Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Suits Valuation Act

5 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

BIKASH BHUSHAN GHOSE AND ORS.versusM/S. NOVARATIS INDIA LIMITED AND ORS.

2007 INSC 49727 April 2007

The appellants, workmen of Novartis India Ltd., were transferred from Calcutta to other locations and challenged the transfer orders as illegal and motivated by trade‑union activities. While a conciliation proceeding was pending, the employer terminated their services for not obeying the transfers. The dispute was refe

SUBHASH MAHADEVASA HABIBversusNEMASA AMBASA DHARMADAS (D) BY LRS. AND ORS.

2007 INSC 30919 March 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved three properties allotted to a Hindu joint‑family member (defendant No.2) who mortgaged them and later sold the equity of redemption to the appellant, Habib. The wife and minor sons of defendant No.2 challenged the sale, but the trial court upheld it and the decree became final. Subsequent suits quest

MANTOO SARKARversusORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND OTHERS

2008 INSC 145316 December 2008Appeal(s) allowed

Mantoo Sarkar, a migrant agricultural labourer originally from Pilibhit, was residing and working in Nainital when he was injured in a bus‑truck collision that occurred in Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh. The truck was insured by Oriental Insurance Company, which maintained a branch at Nainital. Sarkar filed a claim petition b

BHARAT BHUSHAN GUPTAversusPRATAP NARAIN VERMA & ANR

2022 INSC 64916 June 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff filed a suit for mandatory and prohibitory injunction, together with damages, to evict licensees from his plot. The defendant challenged the suit's pecuniary jurisdiction, arguing that the valuation should be based on the market value of the property (Rs. 1.8 crore) rather than the nominal amounts claimed

MALATI SARDARversusNATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED & ORS.

2016 INSC 125 January 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased Diganta Sardar was killed in a bus accident in Hooghly, West Bengal, and his widow filed a claim for compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT) in Kolkata, where the insurer had its business office. The Tribunal awarded Rs.16,12,200 as compens

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