CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1659 OF 2005
1 Jan 1970...
Search Results for "Order XXI Rule 105"
118 result(s) found
Found 118 result(s)
High Court
High Court of Karnataka Allows Civil Revision Petition Against Rejection of Limitation Application in Land Acquisition Case. Order rejecting Section 5 Limitation Act application and dismissing petition under Order XXI Rule 105 and 106 CPC is revisable under Section 115 CPC.
14 Feb 2024The case involves a Civil Revision Petition filed by Smt. Kamal W/o Gulab Singh Rajaput against an order of the Principal Senior Civil Judge and Addit...
- 101
High Court
High Court of Judicature at Bombay Adjudicates Writ Petition Involving Police Recruitment and Maharashtra Public Service Commission. The petition, filed by multiple petitioners against State authorities and private respondents, challenges selection process; no substantive decision available in extracted text.
1 Jan 1970The provided judgment text is limited to the cause title and a detailed list of parties in Writ Petition No.13227 of 2018 before the High Court of Jud...
- 17
High Court
Bombay High Court Dissents That Designated Court Under MCOC Act Cannot Order Investigation Under Section 156(3) CrPC Without Prior Sanction. Special Court Not a Magistrate and Section 23(1) Bar Overrides Private Complaint Procedure.
22 Dec 2005The Bombay High Court heard a batch of writ petitions involving a common legal question: whether a designated court under the Maharashtra Control of O...
- 57
High Court
High Court of Judicature at Bombay Hears Arbitration Petitions Challenging Arbitral Awards in Real Estate Development Dispute — Awards Dated 22-23 April 2022 in Favour of Claimants. Court considers whether awards passed under Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in relation to allotment and development of plots in Arrow City Manhattan Project are liable to be set aside, especially given arbitrator's adoption of findings from Claim No.5 across other claims.
21 Feb 2024The Bombay High Court heard a batch of connected arbitration petitions filed by Arrow Engineering Limited challenging arbitral awards passed in favour...
- 16
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Seeking Restoration of Execution Application Due to Abatement — Execution Application Abates on Death of Judgment-Debtor if Legal Representatives Not Brought on Record Within Limitation Under Order 22 Rule 12 CPC.
7 Sep 2017The petitioners, original defendants in a civil suit, challenged the order dated 04.07.2015 rejecting their MARJI No.527/2012 seeking restoration of R...
- 233
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal of Obstructionist in Execution Proceedings — Sub-Tenancy Claim Not Proven. Order 21 Rule 97 CPC Objection Fails as Appellant Failed to Establish Sub-Tenancy and Decree Was Within Limitation.
26 Aug 2005The appellant, Surjeetsingh Jaswantsingh Hora, filed an application under Order 21 Rule 97 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 before the IV Extra Jo...
- 102
Supreme Court
Supreme Court Dismisses Petition Challenging OROP Policy Implementation for Ex-Servicemen. Periodic Revision Every Five Years Upheld as Not Arbitrary Under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.
16 Mar 2022The dispute arose from a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution challenging the implementation of the One Rank One Pension (OROP) policy for ex...
- 544
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Husband's Transfer Petition in Domestic Violence Case — Maintains Wife's Choice of Forum Under PWDV Act. The court held that the wife's choice of forum under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 cannot be overridden by the husband's convenience under Section 24 CPC.
20 Dec 2023The judgment concerns two Miscellaneous Civil Applications filed by husbands seeking transfer of proceedings initiated by their wives under the Protec...
- 57
High Court
High Court of Karnataka Allows Revision Petition in Probate Matter — Court Holds That Objector Has No Locus Standi to Challenge Probate Without Caveat or Prior Interest. Section 283 of Indian Succession Act, 1925 Requires Citation to All Persons Claiming Interest; Failure to File Caveat or Enter Caveat Precludes Right to Object.
18 Dec 2020The case involves a civil revision petition filed by the petitioners (respondents in the lower court) against an order dated 10.03.2015 passed by the ...
- 120
