Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: misjoinder code of civil procedure Page 1 of about 5,010 results (0.075 seconds)

Oct 04 1893 (PC)

Kandathil Padinhare Veetil Karnavan and Manager Sankunni Nair and Puth ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1894)4MLJ64

..... money and on account of his own tarwad and not benami for plaintiff ; that the suit was opposed to sections 80 and 317 of the code of civil procedure and also bad for misjoinder of causes of action ; further, that it was time-barred and that plaintiff attained his majority more than three years before the institution of ..... cause of action did not arise till january 1889. it has further been found that the suit is not bad either for misjoinder of causes of action or under section 30 of the code of civil procedure.6. the principal contention before this court is that the suit is bad as being opposed to section 317 of the ..... i do not think the 1st defendant can be allowed to succeed in his attempt to secure the property for himself under colour of section 317 of the code of civil procedure.9. but 1st defendant is entitled to interest on the rupees 230 decreed to him from 25th july 1874, the date of sale (see exh. xx ..... code of civil procedure, which declares that 'no suit shall be maintained against the certified purchaser (at a court sale) on the ground that the purchase was made ..... mahmood, j., in aldwell v. ilahi bakhsh i. l. r 5 a 478--section 317 of the present civil procedure code has not altered in principle the rule of law contained in section 260 of the old code (viii of 1859). the subordinate judge's reason for holding this suit not to fall within the prohibition contained in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 11 1893 (PC)

Sankunni Nayar and Raman Nambiar Vs. Narayanan Nambudri and anr.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1894)ILR17Mad282

..... and on account of his own tarwad, and not benami for plaintiff; that the suit was opposed to sections 30 and 317 of the code of civil procedure, and also bad for misjoinder of causes of action; further, that it was time-barred, and that plaintiff attained his majority more than three years before the institution of ..... of action did not arise till january 1889. it has further been found that the suit is not bad either for misjoinder of causes of action or under section 30 of the code of civil procedure.6. the principal contention before this court is that the suit is bad as being opposed to section 317 of the ..... code of civil procedure, which declares that 'no suit shall be maintained against the certified purchaser (at a court sale) on the ground that the purchase was ..... mahmood, j., in aldwell v. ilahi bakhsh i.l.r. 5 all. 478 section 317 of the present civil procedure code has' not altered in principle the rule of law contained in section 2601 of the old code (viii of 1859). the subordinate judge's reason for holding this suit not to fall within the prohibition contained ..... the representative of the certified purchaser at the court sale held in execution of the decree passed therein. it is provided by section 317 of the civil procedure code that no suit shall be maintained against the certified purchaser on the ground that the purchase was made on behalf of any other person, or of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 17 2008 (HC)

Avala Raja Reddy Vs. Gunti Radha Krishnaiah Chetty

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2008(2)ALT70

..... stated in : air1970ap153 , represent, in may opinion, the correct statement of the position of law. i may also add that under order 1, rule 13 of the code of civil procedure, unless objection with regard to misjoinder has been taken at the earliest opportunity and, at or before settlement of issues, the party shall be deemed to have waived it. similarly if the objection ..... suits were brought against such persons, any common question of law or fact would arise.order i rule 9 of the code of civil procedure dealing with misjoinder and non-joinder reads as hereunder:no suit shall be defeated by reason of the misjoinder or non-joinder of parties, and the court may in every suit deal with the matter in controversy so far as ..... amount or value of the aggregate subject-matters at the date of instituting the suit.order ii rule 7 of the code of civil procedure deals with objections as to misjoinder and the said provision reads as hereunder:all objections on the ground of misjoinder of causes of action shall be taken at the earliest possible opportunity and, in all cases where issues are settled ..... that nothing in this rule shall apply to non-joinder of a necessary party.order i rule 13 of the code of civil procedure dealing with objections as to non-joinder or misjoinder reads as hereunder:all objections on the ground of nonjoinder or misjoinder of parties shall be taken at the earliest possible opportunity and, in all cases where issues are settled, at or .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 10 1887 (PC)

Ram NaraIn Dut Vs. Annoda Prosad Joshi and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : (1887)ILR14Cal682

