Search Results for "pleading requirements"

784 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 784 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7370 OF 2026

The present Civil Appeal arises from a suit for declaration of ownership of agricultural properties based on a Will dated 20.04.2018, allegedly execut...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1767 OF 2020

...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Amendment in Suit for Specific Performance After Trial Commenced — Amendment Sought After Cross-Examination of Plaintiff's Witness Held Not Barred by Proviso to Order VI Rule 17 CPC as Trial Had Not Concluded and Amendment Was Necessary for Determining Real Controversy

The petitioner, Walchandnagar Industries Limited, the original defendant No.1, challenged an order dated 28-11-2012 passed by the learned Civil Judge,...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Revision Against Concurrent Findings of Bonafide Requirement in Eviction Suit. Landlord's need for suit premises for dairy business upheld despite minor inconsistencies in evidence.

The case involves a civil revision application filed by the original defendants (tenants) challenging the concurrent findings of the Small Causes Cour...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Application for Amendment in Commercial IP Suit Due to Delay and Lack of Due Diligence. Amendment After Commencement of Trial Not Allowed Under Order VI Rule 17 CPC as Plaintiffs Failed to Show They Could Not Have Raised the Matter Earlier.

The present Interim Application No. 752 of 2024 was filed by the original plaintiffs, Ramnish Verma and Finesse Fashions Pvt. Ltd., in a pending Comme...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal in SARFAESI Act Case — Plaint Rejection Upheld for Lack of Civil Court Jurisdiction. Dispute over mortgaged properties held to be exclusively triable by DRT under Section 34 of SARFAESI Act, 2002.

The case involves two appeals arising from a suit filed by Pooja Ravikumar Nidasoshi and Vandana (plaintiffs) against the Gadhinglaj Urban Co-operativ...