Search Results for "compromise order"

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 "compromise order"

1646 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 1646 result(s)

High Court

High Court Adjudicates Public Interest Petition Against Ministerial Orders on Land Reservation for Pune Telephones and Cooperative Housing Societies. The Court Considers Legality of Compromise Order and Subsequent Land Acquisition Proceedings in Light of Development Plan and ULC Act Provisions.

24 Apr 2006

The petitioners, residents of Pune, filed a public interest petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the order dated 6.2.1991 (a com...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Compromise Between Plaintiffs and Defendant Nos.8-11 in Property Suit — Consent Terms Accepted Despite Objections from Other Defendants. Partial Settlement Under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC Does Not Affect Rights of Non-Settling Defendants Who May Continue to Contest the Suit.

22 Feb 2024

The suit was filed by 35 plaintiffs seeking a declaration that they are purchasers of certain property. The matter was listed for settlement as the pl...

High Court

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.

8 Jul 2019

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...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Plaintiff's Challenge to Compromise Decree in Suit for Specific Performance — Compromise Not Binding as Plaintiff's Advocate Had No Authority to Enter into Compromise Without Express Consent. The court held that an advocate's implied authority does not extend to compromising a suit without the client's express consent, and the trial court erred in rejecting the plaintiff's application under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC.

20 Jun 2016

The petitioner, Ashok Babulal Agrawal, was the original plaintiff in Special Civil Suit No. 29 of 2011 filed in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Divis...

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Sets Aside Order Dismissing Compromise Petition in Civil Suit — Emphasizes Liberal Approach to Compromise Under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC. The court held that a compromise petition should be liberally construed and the trial court's failure to examine the genuineness of the compromise warranted interference under Article 227.

8 Jul 2019

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...

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Quashes Trial Court Order Rejecting Compromise Petition in Partition Suit — Failure to Comply with Order 23 Rule 3 CPC Renders Order Unsustainable. The court held that the trial court must record satisfaction as to the lawful agreement before rejecting a compromise petition under Order 23 Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

18 Jun 2026

The petitioners, who were defendants No. 2 to 4 in O.S. No. 55/2013 pending before the Civil Judge and JMFC, Kudligi, filed a writ petition under Arti...

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Allows Writ Petition Challenging Rejection of Compromise Petition in Partition Suit. Court Holds That Once Compromise Is Recorded Under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC, Suit Must Be Disposed of in Terms Thereof.

18 Jun 2026

The petitioners, who were defendants 2 to 4 in a partition suit (O.S. No. 55/2013) pending before the Civil Judge and JMFC, Kudligi, challenged the or...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Revision Against Lok Adalat Decree in Specific Performance Suit — Compromise Decree Held Final Under Section 21 of Legal Services Authorities Act. Consideration in Compromise Agreement is Implicit in Mutual Settlement, Not Subject to Challenge Under Indian Contract Act.

13 Sep 2017

The case involves a Civil Revision Application filed by the judgment debtor (applicant) challenging the order dated 6.4.2017 passed by the executing C...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal Against Compromise Decree in Lok Adalat Settlement — Minor's Interest Not Protected. Failure to Appoint Guardian Ad Litem for Minor Defendant Renders Compromise Decree Voidable Under Order 32 Rule 7 CPC.

26 Feb 2019

The Letters Patent Appeal was filed by Mangesh, a minor, through his next friend Ambika Manik Mane, challenging the decision of a learned Single Judge...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Decree-Holder to Enforce Higher Interest Compromise Made in Execution Proceedings. Compromise Amounting to Adjustment of Decree, Recorded Under Order 21 Rule 2 CPC, and Found Fair Held Enforceable.

9 Feb 1968

The dispute arose from a decree passed on compromise on March 24, 1953, directing the respondent to pay Rs.22,500 with 6% interest. After the responde...

1 2 3

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