Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home  Phrase:code of civil procedure 1908 section 115  Page:9

Jan 13 2005

Naranjan Singh Vs. Satwinder Singh and Anr.

  • Decided on : 13-Jan-2005

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : (2005)140PLR689

..... of local commissioner cannot be subjected to a revision petition as it cannot be treated as a case decided. the plaintiff-petitioner cannot circumvent the provisions of section 115 of the code of civil procedure, 1908 (for brevity, 'the code') merely by substituting the title of the revision petition and claiming that the same has been filed under article 227 of the constitution. the provisions of article ..... abdul khadir, : air2002sc110 and virendra kashinath ravat and anr. v. vinayak n. joshi and ors., : air1999sc162 .3. the instant petition has been filed merely by circumventing the provisions of section 115 of the code by substituting the title claiming that it has been filed under article 227 of the constitution. the ratio of two division bench judgments in the cases of smt. harvinder ..... manifest injustice has been caused to the interest of a party. the fact of possession cannot be ascertained by the local commissioner as has been rightly held by the learned civil judge. no manifest injustice warranting interference of this court under article 227 of the constitution has been caused. the supreme court has consistently taken the view that in the ..... m.m. kumar, j.1. this petition filed under article 227 of the constitution prays for setting aside order dated 27.10.2004 passed by the civil judge (jr. division), barnala declining the request of the plaintiff-petitioner for appointment of the local commissioner on the ground that already report of a local commissioner shri varinder kumar .....

Tag this Judgment!
Nov 18 2002

Pooja Construction Company, Engineers, Contractors & Builders Vs. Unio ...

  • Decided on : 18-Nov-2002

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : (2003)133PLR513

..... m.m. kumar, j.1. the only question raised in the present petition filed under section 115 of the code of civil procedure, 1908 (for brevity 'the code') is whether the defendant-respondents could effect recovery from the plaintiff-petitioner for a sum of rs. 11,39,360 ..... was sought to be recovered by the defendant-respondents. alongwith the suit an application under order 39 rules 1 and 2 of the code was filed. the civil judge (senior division), bhatinda after detailed discussion reached the conclusion that there was no prima facie case in favour of the plaintiff-petitioner ..... and dismissed the application. the finding recorded by the civil judge is that prior to 1987 the stone crushing/stone breaking labour was also paid at the rate of minimum wages which were applicable to ..... extent of already over paid amount. 3. the afore mentioned action of the defendant-respondents has been challenged by the plaintiff-petitioner by filing civil suit no. 130 dated 7.9.1999 against the defendant-respondents for a declaration and permanent injunction restraining the defendant-respondents from deducting or recovering ..... the minimumwages in respect of said categories remained in operation only for a period from 1.4.1985 to 31.10.1990. this court in civil writ petition no. 7157 of 1994 tejinder singh v. union of india, decided on 31.8.1995 removed this disparity. therefore, defendant-respondents claimed .....

Tag this Judgment!
Nov 11 2002

Balbir Singh Vs. Anokh Singh and Ors.

  • Decided on : 11-Nov-2002

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : (2003)134PLR329

..... this petition filed under section 115 of the code of civil procedure, 1908 (for brevity the code) is to the order dated 24.1.2000 passed by the civil judge (junior division), patiala, dismissing the application of the petitioners in which prayer for impleading them as party defendants under order 1 rule 10 of the code was declined. 2. ..... 000/- had been paid to the defendant-respondent nos.2 and 3. the application under order i rule 10 of the code filed by the petitioners has been dismissed by the civil judge on the following grounds: a) that plaintiff-respondent no. 1 was master of his suit and no one can ..... reading of the impugned order that no finding has been recorded by the civil judge as to whether the petitioners are necessary and proper parties for adjudication of the dispute raised in the suit filed by the plaintiff-respondent ..... in the suit which is pending since 1998. 6. after hearing the learned counsel for the parties. i have reached the conclusion that the civil judge has committed grave error in law by rejecting the application of the petitioners for their impleadment as party defendants. it is evident from the ..... facts necessary to decide the controversy raised in the present petition are that 'plaintiff-respondent no. 1 filed civil suit no. 507 dated 4.4.1998 against defendant respondent nos. 2 and .....

Tag this Judgment!
Apr 01 1995

Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. Vs. General Contractor Co.

