SC: Recoveries U/S 27 of Evidence Act Alone Cannot Sustain Conviction; 1988 Murder Acquittal Restored  ||  SC: Successive Impleadment Applications are Barred by Res Judicata under Different CPC Provisions  ||  Supreme Court Halts Coercive Measures in CJP Protest Cases, Directs Release of Minors  ||  Supreme Court: National Commission for Scheduled Castes Lacks Power to Pass Binding Orders  ||  Bombay HC: Alleged Illegal Arrest Alone Cannot Trigger Contempt Action Against Police  ||  Bombay HC Quashes Order against Taiwan National, Says Online Study Didn't Breach Visa Rules  ||  P&H High Court Issues Directions on LADC Scheme After Reviewing Lawyers' Objections  ||  Allahabad HC: Suspension of Sentence Plea Need Not Take Priority if Appeal is Ready  ||  Allahabad High Court: Surcharge Recovery From Pradhan Must Follow Panchayat Raj Act Procedure  ||  Allahabad HC Directs IB Probe into 4 Lucknow Lawyers, Raises Concern over Lawyer-Police Nexus    

Stantech Project Engg. Pvt. Ltd. v. Nicco Corporation Ltd. - (Supreme Court) (13 Aug 2015)

High Court "unjustifiably considerate" in setting aside order passed on mistaken concession by junior counsel

MANU/SC/0858/2015

Company

The Supreme Court differed with the finding of the High Court that a concession by a junior counsel before a Company Court was mistaken. It held that by recording the debt owed by the Respondent would be paid in installments, the counsel had 'displayed legal sagacity' in preventing the winding up of the Respondent. The Supreme Court rebuked the the High Court's "leniency that results in proliferation and prolongation of litigation".

Relevant : Shrimati Jamilabai Abdul Kadar v. Shankarlal Gulabchand MANU/SC/0518/1975 State of Maharashtra v. Ramdas Shrinivas Nayak MANU/SC/0117/1982

Tags : COUNSEL   MISTAKE   WINDING UP   CONCESSION  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved