Search Results for "Cross-objections"

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 Dismisses Appeal in Compulsory Retirement Case Based on Declining ...
Supreme Court Disposes Appeal by Consent Appointing Arbitrator in MSME Dispute, ...

Search Results for "Cross-objections"

62 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 62 result(s)

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Appeal in Partition Suit, Upholds Trial Court's Decree for Partition and Separate Possession. The court held that the suit for partition was not barred by limitation as the plaintiff's possession was not adverse and the defendants failed to prove ouster.

13 Feb 2025

The case pertains to a Regular First Appeal filed by the defendants against the judgment and decree dated 30.09.2010 passed by the Senior Civil Judge,...

High Court

Bombay High Court Upholds Eviction Decree Against Tenants for Default in Rent Payment, Dismisses Landlords' Cross-Appeal on Subletting. The Court held that Defendant Nos. 2 and 3 were direct tenants of the Plaintiffs and not sub-tenants, and decreed eviction solely on ground of default in payment of rent.

15 Oct 2024

The case involves cross proceedings between the landlords (Plaintiffs) and the tenants (Defendant Nos. 2 and 3) concerning a suit premises in Pune. Th...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Specific Performance Case — Doctrine of Lis Pendens Applied to Protect Plaintiff's Rights Despite Concurrent Findings of Lower Courts. The Court held that an alienation made during the pendency of a suit is void against the decree-holder under Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, and that the First Appellate Court could not record a finding on fraud and collusion without cross-objections by the defendants under Order 41 Rule 22 CPC.

14 Oct 2024

The dispute arose from an agreement to sell dated 17.08.1990 executed by defendant no. 1 (Janraj Singh) in favour of the plaintiff (Daljit Singh) for ...

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Kalaburagi Bench adjudicates multiple appeals and cross-objections under Section 54(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, concerning compensation for lands acquired for a minor irrigation tank in Kakhandaki Village. The dispute involves the correct determination of market value following the Reference Court's enhancement from the initial awards of the Land Acquisition Officer.

24 Apr 2020

These appeals under Section 54(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and cross-objections under Order 41 Rule 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908,...

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Adjudicates Multiple Appeals and Cross-Objections Challenging Compensation Awards in Land Acquisition Matters. The Court Determined Market Value of Lands Acquired for a Minor Irrigation Tank in Kakhandaki Village, Bijapur District.

24 Apr 2020

In the High Court of Karnataka, Kalaburagi Bench, a conglomeration of appeals and cross-objections under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 challenged the...

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Kalaburagi Bench Decides Land Acquisition Compensation Appeals Pertaining to Kakhandaki Village Lands Acquired for Minor Irrigation Tank. The appeals challenged the Reference Court's determination of market value under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, with both State and land losers seeking modification of the award.

24 Apr 2020

The High Court of Karnataka Kalaburagi Bench heard a conglomeration of appeals and cross-objections arising from land acquisition proceedings concerni...

High Court

Bombay High Court Holds Appellate Court Cannot Routinely Enhance Compensation Without Claimant's Appeal or Cross-Objections in Motor Accident Claims. Enhancement Permissible Only in Manifestly Unjust Awards Under Section 168 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

29 Jun 2017

The case arises from a First Appeal under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, filed by United India Insurance Co Ltd against an award of the Motor Accident ...

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Insurer's Appeal and Allows Claimants' Cross-Objections in Motor Accident Claim — Negligence of Driver Proved, Compensation Enhanced. The court upheld the Tribunal's finding of negligence against the driver of the insured vehicle and enhanced compensation from Rs. 2,90,000/- to Rs. 4,50,000/- with interest at 8% p.a. under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

17 Oct 2016

The case arises from a motor accident claim petition filed by the parents of a deceased 17-year-old boy, who died in a road accident involving a vehic...

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Insurer's Appeal and Allows Claimants' Cross-Objections in Motor Accident Claim — Negligence of Driver Upheld, Compensation Enhanced from Rs. 2,90,000 to Rs. 4,50,000. The court held that the driver's failure to examine himself and the unchallenged evidence of claimants proved negligence, and the compensation was enhanced considering the deceased's income and multiplier under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

17 Oct 2016

The case arises from a motor accident claim petition filed by the parents of a deceased person who died in a road accident. The claimants, Neelaiah an...

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses KSRTC Appeal and Allows Cross-Objections in Motor Accident Claim — Compensation Enhanced for Injured Driver. Claimant, a retired driver, suffered 100% disability due to accident; court applied multiplier method and granted future prospects.

24 Sep 2013

The case involves an appeal by the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) and cross-objections by the claimant, Hasanbasha, against the ju...

4 5 6 7

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