Practice Areas
Indirect Tax Cases
Direct Tax Cases
Intellectual Property
All Practice Areas
All Courts
Filter by Jurisdiction
All Courts
SC & All High Courts
All Tribunals
+ Income Tax Appellate Tribunal8019
+ Bombay High Court5041
+ CESTAT3306
+ Madras High Court3265
+ Karnataka High Court3069
+ Delhi High Court2456
+ District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission2150
+ Kerala High Court2071
+ Allahabad High Court2005
+ Andhra Pradesh High Court1688
+ Supreme Court Of India1393
+ Debts Recovery Tribunal1277
+ SEBI1159
+ Rajasthan High Court1041
+ Patna High Court1007
+ Calcutta High Court979
+ Gujarat High Court938
+ State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission914
+ Appellate Tribunal For Electricity898
+ Central Administrative Tribunal892
+ Madhya Pradesh High Court749
+ Jharkhand High Court722
+ National Green Tribunal719
+ Telangana High Court649
+ National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission604
+ Gauhati High Court591
+ Punjab & Haryana High Court585
+ Central Information Commission534
+ National Company Law Tribunal442
+ Central Electricity Regulatory Commission440
+ RERA387
+ Orissa High Court367
+ Himachal Pradesh High Court339
+ National Company Law Appellate Tribunal336
+ Chhattisgarh High Court271
+ Appellate Tribunal- Prevention Of Money Laundering Act160
+ Securities Appellate Tribunal145
+ Telecom Disputes Settlement And Appellate Tribunal140
+ Jammu and Kashmir High Court131
+ National Anti-Profiteering Authority116
+ Uttarakhand High Court105
+ Company Law Board100
+ Tripura High Court100
+ Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal93
+ Competition Commission Of India92
+ Manipur High Court80
+ Sikkim High Court78
+ Authority for Advance Rulings, GST77
+ Meghalaya High Court72
+ Competition Appellate Tribunal66
+ Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, GST59
+ Insolvency And Bankruptcy Board Of India57
+ Armed Forces Tribunal56
+ Privy Council50
+ Airports Economic Regulatory Authority Of India48
+ Appellate Tribunal For Foreign Exchange43
+ Petroleum And Natural Gas Regulatory Board32
+ Board of Revenue29
+ Authority For Advance Rulings23
+ Intellectual Property Appellate Board22
+ Commissioner (Appeals)15
+ Settlement Commission12
+ Appellate Tribunal For Forfeited Property4
+ Board For Industrial Financial Reconstruction4
+ District Court4
+ Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission3
+ Collector Appeals2
+ Airports Economic Regulatory Authority Appellate Tribunal1
+ Central Board of Excise & Customs1
+ Copyright Board1
+ Railway Claims Tribunal1
+ AAR-GST0
+ Appellate Tribunal for Forfeited Property0
+ Board of Revenue, Rajasthan0
+ Consumer Disputes Redressal0
+ Cyber Appellate Tribunal0
+ Deputy Collector0
+ First Appellate Authority0
+ Right to Information0
+ Trade Marks Registry0
Apply Filter
Court Filter
+ RBI
+ SEBI
+ Andhra Pradesh
+ Arunachal Pradesh
+ Assam
+ Bihar
+ Chandigarh
+ Chhattisgarh
+ Delhi
+ Goa
+ Gujarat
+ Haryana
+ Himachal Pradesh
+ Jharkhand
+ Karnataka
+ Kerala
+ Madhya Pradesh
+ Maharashtra
+ Manipur
+ Meghalaya
+ Mizoram
+ Nagaland
+ Odisha
+ Punjab
+ Rajasthan
+ Sikkim
+ Tamil Nadu
+ Telangana
+ Tripura
+ Uttarakhand
+ Uttar Pradesh
+ West Bengal
+ Supreme Court Of India
+ Allahabad High Court
+ Andhra Pradesh High Court
+ Bombay High Court
+ Calcutta High Court
+ Chhattisgarh High Court
+ Delhi High Court
+ Gauhati High Court
+ Himachal Pradesh High Court
+ Jammu and Kashmir High Court
+ Jharkhand High Court
+ Karnataka High Court
+ Kerala High Court
+ Madhya Pradesh High Court
+ Madras High Court
+ Manipur High Court
+ Meghalaya High Court
+ Orissa High Court
+ Patna High Court
+ Punjab & Haryana High Court
+ Rajasthan High Court
+ Sikkim High Court
+ Telangana High Court
+ Tripura High Court
+ Uttarakhand High Court
Apply Filter
Apply Filter
Judge Filter
Filter by Judge (Beta)
Judge Name
Bench
Other Filters
To
2021 Onwards20466
From 2011 To 202021258
From 2001 To 20103945
From 1991 To 20001476
From 1981 To 1990851
From 1971 To 1980554
From 1961 To 1970576
From 1951 To 1960379
Before 1950457

Cases cited for the legal proposition you have searched for.

