Challenge to compromise decree (Order 23, Rule 3)

Challenge to compromise decree under Order 23, Rule 3 can be made only in the court that recorded the compromise except when such court is a revenue court or other court of limited jurisdiction.

(2012) 5 SCC 525

Development Authority cannot be blamed for enchroachment, if any, made after possession of plot was delivered to original allottee

Development Authority cannot be blamed for enchroachment, if any, made after possession of plot was delivered to original allottee

HUDA v. Viresh Sangwan, (2012) 1 SCC 256

Courts will not interfere in process of evaluation of exam or its method

Courts will not interfere in process of evaluation , the process of ranking and selection of candidates for admission with reference to their performance, the process of achieving the objective of selecting candidates who will be better equipped to suit the specialised courses, are all technical matters in academic field and the courts will not interfere in such process.

Sanchit Bansal (2012) 1 SCC 157

Court must examine the pleadings and then only pass orders

The court will examine the pleadings for specificity as also the supporting material for sufficiency and then pass appropriate orders.

(2012) 5 SCC 370
Maria Margarida v. Erasmo Jack De Sequeira

English Civil Procedure Rules and Woolf's Report relied upon in India

(2012) 5 SCC 370
Maria Margarida v. Erasmo Jack De Sequeira

Building is "service". 2012 5 SCC 359

Sale of fully developed plots with assured facilities is "service"

a person convicted on charges of corruption should not be allowed to continue in service until his conviction is set aside by appellate court. The High Court in appeal has not stayed

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 66949 of 2010  (Allahabad) (2010 ILR 1278)

 

Constitution of India Art. 226-Revision of  Subsistence allowance-petitioner-after  conviction under 7/3 prevention of   corruption Act-during pendency of
appeal-granted bail-unless conviction  set-a-side not entitled for relief claimed. 

 

Held: Para 8  In our opinion, a person convicted on charges of corruption should not be  allowed to continue in service until his conviction is set aside by appellate court. The High Court in appeal has not stayed
the conviction of the petitioner.