Doctrine of Merger - CaseCiter

CaseCiter

Sign in Subscribe

Doctrine of Merger

A collection of 6 posts

Specific Relief Act

Anand Narayan Shukla vs. Jagat Dhari 2026 INSC 463 - S.28 Specific Relief Act - Rescission - Doctrine of Merger - Appeal Non- Prosecution

Specific Relief Act 1963 - Section 28 - (i) A decree for specific performance of a contract is in the nature of a preliminary decree and therefore, till the deed is executed pursuant to the decree, the Court that passed the decree is vested with the jurisdiction to either rescind

Amit Arya v. Kamlesh Kumari; 2025 INSC 1486 - S.28 Specific Relief Act - Doctrine Of Merger

Specific Relief Act

Amit Arya v. Kamlesh Kumari; 2025 INSC 1486 - S.28 Specific Relief Act - Doctrine Of Merger

Read Judgment In LawLens Note You can read our notes on this judgment in our Supreme Court Daily Digests. If you are our subscriber, you should get it in our Whatsapp CaseCiter Community at about 9pm on every working day. If you are not our subscriber yet, you can register

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

Khurana Brothers vs Anand Bardhan Principal Secretary 2025 INSC 1240-Doctrine of Merger

Doctrine of merger- The doctrine of merger is not a doctrine of rigid and universal application and it cannot be said that wherever there are two orders, one by inferior court or tribunal and the other by superior court or tribunal, passed in an appeal or revision, there is fusion

Doctrine of Merger

Vishnu Vardhan @ Vishnu Pradhan vs State Of Uttar Pradesh 2025 INSC 884 - Exceptions To Doctrine Of Merger- Writ Jurisdiction - Fraud

Legal Maxims and Doctrines - Doctrine of Merger - When an appeal is limited to a specific part of the judgment and order of the first-instance court, the merger occurs only to that extent, leaving the rest intact and available for future consideration. The extent of merger is determined by

Ram Lal vs Jarnail Singh (D) 2025 INSC 301 - S. 28 Specific Relief Act - Order XX Rule 12A CPC

Specific Relief Act 1963 - Section 28 - The non-payment of the balance sale consideration within the time period fixed by the Trial Court does not amount to abandonment of the contract and consequent rescinding of the same. The real test must be to see if the conduct of the

Vipin Kumar Vs Jaydeep 2025 INSC 169 - SLP Dismissal & Doctrine of Merger - S 100 CPC - Second Appeal

Doctrine of Merger - An order refusing special leave to appeal may be a non-speaking or speaking order. In either case it does not attract the doctrine of merger. An order refusing special leave to appeal does not stand substituted in place of the order under challenge. All that it