Actions (642)
HELD:
"There is no doubt that by our well-established legal precedents that pleadings on which no evidence is led is deemed abandoned.
HELD:
"Furthermore, the 1st respondent sought for the grant of a declaratory relief and an injunctive relief which was dependent on the grant of the declaratory relief.
HELD:
"Above all, declaratory reliefs are not granted as a matter of course and on platter of gold.
HELD:
"The question of whether an action was commenced with the authorisation of the Board of Directors or Shareholders of the company touches on the locus standi to maintain the action.
HELD:
"Let me iterate that the issue of competence of an action and jurisdiction of the Court to entertain the same are threshold in nature and once an issue of jurisdiction is raised it has to be resolved first before anything else.
HELD:
"This issue of competence of the action raised by the Respondents is a threshold issue that goes to the jurisdiction of the Court to entertain the action.
HELD:
"The settled position of the law is that it is the originating processes filed by the plaintiff that are to be construed to determine whether an action is statute-barred.
HELD:
"The evidence given by the Respondent is inconsistent with its pleadings and same goes to no issue and has no legal effect whatsoever.