[09/10, 10:22] Vinothpandian: 2007 (5) SCC 228 : N Devindrappa vs state of karnataka : An act can result in both civil and criminal liability , merely in this case , act of the litigant has civil liability that does not mean that it cannot have criminal liability also[09/10, 10:22] Vinothpandian: 2001 (1) CPR 51 : mehsana agro auto machines pvt ltd vs baldevbhai M patel : late delivery of vehicle by the dealer on account of late delivery by the manufacturer , interest on amount deposited till date of delivery @ 15% allowed[09/10, 10:22] Vinothpandian: 2011 CRI LJ 3506 : Rajesh gutta vs state of AP : In a matrimonial proceeding initiated by wife as to cruelty wherein place of occurence is outside India , magistrate taking cognizance in india without obtaining sanction of central government is bad in law[09/10, 10:22] Vinothpandian: 2002 (1) CPR 207 : gwalior ice factory vs MP electricity board : Excessive electricity bill settled by electricity board , remedy to claim interest on excessive deposit could not be availed from consumer forum[09/10, 10:22] Vinothpandian: 2019 (3) MLJ 468 : varun pahwa vs Renu chaudhary : Power to grant amendment of pleadings is intended to serve ends of justice and not governed by narrow technical limitations ( order 6 rule 17 CPC 1908 )

by Sekar Reporter · October 9, 2024