“Failure to Establish Due Diligence and Relevance; ₹5 Lakh Costs Imposed for Delaying Justice”

Home - "Failure to Establish Due Diligence and Relevance; ₹5 Lakh Costs Imposed for Delaying Justice"

Posted inNews

Bombay High Court Rejects Additional Evidence in Appeal Under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC: “Failure to Establish Due Diligence and Relevance; ₹5 Lakh Costs Imposed for Delaying Justice”

Court’s Decision: The Bombay High Court dismissed the appellants' Chamber Summons seeking to introduce additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27(1)(aa) of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC). It ruled…

Posted by

Rawlaw December 28, 2024

Recent News

Bombay High Court Holds That Land Reservation Under MRTP Act Lapses If No Acquisition Steps Are Taken: “Mere Payment for Measurement Charges Is Not a Step Towards Acquisition; Authorities Cannot Deprive Landowners of Their Rights Indefinitely”
Supreme Court Holds Termination of Daily-Wage Workmen Illegal: “Employer Cannot Use Recruitment Ban to Deny Regularization; Sections 6E & 6N of U.P. Industrial Disputes Act Violated”—Orders Reinstatement with Back Wages and Regularization Process
Delhi High Court Upholds Arbitral Award: Rejects Challenge Against Liquidated Damages, Unlawful Encashment of Performance Bank Guarantee, and Misinterpretation of Price Variation Clause in Metro Rail Supply Contract Dispute
Supreme Court Upholds Arbitral Award Rejecting Contractor’s Claims: Holds Clause 49.5 of GCC Validly Bars Damages for Employer-Caused Delays, Estoppel Prevents Appellant From Reneging on Written Undertakings, and Judicial Intervention Under Section 37 Arbitration Act is Limited
Bombay High Court Quashes IFS Officer’s Transfer Due to Procedural Irregularities: Holds Handwritten Alterations in Civil Services Board Minutes Render Decision Invalid, Leaves Open Question of State vs. Central Rules for Future Determination

Scroll to Top