Stories with the ‘ tag ‘ you searched for "Section 100 CPC"

Substantial Questions Of Law Not Required To Be Formulated In Second Appeals Arising Out Of States Of Punjab & Haryana : Supreme Court
Merely Because Some Benefit Accrued To Litigant Due To Interim Order, They Cannot Claim Such Benefits When Litigation Ends Against Them: Gujarat HC
S.91/92 Evidence Act Exclude Oral Evidence, Forbid Proving Contents Of Writing Otherwise Than By Writing Itself: Gujarat High Court
Object Of Rent Control Act Is Not To Deprive Landlords Of Their Bona Fide Properties: Rajasthan High Court
Hindu Rule Of Damdupat Does Not Apply To The State Of Andhra Pradesh For Any Money Transactions: Andhra Pradesh High Court
Jurisdiction U/S 100 CPC Is So Limited That Even Wrong Or Grossly Inexcusable Finding Of Fact Cannot Be Interfered With: Bombay High Court
Plaintiff In Civil Suit Has To Prove His Case On His Own Strength, Can't Draw Strength From Documents Of Other Side: Gauhati High Court
No Appeal Lies U/S 96 & 100 CPC Against A Mere Finding/Observation When The Decree Has Not Gone Against Appellant: Orissa High Court
High Court Cannot Dismiss Second Appeal In Limine Without Assigning Reasons : Supreme Court
Requirement To Frame Substantial Question Of Law In Second Appeal Not A Mere Formality, But Meant To Be Adhered To: Supreme Court
Second Appeal, After Its Admission With Formulation Of Substantial Question Of Law, Cannot Be Disposed Of Summarily: Supreme Court
Instead Of Independently Formulating Substantial Question Of Law Arising In Appeal, Judges Often Copy Down Grounds From Pleadings: Madras High Court