LawMirror.com

Results of limitation+mutation

Andriod Application iphone Application

Showing : 3511-3520 of 4912 Results

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2003
Details

Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 6, Rule 17 -- Plaint - Amendment - Challenge to adoption - Fact of adoption came to knowledge on filing of written statement - Written statement was filed on 5.9.2001 and amendment of plaint sought on 6.4.2002 - Question of limitation to challenge the adoption can only be decided at the trial as in case plaintiff is able to prove the date..........

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2003
Details

Limitation Act, 1963, Article 58 -- Suit for title - Wrong mutation entry - Starting point of limitation - Limitation to file suit is three years - Starting point of limitation is not from the day when wrong mutation entry was made but from the day when right to sue first accrues i.e. when real threat to title is apprehended...........

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2003
Details

Limitation Act, 1963, Section 19, Article 26 -- Part payment - Extension of limitation - Voucher by which the last payment was deposited not produced - Where no proof such part payment is produced suit filed after expiry of limitation period is liable to be dismissed as barred by limitation...........

PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2003
Details

Capital of Punjab (Development and Regulation) Act, 1952, Section 10(3) -- Chief Administrator expected to exercise much wider power for determining legality or propriety of any order passed by Estate Officer - No limitation on power of Chief Administrator to entertain application and exercise revisable power...........

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2003
Details

Limitation Act, 1963, Section 30 -- Suit for redemption - Limitation - Period under Limitation Act, 1963 when shorter than period prescribed under Limitation Act, 1908 then suit instituted within a period of seven years next after the commencement of the 1963 Act is within limitation...........

KERALA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2003
Details

Limitation Act, 1963, Section 14 -- Suit filed in wrong Court owing to own negligence or default - S.14 is not attracted - Even if there is wrong legal advice and party acted by that advice, that itself is not a ground to get the benefit of S.14 Limitation Act...........

KERALA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2003
Details

Limitation Act, 1963, Section 14 -- In order to attract the provision three conditions are to be satisfied viz. (1) the petitioner has been prosecuting the other civil proceeding with due diligence, (2) the earlier proceeding and the subsequent proceeding must relate to the same matter in issue and (3) earlier proceeding must have been prosecuted in good faith in a court..........

UTTARANCHAL STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, DEHRADUN

Year of decision: 2003
Details

Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 24A -- Limitation - Possession of house delivered in 1991 - Complaint filed in 1997 that construction below standard - No expert evidence led - Merely by correspondence the limitation is not at all extended - Complaint held to be barred by time and should have been dismissed...........

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2003
Details

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 -- Order 6 ,R. 17 - Amendment of plaint - Limitation - Correction of date of agreement sought which is formal in nature - Nature of suit also not changed - Plaintiff's evidence yet not completed - Held that amendment will relate back to the date of the original suit and suit will not be time barred by permitting the amendment - The amendment..........

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2003
Details

Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Section 16(1)(a)(i), Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 468 -- Tea - Sample found to be adulterated - Complaint lodged after 3 years and two months - Limitation u/s 468 Cr.P.C. is 3 years - Complaint quashed...........

Showing : 3511-3520 of 4912 Results