..... suit was bad for misjoinder the code of civil procedure, section 31, provides that no suit shall be defeated by reason of misjoinder of parties. this is not a case of misjoinder only of parties ; it is a case of misjoinder of causes of action. there is no section of the code which permits a person ..... got possession without opposition, but as to many plots he was opposed. those who opposed him apparently instituted proceedings under section 332 of the code of civil procedure, and their claims were decided under that section in their favor.2.the present suit was brought by the plaintiff to obtain a declaration ..... adopted by the lower courts was right.6. if the allegation set forth in the plaint had been correct, then perhaps there would be no misjoinder ; but, upon the contentions set out in the written statements, it is clear that the defendants did not admit any combination or joint action ..... possession of the various plots.3. there appear to be some twelve different defendants named in the plaint. they filed separate defences and several pleaded misjoinder. they set up totally different titles, quite distinct one from another, in respect of the various plots of land, and equally distinct one from ..... that ground, the subordinate judge in appeal ought not to have interfered. it seems that the first corut was of opinion that there was misjoinder of diffirent causes of action in the suit. the munsif was of opinion that a seprate suit should have been brought against each defandant; but .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 28 1881 (PC)

Ramsebuk and ors. Vs. Ramlall Koondoo

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : (1881)ILR6Cal815

..... -off would be tried, and the defendant would succeed or not according as he proved that plea. this is the reason why both by the common law procedure act of 1860 and the indian code of civil procedure, misjoinder of plaintiffs can never be fatal to a suit, though nonjoinder of plaintiffs may. now, as i understand, the lower court has found in this case ..... to a suit (section 31 of the civil procedure code has, however, not been extended to the presidency small cause courts---rep. note). that section is a reproduction of section 19 of the common law procedure act, 1860, and applies (for good reasons) to cases of misjoinder only. there can never be any ..... defeated by reason of the misjoinder of parties, and the court may in every suit deal with the matter in controversy so far as regards the right and interests of the parties actually before it. nothing in this section shall be deemed to enable plaintiff (sic) join in respect of distinct couses of action. of the code of civil procedure is never now fatal ..... the limitation act presented a new difficulty to the plaintiff's, and upon this the main question in the case depends. in england, since the passing of the common law procedure act of 1852, the amendment might have been made, if the court thought proper, so as to protect the claim of the plaintiffs from limitation, because, after the amendment, the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 02 2015 (HC)

Randhir Singh Bhutoria and Anr. Vs. Food Corporation of India

Court : Kolkata

..... . it is the trustees which are the legal entities. order 1 rule 9 of the code of civil procedure, 1908 deals with misjoinder and non-joinder of parties. in my view, the objection cannot be that of a misjoinder and non-joinder of a party. it can at best be a scenario where the plaintiffs ..... have not been properly described, an objection more akin to order 1 rule 10(1) of the code of civil procedure, 1908. the submission of the defendant is that, ..... name of the executor must appear first and thereafter such executor should be described as the executor of the particular deceased. order 31 of the code of civil procedure deals with suits by or against the trustees, executors and administrators. rule 1 of order 31 lays down that in all suits concerning property vested ..... its trustees as natural persons and not the trustees as natural persons claiming to represent the trust. appendix- a under the heading pleadings of the code of civil procedure, 1908 and subheading (1) titles of suits provides that a natural person should be described first and then his capacity in relation to subject ..... : calpro food (pvt.) ltd.) in food corporation of india (supra) it has been held that sections 16, 17, 20 and 120 of the code of civil procedure, 1908 do not apply to a high court established by the letters patent, 1865. under clause 12 of the letters patent, 1865, a place where the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 08 1981 (HC)

