Search Results for "interest pendente lite"

322 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 322 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Sets Aside Order Dismissing Compromise Petition in Partition Suit — Emphasizes Liberal Approach to Compromise Under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC. Trial Court Failed to Examine Genuineness of Compromise and Consent of Parties, Leading to Remand for Fresh Consideration.

The petitioner, Shri K M Manjunath, filed a writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 05.01.2016 passed...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Bombay at Goa Dismisses Appeal Against Arbitral Award in Construction Contract Dispute. Court holds that arbitrators are not bound to give reasons for each item of claim and that the award is not liable to be set aside for non-speaking nature under the Arbitration Act, 1940.

The appellant, Board of Trustees of Port of Mormugao, a body corporate under the Major Port Trusts Act, 1963, entered into a contract dated 12/10/1985...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Hears Appeals Filed by Legal Heirs of Defendant Against Decree in Partition Suit. Appeals Arise from Common Judgment Partly Decreeing Suit for Partition and Separate Possession of Ancestral Properties.

The appeals arose from a common judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.2640/1988 and O.S.No.5075/2000 by the I Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge, B...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal Against Probate Granted to Executors of Will — Will Proved in Manner Required by Section 63 of Indian Succession Act, 1925 and Section 68 of Evidence Act, 1872

The appeal arose from a probate proceeding concerning the Will of Purvez Burjor Dalal, a Parsi who died on 7th December 2011. The appellant, Manek Dar...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Execution Proceedings — Possessory Title Not Required for Restoration Under Order XXI Rules 98-100 CPC. High Court erred in ordering restoration of possession without determining whether respondent had any right to possession under Order XXI Rules 98-100 CPC.

The Supreme Court considered an appeal against the judgment of the Calcutta High Court which had allowed the appeal of the respondent (Lt. Col. Nahar ...