Showing : 31-40 of 51 Results

DELHI HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2001
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 39, Rule 1, 2-- Suit for specific performance of agreement to sell - Balance amount payable as per agreement not paid - Defendant No.1 pleaded forfeiture of advance and cancellation of agreement - Defendant No.1 transferred plot to defendants No.2 & 3 by way of power of attorney and Will etc. and defendants No.2..........
ORISSA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2001
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 39, Rule 1, 2-- Temporary injunction - To obtain temporary injunction plaintiff has not only to show that he has a prima facie but also that (1) In the event of withholding the relief of temporary injunction he would suffer an irreparable injury; (2) In the event of his success in the suit, he will not have the..........
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Year of decision: 2000
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 39, Rule 3-- Exparte interim injunction - Failure to record reasons or failure to require applicant to perform duties enumerated in clauses (a) and (b) of Rule 3 - Order can be deemed to contain such requirements at least by implication...........
ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 1999
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 39, Rule 3-- Proviso - Compliance with requirement of Rule 3 read with proviso viz. recording of reasons and direction to the applicant to supply copies of application, affidavit, plaint and documents relied on to the other side - Mandatory - Order passed without complying with such mandatory requirements -..........
DELHI HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 1999
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 39, Rule 3-- Proviso -Requirements of O.39.R.3 Proviso clauses (a) and (b) are mandatory - Even in absence of a specific direction for complying with the said clauses plaintiff is bound to comply with these requirements...........
DELHI HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 1999
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 39, Rule 3-- Proviso - Ex parte injunction - Reasons not recorded - No specific direction to comply with the mandatory requirements of O.39.R.3 Proviso - Order is illegal - Exparte order is liable to be vacated for non compliance with the mandatory requirements...........
DELHI HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 1999
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 39, Rule 3-- Proviso - Exparte injunction - Non compliance with mandatory requirements of O.39.R.3 Proviso - Exparte order is liable to be vacated - However, application U.O.39.Rr.1 and 2 not liable to be dismissed without considering it on merits and hearing the parties...........
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 1999
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 39, Rule 2A-- Injunction granted restraining respondent No.1 from decreeing the land in suit in favour of Respondent Nos.2 & 3 - Respondent No.1 transferred the suit land by means of a gift deed in favour of the sons of Respondent Nos.2 & 3 - 'Decreeing' means suffering a decree - Injunction was restricted only..........
DELHI HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 1999
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 39, Rule 1, 2-- Temporary injunction - Suit for specific performance - Restraining defendant from selling, transferring or alienating suit land till further orders - Defendant No.3 did not enter into agreement with the plaintiff - Defendant No.3 however obtained `No objection certificate for sale of his share' -..........
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 1998
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 39, Rule 1, 2-- Performance of negative covenant in agreement - Temporary injunction sought restraining defendants from conducting business activities similar to those of plaintiff as stated in agreement between parties and for recovery of amount advanced to them as loan - Relief thus sought for pertaining to..........

Showing : 31-40 of 51 Results