LawMirror.com

Results of wrong findings

Andriod Application iphone Application

Showing : 11-20 of 35 Results

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI

Year of decision: 2011
Details

Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1)(g), 2(1)(r), 14(1)(d), 21(b) -- Revisional jurisdiction - Concurrent findings - Medical advice - Rendering wrong professional advice - OPs advised surgery for acute appendicitis whereas on consultation of another doctor it was found there was small cyst in the left ovary - Both Fora below have returned their concurrent finding..........

MADRAS HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2011
Details

Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Section 100 -- Second Appeal - Concurrent finding of fact - Interference with - Held, against concurrent findings of fact, there may not be any interference in second appeal but in exceptional circumstances, High Court is not niggard and bereft of powers to interfere with perverse finding of facts emerged out of misreading of evidence and wrong..........

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2010
Details

Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Section 16, 20 -- Jurisdiction - It is wrong for a Court to find the issue of jurisdiction against the person and at the same time also enter the findings on merits of the case...........

CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2010
Details

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 397 -- Revisional power of High Court - Exercise of - It is only in the glaring cases of injustice, resulting from some violation of fundamental principles of law by the trial court that the High Court to exercise revisional powers to order acquittal - The order of lower court ought not to be lightly set aside unless it has entailed..........

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Year of decision: 2008
Details

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 378 -- Appeal against acquittal - Appellate Court has full power to review the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded - Appellate Court on the basis of evidence before it may reach its own conclusions both on questions of fact and of law - If findings of trial Court are palpably wrong, manifestly erroneous or..........

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2008
Details

Provincial Small Causes Courts Act, 1887, Section 25 -- Revision - Revisional Court u/s 25 of the Act cannot reappraise or reassess the evidence - It is only when the findings of fact are based either on no evidence or inadmissible evidence or evidence has been ignored under a wrong assumption, then the Revisional Court would be within its jurisdiction to record its own..........

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Year of decision: 2008
Details

Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Section 100 -- Second appeal - Concurrent findings - When there are concurrent findings of Courts below High Court will not interfere - It can interfere when Courts have ignored material evidence or acted on no evidence or have drawn wrong inferences from proved facts by applying the law erroneously or Courts have wrongly cast the burden of..........

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Year of decision: 2007
Details

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 378 -- Appeal against acquittal - Appraisal of evidence - Gross error in assessing evidence - Findings recorded not only wrong but based on complete misreading of evidence - Appellate Court can re-evaluate the evidence...........

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Year of decision: 2006
Details

Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 41, Rule 23, 23A, 25 -- Wrong framing of issue - Scope of remand - Will by mother in favour of a daughter - Challenged by other daughter by filing suit for declaration - Suit dismissed - In appeal High Court held that the Trial Court wrongly framed issue regarding validity of Will in negative ` Onus of proof of Will was also wrongly placed..........

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Year of decision: 2006
Details

Education -- Examination - Mark sheet - Mistake in marks - Revaluation - Findings of the High Court that there was no provision under any rule or regulations of the appellant Board for revaluation, a sum of Rs.20,000/- awarded for wrong intimation about the total marks actually received by the respondent No.1 upheld - Board to recover Rs.15,000/- from computer firm which..........

Showing : 11-20 of 35 Results