SC: Forfeiture of Earnest Money Impermissible When Both Buyer and Seller are at Fault  ||  Supreme Court: Gravity of Offence Cannot Defeat Speedy Trial; Pre-Trial Detention is Punishment  ||  SC: Terrorist Act under UAPA Includes Conspiracies to Disrupt Essential Supplies, Not Just Violence  ||  Supreme Court Directs Measures to Prevent False and Frivolous Complaints Against Judicial Officers  ||  SC: Mere Participation in Arbitration Doesn’t Bar Challenging Arbitrator; Waiver Must be in Writing  ||  SC: Under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC, the Plaintiff, as Dominus Litis, Cannot be Forced to Add a Defendant  ||  SC: Law Does Not Change With a New Bench; Decisions of a Coordinate Bench are Binding  ||  Delhi HC Absence of Formal Arrest under Section 311A Crpc Does Not Bar Giving Handwriting Samples  ||  Del HC: Security Guards Performing Duties Cannot Be Prosecuted For Wrongful Restraint or Molestation  ||  Bombay HC: Housing Society Earning From Telecom Towers Isn’t An ‘Industry’; Staff Get No Gratuity    

P&H HC: Party Under Legal Obligation to Opt Where Effective Remedy is Available U/S 41(h) SR Act - (06 May 2022)

CIVIL

Punjab and Haryana High Court, while dealing with a revision petition, held that it is well-settled law that under Section 41(h) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 where a more efficacious remedy is available, the party is under a legal obligation to opt for that remedy.

Tags : PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT   SECTION 41(H)   SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT   1963   STATUTORY PROVISIONS   EFFICACIOUS  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved