Search Results for "RSA Section 100"

210 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 210 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Regular Second Appeal in Property Suit — Concurrent Findings of Fact Not Interfered With Under Section 100 CPC. Suit for Declaration of Title and Injunction Dismissed as Plaintiffs Failed to Prove Title and Possession Over Suit Property.

The appellants (plaintiffs) filed a Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, against the judgment and decree of t...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Second Appeal in Property Title Dispute Involving Multiple Previous Suits. Court Examines Maintainability Under Order 2 Rule 2 CPC and Relief Requirements Under Section 34 of Specific Relief Act, 1963 Regarding Declaration Without Consequential Possession.

The dispute originated from a property suit O.S.No.156/2010 filed by seven plaintiffs seeking declaration of title and permanent injunction regarding ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Second Appeal in Property Suit for Declaration and Injunction — Concurrent Findings of Fact Not Disturbed. Second Appeal Under Section 100 CPC Dismissed as No Substantial Question of Law Arises.

The appellants, legal representatives of the original plaintiffs, filed a second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, agains...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Second Appeal in Property Suit — Concurrent Findings of Fact Not Interfered With. Court holds that no substantial question of law arises under Section 100 CPC where courts below have concurrently found that the plaintiff failed to prove title and possession.

The present second appeal was filed by the original plaintiff (since deceased, represented by legal representatives) against the judgment and decree d...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Allows Appeal in Money Recovery Suit — Photostat Copy Compared with Original is Admissible as Secondary Evidence Under Section 63 of Evidence Act, 1872. Section 11 of Karnataka Money Lenders Act, 1961 Does Not Mandate Production of Licence to Maintain Suit.

The appellant, Shri M. Ratnavarma Padival, filed a Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, challenging the judgm...