Law tips Vinothpandian: 2010 (7) RCR ( criminal ) 1580 : sompal vs state NCT of delhi : Grant of parole / release on parole is a part of reformative process , object behind it is to provide opportunity to the prisoner to transform himself into a useful citizen[01/04, 10:27] Vinothpandian: 2017 (2) DRTC 380 : Aniruddhsinh pratap Gohil vs Gruh finance ltd ; Review is not rehearing of matter and it is not to be converted into appeal proceedings , new grounds cannot be urged in guise of review

Vinothpandian: 2010 (7) RCR ( criminal ) 1580 : sompal vs state NCT of delhi : Grant of parole / release on parole is a part of reformative process , object behind it is to provide opportunity to the prisoner to transform himself into a useful citizen
[01/04, 10:27] Vinothpandian: 2017 (2) DRTC 380 : Aniruddhsinh pratap Gohil vs Gruh finance ltd ; Review is not rehearing of matter and it is not to be converted into appeal proceedings , new grounds cannot be urged in guise of review

[01/04, 10:27] Vinothpandian: 2010 (7) RCR ( criminal ) 1580 : sompal vs state NCT of delhi : Grant of parole / release on parole is a part of reformative process , object behind it is to provide opportunity to the prisoner to transform himself into a useful citizen
[01/04, 10:27] Vinothpandian: 2017 (2) DRTC 380 : Aniruddhsinh pratap Gohil vs Gruh finance ltd ; Review is not rehearing of matter and it is not to be converted into appeal proceedings , new grounds cannot be urged in guise of review
[01/04, 10:27] Vinothpandian: 2017 (3) CCC 115 : SDU travels pvt ltd vs vipin sharma : In a proccedings in an appropriate forum , granting final relief in interim order not permissible
[01/04, 10:27] Vinothpandian: 2011 (14) SCC 401 : Ajit singh harnamsingh gujral vs state of maharastra : Hired killing would also ordinarily come within category of rarest of rare cases
[01/04, 10:27] Vinothpandian: 2014 (2) DRTC 426 : Madhuri devi vs dena bank : once objection is filed by the borrower against notice issued under section 13(2) of SARFASI act , bank is obliged to file reply to same under section 13 ( 3 – A) SARFASI act
[01/04, 10:27] Vinothpandian: 2017 (6) MLJ 489 : U manjunath rao vs U chandrasekar & another : A judge has to constantly remind himself that absence of reason in process of adjudication makes ultimate decision pregnable (sec 96 CPC 1908 ” reason is life of law ” )
[01/04, 10:27] Vinothpandian: 2014 (2) DRTC 140 : state bank of patiala vs shiv shanker rice mills & others : Approach to writ court regarding SARFASI matters without exhausting effective alternative remedy available must lead to dismissal of writ petition
[01/04, 10:27] Vinothpandian: 2014 (2) DRTC 274 : deepti trading co rep by its proprietor vs authorised officer ICICI bank ltd : once tribunal found that it has no jurisdiction to entertain the SARFASI application , it is not empowered to pass any order touching upon merits of case ( sec 13 (2) & 13(4) SARFASI act )