Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Civil Procedure Code (Amendment) Act, 1976

4 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

NAZIR MOHAMEDversusJ. KAMALA AND ORS.

2020 INSC 51127 August 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined two second appeals filed under Section 100 of the CPC concerning a suit for declaration of title and possession of a property. The High Court had entertained the appeals despite the absence of a substantial question of law, and had allowed the respondent's claim to possession while dismissing

P.K. UNNIversusNIRMALA INDUSTRIES & ORS.

1990 INSC 4820 February 1990Appeal(s) allowed

The appeal filed by the auction‑purchaser challenged a Madras High Court decision on the time limit for depositing money under Rule 89 of Order XXI of the CPC to set aside a sale of immovable property executed against a decree. The question was whether the deposit must be made within 30 days as prescribed by sub‑rule (

BANWARI LALversusSMT. CHANDO DEVI (THROUGH L.R.) AND ANR.

1992 INSC 34111 December 1992Appeal(s) allowed

Banwari Lal filed a suit which was dismissed by the Subordinate Judge on the basis of a petition of compromise filed on his behalf. Banwari Lal later alleged that the petition was fraudulent, unsigned by the respondent and filed through a colluding advocate. The Subordinate Judge, after finding the compromise unlawful,

RAJENDER SINGHversusRAMDHAR SINGH AND ORS.

2001 INSC 27711 May 2001Disposed off

The appellant, Rajender Singh, obtained a decree in a money suit and had the defendant's property attached and later purchased at a court auction. The respondents, who had earlier bought the same property under registered sale deeds, challenged the attachment and auction, arguing that the attachment order was not sent

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search