P. Kandaswamy Vs. Hajee K.S. Mohamed Mohideen Rowther

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1982)1MLJ179

..... are not made applicable to the proceedings under the tamil nadu buildings (lease and rent control) act. hence the provisions of the code of civil procedure with reference to the misjoinder of causes of action cannot be applied to the above ..... of causes of action. in considering this plea it has to be noted that in the counter statement to the r.c.o.p. the tenant had not taken this plea. the tenant had also not taken this plea before the appellate court. it is urged on behalf of the landlord that the provisions of the code of civil procedure ..... other than for which it was let out, rendered by both the courts below on evidence cannot be interfered with in revision. the civil revision petitioner has not succeeded in showing that the findings of both the courts below on the above three points are in any way ..... that the repairs carried out by him will not in any away hamper the value of the building. in this connection the learned advocate for the civil revision petitioner relied upon the case reported in g. natarajan v. p. thandavarayari : (1969)2mlj19 , where it has been observed that while ..... civil revision petitioner is that the rent control application itself is not maintainable since the reliefs in respect of the two buildings mentioned in a and b schedules to the petition have been clubbed together and hence the rent control petition itself ought to have been dismissed on the ground of misjoinder .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 06 1942 (PC)

Maharani Gurucharan Kaur of Nabha and anr. Vs. the Province of Madras, ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1942Mad539; (1942)2MLJ14

..... against him but not against the other defendants. the issues in regard to the validity of the notice under section 80 of the code of civil procedure and relating to misjoinder of defendants were not seriously pressed on behalf of the defendants. as for the quantum of damages the learned subordinate judge was of ..... xiv) to arrest a person, would it be essential for the inspector-general of police to comply with the requirements of section 56 of the code of criminal procedure? in our opinion, it would not be so necessary. nor would it be necessary for a subordinate police officer, say an inspector of ..... king-emperor i.l.r.(1935) 13 bom. 754 where it was held that the provisions of section 54 of the code of criminal procedure were limited by section 56 of the code and that although it is possible for a police officer to arrest on his own. initiative or when acting independently any ..... giving the order is not the officer in charge of a police station and is not making an investigation under chapter xiv, criminal procedure code. in other words, section 56 of the code only applies to cases of police officers who are either in charge of a police station or who are making investigation under ..... in charge of a police station or when he is not making an investigation under chapter xiv of the code of criminal procedure to comply with the formalities mentioned in section 56 of the code, we must with deference express our dissent. section 54 applies to all police officers whether to superior or .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 02 2015 (HC)

Pushpaben Vishwambarlal Khetan and Others Vs. Heena Narendra Patel and ...

Court : Mumbai

..... suit. the intention of section 18 seems to be provided for suits which involved multifariousness and which do not go against the provisions of code of civil procedure such as misjoinder of causes of action. 13. whether the items involved in the suit are distinct subjects or one and the same subject may also ..... . in such a case it is possible to avoid multiplicity of suits by combining causes of action and parties without offending the provisions of code of civil procedure. at the same time i find it difficult to see how distinct causes of action which each plaintiff has can be one subject even ..... each of such subjects would be liable under this act. nothing in the former part of this section shall be deemed to affect the powers conferred by the code of civil procedure, 1908, schedule i, order ii, rule 6. ? schedulei ad valorem feesnumber 1 ? ....... 2proper fee 31. plaint or memorandum of appeal (not otherwise ..... deficit of rs.7,65,840/-. if that is not paid, the plaint is liable to be rejected under order vii rule 11 of the code of civil procedure. 5. the learned counsel for the plaintiffs stated that the plaintiffs are claiming a comprehensive relief as stated in prayer clause (a). i do ..... call upon the plaintiffs to pay the deficit court fees and if not paid reject the suit under order vii rule 11(b) of the code of civil procedure. accordingly, this court by an order dated 27th july 2007 directed the prothonotary and senior master to hold an enquiry to ascertain whether the valuation .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 16 2011 (HC)

M/S Century Aluminium Manufactring Co Ltd Vs. M/S Goodpal Industry Lim ...

Court : Delhi

..... in any case, the suit is in such a case would be hit by section 230 of contract act, thereby attracting order vii rule 11(d) of the code of civil procedure, besides being bad for misjoinder of defendant no. 2 which is neither a necessary nor a property party to the suit. 7. the learned counsel for the plaintiff has relied upon the ..... 1989 calcutta 59. in the case before calcutta high court, the contract indicated that the name of defendant no. 2, who had filed application under order 7 rule 11 of cpc for rejecting the plaint, had been shown as purchaser. it was specifically stated on behalf of the plaintiff that defendant no. 2 had entered into the said contracts in the .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //