[15/07, 09:41] Vinothpandian: 2016(5) CTC 117 : sarasu vs Ravi : sec 5 limitation act : Application for condoning delay filed under sec 5 to be dealt with liberally and leniently in order to do substantial justice to parties ,length of delay not a material factor for deciding application under section 5 of limitation act[15/07, 09:41] Vinothpandian: 2018(1) BC 158 ( DB ) : Kumar Rohit vs Allahabad bank : Auction sale which proceeded on misrepresentation to intending bidders is definitely illegal and liable to be quashed[15/07, 09:41] Vinothpandian: 2020 (2) CTC 142 : Karuppuraj M vs M ganesan : review not maintainable merely an alternative decision to be taken by court , raising new plea not permissible in review ( order 47 rule 1 CPC 1908 )[15/07, 09:41] Vinothpandian: 2016 (10) SCC 676 : state bank of travancore vs R sobhana : Courts making scathing remarks on banks unwarranted and can be expunged[15/07, 09:41] Vinothpandian: 2017 (1) CCC 532 : Buddha jagadeeswara rao vs sri ravi enterprises : courts obliged to intimate registrar office after cancellation of an instrument of transfer of any immovable property , section.49 of the indian registration act permits admission of unregistered documents in evidence for collateral purposes , but it should be duly stamped[15/07, 09:41] Vinothpandian: 2012 (1) crimes 227 : Absar Alam @ Afsar Alam vs state of bihar : mental condition or state of mind of accused is one of factors that can be taken into account in considering question of sentence