Vinothpandian: 2011 (7) SCC 69 : Amar singh vs union of india : Held litigants must observe total clarity and candour in their pleadings especially when it contains a prayer for injunction ( order 39 rule 1 & 2 CPC 1908 )

[8/10, 16:55] Vinothpandian: 2011 (7) SCC 69 : Amar singh vs union of india : Held litigants must observe total clarity and candour in their pleadings especially when it contains a prayer for injunction ( order 39 rule 1 & 2 CPC 1908 )
[8/10, 16:55] Vinothpandian: 2012 (3) All India criminal LR SC 197 : munna kumar upadhyaya vs state of AP : If the accused gave incorrect or false answers during the course of his statement under section 313 CRPC , the court can draw an adverse inference against him
[8/10, 16:55] Vinothpandian: 1975 (2) SCC 840 : New india insurance co ltd vs shanti misra : discretion given by sec 5 of limitation act should not be defined or crystallised so as to convert a discretionary matter into a rigid rule of law
[8/10, 16:55] Vinothpandian: 1994 (4) SCC 225 : morgan stanley mutual fund vs kartick das : Every man who pays money as the price of cost of goods and services is a consumer under the act . A prospective investor is not a consumer under the consumer protection act
[8/10, 16:55] Vinothpandian: 1984 (4) SCC 66 : OP kathpalia vs lakhmir singh : If refusal to condone delay results in grave miscarriage of justice , it would be a ground to condone delay
[8/10, 16:55] Vinothpandian: 2002 (3) RCR ( criminal ) 43 ( DB ) : uniplas india ltd vs state : mere breach of contract would not give rise to an offence of cheating unless fraudulent or dishonest intention was alleged right at the beginining of transaction