the merits and there are two

Collector Vs. Evengelical Alliance Mission and anr.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: AIR1984All25

rely upon, and though not conclusive, is decisive of the matter, unless successfully withdrawn or proved erroneous (see Narayan v. Gopal, (AIR I960 SC 100)). The aforesaid admission was at no stage of the proceeding withdrawn by the … rely upon, and though not conclusive, is decisive of the matter, unless successfully withdrawn or proved erroneous (see Narayan v. These are well known. 11. In view of the foregoing discussion the appeal as well as the cross-objection

Uttam Chand Vs. Smt. Radhabai

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1991MP296

Clause, Section 2. In the Indian contrxt, law has been examined in the Division Bench case of Deb Narayan v. Ram Sadhan, AIR 1914 Cat 129 with reference to Section 2(d) of Contract Act and having found linkage … Clause, Section 2. In the Indian contrxt, law has been examined in the Division Bench case of Deb Narayan v. Full consideration is not paid when agreement only is made for the sale-deed to be executed in future

Ratilal Devabhai Navik Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.

Court: Gujarat

Reported in: 1985CriLJ96; (1983)2GLR657; (1985)1GLR23

the Bombay High Court in In re Prahalad Krishna Kurne'scase 1951-52 Cri LJ 306 (FB) (supra) (See :Ram Narayan v. However, a second such petition would lie when a fresh and a new ground of attack against the … Bombay High Court in In re Prahalad Krishna Kurne'scase 1951-52 Cri LJ 306 (FB) (supra) (See : Ram Narayan v. Dist. Magistrate, Madna 1975 Cri LJ 1312). This decision of the Full Bench has been followed by the

Bhikha Bhai Vs. Lalshanker and ors.

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: AIR1978Raj193; 1978(11)WLN45

printing of the pamphlet is not detrimental and cannot lead to the dismissal of the petition, (See Prabhu Narayan v. A. K. Srivastava, AIR 1975 SC 968).'This case is, therefore, of no assistance to the petitioner.29. It was … printing of the pamphlet is not detrimental and cannot lead to the dismissal of the petition, (See Prabhu Narayan v. It is well settled that the power of the agent is circumscribed within the framework of the authority

Eric George Day Vs. Constance Muriel Day

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (1974)76BOMLR127

lay down rules of evidence cannot furnish a cause of action. As laid down in the case of Narayan v. Shriniwas (1905) 8 Bom. L.R. 226, Section 108, according to its terms, does not require that the Court … Section 108 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, do not apply to proceedings under the Indian Divorce Act, 1869.;Narayan v. Shrinivas (1905) 8 Bom. L.R. 226 and Greenwood v. Greenwood [1946] A.I.R. Mad. 65 referred to. - -