Search Results for "Rule 222"

Trending :

Bombay High Court Allows Appeals by Acquiring Body in Land Acquisition Compensat...
Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Disput...
Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Concurrent Findings in Sui...
Supreme Court Upholds Refusal to Eschew Proof Affidavit in Probate Proceedings. ...
Supreme Court Allows Agriculturists' Appeal for Enhanced Compensation; Condones ...

Search Results for "Rule 222"

658 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 658 result(s)

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Allows Revision Petition for Delivery of Possession Under Order 21 Rule 95 CPC — Decree Holder Entitled to Possession After Court Sale Confirmation. The court held that once a court auction sale is confirmed, the purchaser has a right to delivery of possession under Order 21 Rule 95 CPC, and the executing court cannot dismiss such application.

30 Apr 2014

The petitioner, the decree holder in O.S.No.222/1996, had obtained a money decree against the respondent for Rs.1,15,500/-. In execution proceedings (...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Belated Production of Power of Attorney in Civil Suit. Foundational Pleadings Not Required at Production Stage; Trial Court's Discretion Upheld with Costs.

7 Nov 2019

The petitioners, legal heirs of the original deceased defendant no.1 in Special Civil Suit No.222/2009, challenged the trial court's order dated 29.07...

High Court

Karnataka High Court Quashes Transfer Order of Undertrial Prisoner in Murder Case — Holds Magistrate Applied Blanket Transfer Without Assessing Individual Role. The Court Held That the Transfer of the Petitioner, Who Was Not Involved in Prison Misconduct, Violated Procedural Fairness and Set Aside the Impugned Order Under Sections 302, 201 IPC.

1 Oct 2024

The writ petition challenged an order passed by the XXIV Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru, directing the transfer of the petitioner, an...

High Court

KAHC010068412019_1

16 Aug 2019

...

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Upholds Validity of Rule 6 of Karnataka Human Rights Courts Rules, 2006 in Writ Petition Challenging Its Constitutional Validity. Rule 6 requiring prior sanction for prosecution of public servants under Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 is held intra vires and not inconsistent with the Act.

17 Jul 2025

The petitioners, nine police officers from Vijayapura, Karnataka, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Secti...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Forfeiture of Remission for Prisoner Who Escaped from Open Prison. Rule 22(i) of Maharashtra Prisons (Remission System) Rules, 1962 held not violative of Article 14 as it applies uniformly to all prisoners who escape or attempt to escape.

8 Apr 2014

The petitioner, Shalik Maruti Kowe, was convicted for murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code on 23 June 1997 and sentenced to life imprison...

High Court

Bombay High Court Upholds Characterizing Order Under Section 60 of Maharashtra Police Act as Administrative; Petition to be Heard by Division Bench. The Division Bench Rules That Externment Appeal Order Does Not Involve Quasi-Judicial Determination and Thus Falls Outside 'Order' Under Rule 18 of Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960.

15 Sep 2016

The case arose from a Criminal Writ Petition filed by the petitioner challenging an externment order and the subsequent appellate order confirming the...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Revision Application Dismissed — Trial Court's Order Permitting Counter Claim for Rendition of Accounts Upheld. Counter claim arising from same transaction as plaintiff's suit for recovery of money is maintainable under Order 8 Rule 6A CPC even if filed after written statement.

10 Feb 2014

The applicant, M/s Parakh Sales Corporation, filed a Civil Revision Application under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, challenging an...

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Adjudicates Writ Petitions Challenging Constitutional Validity of Sections 212(6) and 217 of Companies Act, 2013 and Cognizance Order. Petitioners sought declaration that sections unconstitutional and quashing of arrest warrants issued by the Special Court in SFIO complaint.

15 Apr 2024

...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal Against Exparte Decree in Shipping Dispute — Sets Aside Decree Due to Non-Service of Summons. Court holds that service of summons on defendant's employee at registered office is valid under Order 5 Rule 12 CPC, but failure to serve on defendant No.1 renders decree liable to be set aside.

31 Jul 2006

The case involves an appeal filed by the Shipping Corporation of India Ltd. (original defendant No.1) against an exparte decree dated 8th June 2006 pa...

1 2 3 4

Full Name * Username * Mobile Number * Email Address * State/UT * City * Password * Confirm Password * Referral Code (Optional)