  • Decided on : 01-Apr-1995

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : AIR1996Guj46; (1996)1GLR750

..... no. 1 of 1988 below application exh. 23 refusing to raise an issue as to the jurisdiction as preliminary issue, by invoking the aids of provisions of section 115 of the code of civil procedure, 1908 ('the code' for short).2. the material facts giving rise to the present petition may be stated. for the work of the petitioner for which tenders were invited by it, the ..... . this contract shall in all respects be governed by and construed according to the laws in force in the republic of india during the period of contract. the civil courts having ordinary original civil jurisdiction, new delhi shall have exclusive jurisdiction in regard to all claims in respect of this contract'- there is also an arbitration clause in the tender condition accepted ..... the issue of jurisdiction as proposed by the defendant is not a pure question of law and cannot be tried as a preliminary issue under order14, rule 2 of the code, then in that case, it will be open for the court to decide all issues simultaneously.6. in light of the facts and circumstances narrated hereinbefore, this revision is required ..... /- to the petitioner as earnest money, for the contract work for which tenders were invited. there was a dispute between the parties. therefore, special civil suit no. 1 of 1988 was filed in the court of civil judge (s.d.) at bhuj. the petitioner who is the original defendant had submitted application ex. 23 in the trial court on 7-8-1990 .....

Tag this Judgment!
Jun 20 1996

Rt. Rev. R.T. Baskaran, Bishop of Vellore and Anr. Vs. Aruldoss and An ...

  • Decided on : 20-Jun-1996

Court : Chennai

Reported in : 1996(2)CTC299

..... orderk.a. swami, c.j.1. this civil revision petition under section 115 of the code of civil procedure, 1908 is preferred against order of ad-interim injunction dated 22.4.1992 passed by the district munsif, villupuram, on i.a. no. 803 of 1992 ..... -a of order 39 of the code of civil procedure.3. even when such a care is not taken by the court while granting the ad-interim injunction, it is not possible to hold that it is appropriate for the party and also for this court to entertain a civil revision petition under section 115, c.p.c. against an ..... 4. even assuming for a moment that what is passed is only an ad-interim injunction, ignoring the provisions contained in rule 3 of order 39 of civil procedure code, the only appropriate course for the party against whom an order of injunction is issued, is to file objections immediately without waiting for service of notice, and ..... while granting the order of ad-interim injunction, the court has to bear in mind the provisions contained in rules 1 and 3 of order 39 of civil procedure code. the court can pass an order of ad-interim injunction only when it is satisfied that the object of granting the injunction will be defeated by the ..... order of ad-interim injunction. the code .....

Tag this Judgment!
Aug 17 2010

SRI BIRENDRA KUMAR NATH Vs. NORTH EASTERN REGIONAL AGRICULTURE MARKETI ...

  • Decided on : 17-Aug-2010

Court : Guwahati

..... 01. the revisional jurisdiction of this court under section 115 of the code of civil procedure, 1908 (hereafter for short referred to as the code) has been sought to be invoked to annul the order dated 16. 09. 2009, passed by the learned civil judge no. 2, kamrup, in misc. (j) case no. 223/2008, arising out of money suit no. 105/2003. thereby, the related application for condonation ..... in jiwan das rawal (supra), expressed the view that the power to convert an appeal into revision, if called for, can be exercised if the considerations laid down under section 115 of the code are satisfied. the judicial enunciations as noticed hereinabove, therefore, proclaim in clear terms that the power of conversion, inherent though, has to be exercised on some well founded principles ..... to this effect. this court in himangsu kumar nath (supra), only observed that the power to entertain such a request would be in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction under section 151 of the code. while reiterating this view, the allahabad high court in bahori (supra), emphasised that such discretionary power is to be exercised in the interest of justice to prevent the ..... of delay for 385 days in filing the accompanying petition, being misc. (j) no. 224/2008, under order 9, rule 13 of the code had been rejected. consequently, the application .....

Tag this Judgment!
Feb 10 2005

Patiala Improvement Trust Vs. Amar Singh and Ors.

