Bare Law is an educational platform for Students to develop their knowledge by the way of writing and reading. The Platform is open all to students and working professionals in the field of Law. The Law Life Team aims to provide the platform for legal connectivity and knowledge., we will update on the Legal News and opportunities in the field of Law.
No. 4ASUMMONS FOR JUDGMENT IN A SUMMARY SUIT[O. 37, R. 3] (Title) In the ………….. court, at ……… Suit No…….. of 19 ……………… /20 …………XYZ ………………………….. Plaintiff Versus ABC …………………………… Defendant Upon reading the affidavit of the plaintiff the court makes the
A Study of Mahant Ram Dass v. Mahant Ganga Dass, AIR 1961 S.C. 882 | BareLaw A Study of Mahant Ram Dass v. Mahant Ganga Dass, AIR 1961 S.C. 882″ The case of Mahant Ram Dass v. Mahant Ganga Dass, AIR 1961
The case of C.A. Balakrishnan v. Commissioner, Corporation of Madras, AIR 2003 Mad. 170, is an important decision that addresses the applicability of Order II, Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) to writ petitions filed under Article 226 of
In the case of Gill & Co. v. Bimla Kumari, 1986 RLR 370, the central issue revolved around the eviction notice served to M/S Gill & Co. on various grounds, including non-payment of rent, misuse, bona fide requirement as a residence for
No. 13SUMMONS TO WITNESS [O. 16, R. 1, 5] (Title) To Whereas your attendance is required to …… on behalf of the …………………………… in the above suit, you are hereby required [personally] to appear before this court on the …….. day of………
No. 6SUMMONS TO LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF A DECEASED DEFENDANT[O. 22, R. 4] (Title) To, Whereas the plaintiff …………… instituted a suit in this court on the …….. day of …… 20……, against the defendant ….. who has since deceased, and whereas the
No. 3SUMMONS TO APPEAR IN PERSON[O. 5, R. 3] (Title) To, Whereas ………………. (Name, description and place of residence) has instituted a suit against you for ….. you are hereby summoned to appear in this court in person on the ……. day
Unraveling the Legal Maze: Gundaji Satwaji Shinde v. Ram Chandra Bhikaji Joshi, AIR 1979 SC 653″ | BareLaw Unraveling the Legal Maze: Gundaji Satwaji Shinde v. Ram Chandra Bhikaji Joshi, AIR 1979 SC 653″ | BareLaw Introduction The judgment of Gundaji Satwaji
Iftikhar Ahmed v. Syed Meharban Ali: A Landmark in the Doctrine of Res Judicata | BareLaw Iftikhar Ahmed v. Syed Meharban Ali: A Landmark in the Doctrine of Res Judicata | BareLaw The judgment of the Supreme Court of India in Iftikhar
The case of “Indian Bank v. Maharashtra State Cooperative Marketing Federation Ltd, AIR 1998 SC 1952″ is a landmark judgment in Indian civil procedural law. This case primarily dealt with the applicability of Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908