..., the defendants 1 and 2 are claiming right over the plaint schedule property based on certain documents created by them.3. The first defendant contested the suit contending inter alia that there is no ...plaintiffs is that the plaint schedule property was obtained by the first plaintiff as per Ext.A1 sale deed of the year 1958 and the same is in possession of the second plaintiff. According to the plaintiffs...that the plaint schedule property is a property obtained by him...

...property and the defendants, who are holding the property on the north of the plaint schedule property, are attempting to use a portion of the plaint schedule property as a pathway. The trial cour...plaintiff has established that she is in exclusive possession of the plaint schedule property. The courts below concurrently found that the plaintiff is not in exclusive possession of the property. The...P.B. Suresh Kumar, J.:— The plaintiff in a suit for injunction is the appellant in the second appeal. The case of the plaintiff is that she is in possession of the plaint schedule...

...defendants are attempting to cut open a way through the eastern boundary of the plaint schedule property. The defendants contested the suit contending mainly that the description of the plaint schedule property is ...P.B. Suresh Kumar, J.:— The plaintiff in a suit for injunction simplicitor is the appellant in the second appeal.2. The plaint schedule property belongs to the plaintiff.... The case of the plaintiff is that the plaint schedule property has well defined boundaries on all its sides and that she is in exclusive possession of the same. It is alleged by the plaintiff that the...

...defendants are attempting to cut open a way through the eastern boundary of the plaint schedule property. The defendants contested the suit contending mainly that the description of the plaint schedule property is ...P.B. Suresh Kumar, J.:— The plaintiff in a suit for injunction simplicitor is the appellant in the second appeal.2. The plaint schedule property belongs to the plaintiff.... The case of the plaintiff is that the plaint schedule property has well defined boundaries on all its sides and that she is in exclusive possession of the same. It is alleged by the plaintiff that the...

...Order 26 Rule 9 r/w Section 151 of CPC for appointment of Commissioner to impact, measure and report about the boundaries of the schedule property. Decree Holder had resisted the said application on the gr...the Commissioner to measure the suit schedule property, the Execution Court has made clear that Executing Court will not go beyond the decree. Further, if there is any compromise, the petitioner is at...schedule etc., However, the Executing Court by observing that the appointment of Commissioner is not necessary for deciding...

...schedule property, RFA No. 623/2004 is filed by him. Contending that the share granted to the plaintiff in respect of A-schedule property is incorrect, L.Rs of 2 defendant have filed RFA No. 443/2004...was filed by the plaintiff for partition and separate possession in respect of the suit schedule properties. Trial court has decreed the suit only in respect of plaint ‘A’ schedule property granting 1..., plaintiff Venkataramaiah is entitled for 1/3 share in plaint A-schedule property bearing No. 159, 6 Block, Jayanagar, Bangalore and the L.Rs of 2 defendant Venkateshaiah are entitled for 2/3 share in...

...written statement:‘It is true that this defendant has entered into an agreement of sale with the plaintiff, agreeing to sell the suit schedule property on 25-1-1991 for a sale consideration..., agreeing to sell the suit schedule property on 25-1-1991 and for a sale consideration of Rs 29,87,000 and that day the plaintiff has paid sum of Rs 25,000 as token advance and agreed to pay a sum of Rs...5,00,000 within 2 weeks from the date of agreement and the balance amount shall be paid on or before 31-3-1992. But the possession of the schedule property was not delivered to the plaintiff at all. It...

...A4, B schedule property can never be BCSR in Exts.C3 and C3(a) and therefore the identification of B schedule property is incorrect. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, the recitals...plaintiffs to get possession of plaint B schedule property and to put up boundaries on all sides of the B schedule property. Plaint A schedule property is 1 acre and 45 cents and plaint B ...is 10 cents out of plaint A schedule property. Preliminary decree was passed on 10/3/1983, which was confirmed by the Appellate Court by judgment dated 28/2/1986 in A.S No. 395/1983. Subsequently, the...

...such a suit against them as the suit is not maintainable. The description of the plaint ‘A’ Schedule property is not correct and the plaint ‘A’ Schedule property is not an identifiable one. It is also contended tha...the land owners having properties on the northern side of plaint ‘A’ Schedule property. It is the case of the plaintiff that when plaint ‘A’ Schedule property was measured, it was found that the...the plaintiff, the said property was encroached upon by the defendants and the property is shown as ‘B’ Schedule property. The plaintiff came to know about the trespass by the defendants on 30/6/2008...

...property. The contention of the plaintiff is that after the Commissioner submitted a report and plan (Exts.P3 and P3(a)), the plaintiff realised that the extent shown in the plaint schedule property is incorrect. T...prohibitory injunction. Case of the plaintiff is that the property described in the plaint schedule having an extent of 11 ⅝ cents is exclusively belonging to the plaintiff and he is in possession. The...respect of the property shown in the plaint schedule. That apart, the main contention raised by the defendants/petitioners is that 3 cents of land on the south eastern corner of the plaint schedule...

