Judgments - Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC)
MRS SONIA KHOSLA (THROUGH L.R.) VERSUS LD. REGISTRAR, NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL
SUPERIOR AIRCON PVT. LTD. VERSUS NATIONAL BUILDING CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION
SALIM D. AGBOATWALA AND ORS. Versus SHAMALJI ODDHAVJI THAKKAR AND ORS.
SUDHIR KUMAR @ S. BALIYAN VERSUS VINAY KUMAR G.B.
M/S OK PLAY INDIA PVT. LTD. VERSUS M/S A P DISTRIBUTORS & ANR
Srihari Hanumandas Totala Versus Hemant Vithal Kamat & Ors
PARVEEN KUMAR GUPTA VERSUS RAVI CHADHA AND ORS
M/S BDR DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. VERSUS NARSINGH SHAH alias NARSINGH SAH
Batsiya and ors. Vs. Ramgovind and ors.
Law Laid Down:- 1. Once examination-in-chief is affirmed by way of filing it before the trial Court, thereafter, it is not possible to withdraw the said affidavit. Deponent may file an affidavit subsequent to it and to add or supplement the facts for the reason that order XVIII Rule 4 of CPC does not limit itself to a single affidavit but nonetheless deponent ought not be allowed to keep on filing fresh affidavits to keep improving his case in routine manner. 2. Full Judgment
Sayyed Ayaz Ali Versus Prakash G Goyal & Ors.
M/S. SHANTI NATH ENTERPRISES VERSUS M/S. AA ENTERPRISES
MR. NIRANJAN SWARUP GUPTA & ORS VERSUS BIMLA DEVI & ORS
Ashok Vs. Smt. Gyan
Law laid down - Compliance of under Order 21 Rule 34 of CPC. 8. ...............So far as the compliance of Order 21 Rule 34 of CPC is concerned, it was necessary, had there been no representation at all in the Executing Court, however, when the order-sheet itself reveals that the judgment debtor appeared before the Court through her Counsel Shri Ratnesh Pal on 04.10.2019, and thereafter vanished from the scene, there is no point in again sending a notice to the judgment Full Judgment