  • Decided on : 10-Feb-2005

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : (2005)140PLR150

..... m.m. kumar, j.1. this petition filed under section 115 of the code of civil procedure, 1908 (for brevity 'the code') prays for quashing order dated 6.6.2000 passed by the executing court in execution application no. 1251/ 15.5.1988. ..... . shri m.l. sarin, learned counsel for the respondents has argued that there are sustainable doubts about the maintainability of the revision petition under section 115 of the code as the order dated 6.5.2000 is an interlocutory order and it has not attained finality determining the rights of the parties. the learned ..... of compensation in execution proceedings initiated at the instance of successful claimant in the independent reference. such an unsuccessful claimant cannot even file an application under section 24a of the act for re-determination of compensation on the basis of enhancement of compensation ordered by the reference court in the case of co- ..... what was acquired was their totality of right, title and interest in the acquired property and when the reference was made in respect thereof under section 18 they are equally entitled to receive compensation pro rata as per their shares. the courts below committed manifest error in refusing to pass an award ..... by filing objections on 3.12.1988. although on 7.5.1999 the counsel for the respondents submitted that he would file an application under section 28a of the act before the collector yet the execution was pressed and the executing court has passed the order directing the judgment debtor to enhance .....

Tag this Judgment!
Feb 25 2004

P. Suryanarayana (D) by Lrs. Vs. K.S. Muddugowramma

  • Decided on : 25-Feb-2004

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2004SC1930; JT2004(Suppl1)SC15; 2004(3)SCALE1; (2004)3SCC589

..... would be suffered by the landlady in the event of the eviction being denied.4. the landlady preferred a revision petition in the high court under section 115 of the code of civil procedure, 1908. during the pendency of the civil revision, the karnataka rent act, 1999 (for short 'the 1999 act') came into force. the high court took notice of the provisions of the new act ..... and applied the same to the case before it as required by clause (b) of sub-section (2) of section 70 of the 1999 act and held the ,bona ..... relevant facts and material available on record. it was also submitted by him that in view of the jurisdiction vesting in the high court being one of revision under section 115 of the code of civil procedure, the high court was not justified in upturning the finding of fact arrived at concurrently by the two courts below. we do not find merit in any of ..... the two submissions so made. the presumption enacted by explanation-i(i) appended to clause (r) of sub-section (2) of section 27 of the act is mandatory and has to be .....

Tag this Judgment!
Aug 31 2005

Gajender Solanki Vs. Banso Devi

  • Decided on : 31-Aug-2005

Court : Delhi

Reported in : AIR2006Delhi24; 124(2005)DLT409; 2005(84)DRJ353

..... civil revision petition under section 115 of the code of civil procedure, 1908 (for short cpc) is filed against the order of the learned senior civil judge dated 24th february, 2001 allowing the appeal filed against the order dated 15th december, 1999 passed by the learned trial court dismissing the application filed by the petitioner under section ..... be evicted only in accordance with due process of law. 5. the last plea raised by the petitioner is that the effect of section 14(1) of the act is available to him. the appellate court has rightly recorded that it was not a case of ..... the compromise decree dated 28th january, 1999 which was passed by the learned trial court was without jurisdiction as the jurisdiction of the civil court to order eviction of a tenant from the tenanted premises was barred by the provisions of the delhi rent control act. (d ..... 144, order 21 rule 97 cpc. the appeal filed by the respondent banso devi was allowed by the learned senior civil judge leading to the present revision petition. the relevant facts of the case ..... 144, order 21 and rule 97 cpc, in the execution proceedings. 2. the learned trial judge had allowed the application filed by the petitioner under section .....

Tag this Judgment!
Oct 25 2010

Smt. Shanti Devi And Ors. Vs Mohd. Furman

  • Decided on : 25-Oct-2010

Court : Delhi

..... judgment should be reported in the digest? yesorder.1.this revision petition under section 115 of the code of civil procedure 1908 (for short as code) has been filed on behalf of petitioners challenging order dated 28th april, 2010 passed by commercial civil judge, delhi. vide impugned order, application under order 22 rule 4 read ..... with section 151 and order 22 rule 9 of the code, of respondent was ..... present case. it is well settled that, "once a suit is finally disposed of by the civil court, all the interim as well as interlocutory orders passed in the suit merges with the final order".7. since, decree has been ..... 31st july, 2010, present petition challenging order dated 28th april, 2010, vide which respondents application under order 22 rule 4 of the code was allowed, under these circumstances has become infructuous. judgments cited by learned counsel for petitioners are not applicable to the facts of the ..... allowed.2. respondent had filed a suit for possession and injunction against om parkash (since deceased). petitioners who are the legal heirs of deceased-om parkash, have already been brought on record as application under order 22 rule 4 of the code .....

Tag this Judgment!
Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //