[18/06, 09:46] Vinothpandian: 2018(3) BC 389 ; India affordable housing solutions vs konmark infra developers : oral plea to contradict written agreement is not tenable in terms of section 91 of evidence act
[18/06, 09:46] Vinothpandian: 2019 (5) CTC 97 : sarojinidevi A rep by power agent vs R Arumugam : code of civil procedure and civil rules of practice permits appearance of non – advocate to conduct litigation
[18/06, 09:46] Vinothpandian: 2012 (2) DRTC 351 : Gulshan Rai jain & others vs DRAT Allahabad ; DRT / DRAT cannot keep appeal pending for indefinite period under garb of interim orders , non – disposal of appeal within statutory period shall frustrate very object of statute ( SARFASI act )
[18/06, 09:46] Vinothpandian: 2014 (4) CCC 240 SC : K srinivas vs K sunita : Hindu marriage act 1955 section 13 (1)(1a) : Either spouse filing false criminal cases , invariably and clearly constitute matrimonial cruelty , the other spouse would be entitled to claim a divorce
[18/06, 09:46] Vinothpandian: 1996 CRI LJ 3983 : BK subbarao vs K parasaram : No litigant has a right to unlimited drought on the court time and public money in order to get his affairs settled in the manner as he wishes , easy access to justice should not be misused as a licence to file misconceived and frivolous petitions
[18/06, 09:46] Vinothpandian: 2013 (4) CCC 355 : Vijay Agarwal and others vs Harinarayan G bajaj ; CPC 1908 order 6 rule 17 : Amendment of written statement is subject to a more liberal dispensation than amendment of plaint ,
[18/06, 09:46] Vinothpandian: 2006 (3) RCR ( criminal ) 261 SC : mayuram subramanian srinivsan vs CBI : ” incuria ” literally means carelessness , in practice per incuriam is taken to mean per ignoratium , to perpetuate an error is no heroism , to rectify it is the compulsion of the judicial conscience