Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
India decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Supreme Court held a compromise decree void under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC where defendant no. 5 had not signed and no valid authority or exigent circumstance was shown.
Supreme Court held that the suit was not barred by constructive res judicata and restored the concurrent findings in the appellant’s favour.
Supreme Court held that heirs under Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act take as tenants-in-common with separate shares, so karta-based legal necessity did not apply.
The Supreme Court upheld a Will in favour of the testator’s sister, holding that the attesting witness proved execution and exclusion of natural heirs alone is not suspicious.
Supreme Court held that the partition decree was executable on its terms and set aside the High Court’s order that had halted execution pending a fresh final decree.
Dismissal of an appeal for non-prosecution does not merge the trial court decree into an appellate order; permitting deposit in execution proceedings to test bona fides does not preclude a Section 28 application; courts exercising Section 28 must consider all relevant circumstances and balance equities, and may rescind the contract or grant extension on terms including compensation; because the lower courts failed to apply these principles, their orders were set aside and the matter remitted for fresh consideration.
Source excerpt
The High Court exceeded its revisional jurisdiction under Section 46 by reappreciating evidence and substituting its findings; the landlord discharged the initial burden by proving exclusive possession of third parties and absence of the original tenant, giving rise to a presumption of unlawful sub-letting which the respondents failed to rebut; the alleged partnership reconstitution was a cloak to conceal unlawful transfer of possession and thus amounted to unlawful sub-letting/assignment under ss.27(2)(b)(ii) and 27(2)(p) of the Karnataka Rent Act, 1999, warranting eviction.
Source excerpt
The Srimati Radhika Sinha Institute and Sachchidanand Sinha Library (Requisition & Management) Act, 2015 is manifestly arbitrary and violative of Article 14 because it effects a complete vesting and dissolution of long-standing trust arrangements without demonstrated necessity, objective criteria, inquiry or proportionate means; further, its scheme permits deprivation of property without fair and non-confiscatory compensation in breach of Article 300A, and therefore the Act is unconstitutional and must be struck down with restoration of the trust to its pre-enactment legal position.
Source excerpt
The High Court rightly refused the application for additional evidence because the conditions under Order XLI Rule 27 CPC were not satisfied; the appellants' claim rested on a decree not binding on the Union and on revenue entries that could not cure defects in their case; appellants could and should have adduced complete title evidence at trial; entries in the GLR would not establish ownership against the respondents, who traced title to the Union's 1953 decision and related notifications; accordingly the High Court judgments were correctly affirmed and the appeals dismissed.
Source excerpt
The High Court correctly held that the suit properties were, in large part, joint Hindu family properties given the admitted genealogy and existence of ancestral income-yielding lands; the burden lay on the appellant to prove self-acquisition and legal necessity for alienations by the Karta, which was not established except in limited items, the unregistered Will was properly treated as suspicious and not relied upon, and therefore the High Court's decree awarding the plaintiff a 5/16th share (with exclusion of specified items) was upheld; the appeals were dismissed.
Source excerpt
Explore more
