IQBAL AHMAD, THOM
Koer Durag Pal Singh – Appellant
Versus
Th. Pancham Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Thom, C.J. - The question referred for decision may be stated thus : "Is Section 48, Civil P.C., uncontrolled by the provisions of Section 15, Limitation Act?" The question has arisen in the following circumstances : A final decree was passed on 19th May 1922 against one Raghubir Pal Singh and his son Dirag Pal Singh. The decree-holders presented an application for execution of that decree on 8th May 1925. During the pendency of this application, the validity of the decree was challenged by the judgment-debtors in Suit No. 171 of 1926. This suit was dismissed by the trial Court on 23rd May 1927. The plaintiffs appealed to the High Court and during the pendency of the appeal in the High Court the execution proceedings initiated on 8th May 1925 were stayed by order dated 26th November 1927. On 12th April 1932, the judgment-debtors appeal in Suit No. 171 of 1926 was dismissed and the stay order was discharged. The execution application had remained pending throughout. It was however dismissed for want of prosecution in February 1936. The decree-holders, on 20th October 1936, filed a second application for execution. The judgment-debtor objected to the execution of the decree u
Harish Chandra and Others Vs. Mt. Kastola Kunwar and Others
Subbarayan by Guardian Visalakshmi Achi Vs. Natarajan by their Guardian Gouri Achi and Others
Puran Chand and Another Vs. Abdullah and Another
Bhairo Prasad and Another Vs. S.P.C. Dass
Sheo Partab Singh and Another Vs. Tajammul Husain and Others
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.