...plaint schedule property is incorrect and the defendant's property is also included in the plaint schedule property so as to grab the property, covered by Ext.B2 of the defendant, which i...property belongs to him as per Ext.A1 sale deed and he is in possession and enjoyment of the property. The defendant has neither right nor possession over the plaint schedule property. The defendant is...residing in the property situated on the southern side of the plaint schedule property. Now he is trying to trespass into the plaint schedule property and to construct a shed in it. This is the...

...has conceeded the title of the plaintiff to the 'B' Schedule property is factually incorrect. Hence, the Review Petition is dismissed as devoid of merits. Consequently, connected miscellaneous...2020. The said Second Appeal was dismissed at the admission stage mainly on the ground that the defendant, who had asserted his title over 'B' Schedule property cannot plead adverse possession...property, which was settled on the Defendant by his father by the Settlement Deeds dated 01.09.1982 and 21.02.1992, and over which the plaintiff cannot have any claim whatsoever...

...reading of Ext.P3, it could be seen that the learned Munsiff took a view that deputing an Advocate Commissioner for identifying the plaint schedule property involved in a suit for injunction is not at all necessary and in a suit for...order that identity of the plaint schedule property need not be determined is incorrect and hence set aside. Ext.P6 order is also set aside. The court below shall issue a Commission to take note of the matters mentioned in ..., Kasaragod. The orders impugned are Exts.P3 and P6. The suit is one for permanent prohibitory injunction simplicitor. The defendant/respondent entered appearance and disputed identity of the suit property...

...of the Ashramam property through which also the plaintiff has access to his property. It is incorrect to say that Plaint B schedule is meant as a pathway for ingress and egress to A schedule ...property of the plaint as a pathway to the A schedule property of the plaint.2. It may be mentioned that during the pendency of the second appeal before the High Court of...Amma. As per the settlement, Schedule A property of the plaint was allotted to the original plaintiff (since deceased). Even thereafter, the original plaintiff (since deceased) continued to be in...

...only in S.F.No.37/1F, and granted mandatory injunction. Admittedly, S.F.No.37/1F comes in 'C' schedule property. But contrary to the same mandatory injunction was granted in respect of 'B' Schedule property, which ...portion of 'A' Schedule property which is described as 'B' Schedule property in the plaint. The plaintiff further submits that he seeks for relief for declaration in respect of 'A' Schedule ...and also sought for relief of mandatory injunction in respect of 'B' Schedule property. The plaintiff has also prayed for partition in respect of 'C' Schedule property. 4.The said suit was resisted by...

...C1 to C6 for the plaint schedule property by the Advocate Commissioner is incorrect. Under such circumstances, I do not find any reason to interfere with the well considered order of the learned First...under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to note down the physical features of the plaint schedule property. 2. The learned...counsel appearing for the respondents would state that already two Commissioners were appointed to note down the physical features of the property and particularly the second advocate Commissioner along...

...suit schedule property and for permanent injunction to restrain the defendants from interfering in the peaceful possession of the property.3. The Defendants denied the suit averments. It was contended that th...Defendants are the allottees of one site in the acquired land which is situated towards the southern side of the suit schedule property and they have no manner of right, title and interest over the suit...schedule property. However, they continued to interfere with the possession of the 8 guntas. Hence, the Plaintiff filed the instant suit seeking for a declaration that he is the absolute owner of the...

...of plaint A schedule item Nos. 1 and 2 properties is misleading. The description of plaint C schedule way is also incorrect and therefore, the location of plaint A schedule item No. 2 property...mentioned with reference to the plaint C schedule way is incorrect and hence denied. It is respectfully submitted that the existence of a way through the property of the plaintiff is mentioned in Document...A. Badharudeen, J.:— Is there any rigid rule that a Commissioner with assistance of Surveyor to measure the plaint schedule property shall not be appointed in any contingency...

...before the court below. It is pointed out that the scale adopted by the Commissioner is totally wrong. Further it is pointed out that only after measuring out B schedule property, the other properties should have been measured. More...the petitioner. According to the lower court, a reading of Ext.A1 shows that shop building is in A schedule property. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner points out that there is also an additional shop put up by the petiti...have Ext.P6 order quashed.2. The suit was one for declaration of title and possession of plaint A schedule property in favour of the plaintiff and fixation of boundaries of A schedule...

...Court that the plaintiff/petitioners herein are not in possession of the suit schedule property is incorrect, as the plaintiff is jointly enjoying the possession of the suit schedule property. Therefore...schedule property. Defendants entered appearance and filed written statement. In the meanwhile, the defendant No.24 filed application under Order VII Rule 11(b) of the Civil Procedure stating that the said...and 30 of plaint and submitted that since the plaint averments itself would indicate that the plaintiffs are not in possession of the suit schedule property, valuation has to be made under Section 35(1...

x