17. Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act reads as under: “17. Right to appeal.–(1) Any person (including borrower) aggrieved by any of the measures referred to in sub-section (4) of Section 13 […]
Statutory appeals as provided by Special Acts : (i) Section 35 (L) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (1 of 1944); (ii) Section 116A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (43 of […]
FACTS : Respondent No.1 had filed a suit before the Munsiff Court in the year 1975 being O.S. No.1004 of 1975 against the predecessor of the Appellants in respect of the suit […]
Under The Supreme Court Rules 2009 Hearing in open court 27.(1) Every contested appeal shall be heard in open court except where it is necessary in the interests of justice or in the […]
The word ‘appeal’ is not defined even in the CPC and in ordinary parlance would mean “call to higher tribunal for deliverance from decisions of the lower”. In Chappan v. Moidin Kutti […]
The question with reference to Section 115 of the Civil P. C., 1908 was again considered by a Full Bench of the Madras High Court in P. P. P. Chidambara Nadar v. […]
The penal laws in India are primarily based upon certain fundamental procedural values, which are right to fair trial and presumption of innocence. A person is presumed to be innocent till proven […]
Article 132 deals with the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in cases involving a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution, and the words used in that […]
September 07, 2018: LAND ACQUISITION-Any act done by the parties in relation to the subject matter of the appeals after the impugned order, cannot be pressed into service to support the impugned order. In other words, the legality and correctness of the impugned order has to be examined in the light of reasoning contained in the impugned order and not on the basis of the acts done by the parties subsequent to the passing of impugned order. It is for this reason the acts done by the party subsequent to passing of the impugned order are of no relevance for deciding the present appeals. APPEAL ALLOWED.
The petitioner obtained rule nisi in 1976 and waited for 7 years for its being heard. Suddenly one day the High Court consistent with its calendar fixed the matter for bearing on April 21, 1983.