Follow:
- Next story HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN C.R.P. No.676 of 2013 and M.P.No.1 of 2013 V.K.John …. Petitioner Vs 1. S.Mukanchand Bothra & HUF (died) Represented by Mukanchand Bothra the petitioner challenged the Arbitration Award under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, it is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed. 12. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition stands dismissed. Consequently, connect miscellaneous petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. 03.02.2023
- Previous story Justices D Krishnakumar and L Victoria Gowri directed the collector to inquire into the allegations and file a report before the next hearing on February 22.
Recent Posts
- நீதிபதி என் செந்தில்குமார் MRC Case golf ground
- 50 கோடி ரூபாய் சொத்தை மீட்ட நடிகர் கவுண்டமணி!
- PBBJ AMj தொடர் போராட்டத்தில் ஈடுபட்டு வந்த, சாம்சங் தொழிலாளர்கள் கைது செய்யப்பட்ட விவகாரம்
- Shamima Begum, the schoolgirl who left the UK to join Islamic State in Syria, has lost the latest round of her legal battle with the Home Office over its decision to remove her British citizenship.
- [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 )
More
Recent Posts
- நீதிபதி என் செந்தில்குமார் MRC Case golf ground
- 50 கோடி ரூபாய் சொத்தை மீட்ட நடிகர் கவுண்டமணி!
- PBBJ AMj தொடர் போராட்டத்தில் ஈடுபட்டு வந்த, சாம்சங் தொழிலாளர்கள் கைது செய்யப்பட்ட விவகாரம்
- Shamima Begum, the schoolgirl who left the UK to join Islamic State in Syria, has lost the latest round of her legal battle with the Home Office over its decision to remove her British citizenship.
- [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 )