Legal Representative - Judgment Search Results

Legal Representatives of Gusai Karan Giri Vs. Legal Representatives of ...

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: AIR1999Raj65

was posted for decision on 31-10-1996. On 31-10-1996 the suit was finally adjudicated and decreed by the learned trial Court.3. An application under Order 9, Rule 13, C.P.C. was referred by the non-petitioners before the trial Court.

Legal Representatives of Manohar (Smt. Shamlata Wd/O Manohar Raut, Vij ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: AIR2008Bom155; 2008(2)ALLMR743; 2008(3)BomCR166

Matched in: Parties Legal Representatives of Manohar (Smt. Shamlata Wd/O Manohar Raut, Vijayant S/O Manohar Raut and Sonali D/O Manohar Raut) Vs. Vishweshwar Tukaram Giripunje (Legal Representatives Smt. Sushilabai Wd/O Surendrasingh Naik and ors.)

Lachhman Singh (Deceased) Through Legal Representatives and ors. Vs. H ...

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: 2008(3)AWC2635(SC); 2008(3)CTC541; JT2008(7)SC129; (2008)7MLJ481(SC); 2008(8)SCALE220; (2008)5SCC444; 2008(4)LH(SC)2392

Matched in: Parties Lachhman Singh (Deceased) Through Legal Representatives and ors. Vs. Hazara Singh (Deceased) Through Legal Representatives and ors.

R. Rajagopal Reddy and ors. (Deceased by Legal Representatives) Vs. Pa ...

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: AIR1996SC238a; 1995(2)ALT1(SC); 1995(1)CTC568; [1995]213ITR340(SC); JT1995(2)SC667; 1995(1)SCALE692; (1995)2SCC630

Division Bench taking a contrary view does not lay down correct law.8. These reasons are these. Under various legal provisions holding the field prior to the coming into operation of this Act, benami transactions were a recognised

Tukaram Hari Shevale, Vs. Smt. Laxmibai Vishnu Kulkarni (Since Decease ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(5)BomCR45; 2006(5)MhLj390

and by the following observations, by the Special Deputy Collector: The effect of this order, subject to further legal proceedings, if any, would be that the tenants have become the deemed purchasers on the postponed day and

AlimoddIn Faizuddin, Deceased Through His Legal Representatives Shamsh ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2009(111)BomLR3378

P.R. Borkar, J.1. This is a second appeal preferred by legal representatives of original Plaintiff Alimoddin, being aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the learned III Additional … P.R. Borkar, J.1. This is a second appeal preferred by legal representatives of original Plaintiff Alimoddin, being aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the learned III Additional District

Antonio Sebastiao Gandalupe Da Costa, (Since Deceased) Through His Leg ...

Court: Mumbai Goa

by the plaintiff no.1 though he was one of the parties to the said Inventory Proceedings . The trial Court further held that pursuant to the said allotment the properties have been inscribed in the land registration

Pundalik Narayan Xet Pednekar, (Since Deceased) Represented by His Leg ...

Court: Mumbai Goa

Matched in: Parties Pundalik Narayan Xet Pednekar, (Since Deceased) Represented by His Legal Representatives : and Others Vs. Augusto Fernandes, (Since Deceased) Represented by His Legal Representatives: and Others

Jot Ram (Deceased and Represented by Legal Representatives) and Others ...

Court: Punjab and Haryana

AT CHANDIGARH ***** R.S.A No.1599 of 1988 (O&M) Date of Decision:08. 08.2013 Jot Ram (deceased and represented by legal representatives) and others ..... Appellants Versus Sahab Ram and others ..... Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHAVIR S. … CHANDIGARH ***** R.S.A No.1599 of 1988 (O&M) Date of Decision:08. 08.2013 Jot Ram (deceased and represented by legal representatives) and others ..... Appellants Versus Sahab Ram and others ..... Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHAVIR S. CHAUHAN

Dattatray Gopal Pasalkar (Deceased) Through Legal Representatives and ...

Court: Mumbai

was 50 x 27 ft. However, it was accepted by the Defendant No.1 that the Plaintiffs are the legal representatives and are entitled to succeed to the estate of the said Anusayabai. The fact of the property … 50 x 27 ft. However, it was accepted by the Defendant No.1 that the Plaintiffs are the legal representatives and are entitled to succeed to the estate of the said Anusayabai. The fact of the property being