Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: multifariousness Sorted by: old Page 8 of about 1,542 results (0.004 seconds)

Dec 16 1912 (FN)

Murray Vs. Pocatello

Court : US Supreme Court

..... brought a bill in equity in the circuit court, seeking to have the court fix reasonable rates. the defendant demurred for want of jurisdiction to give relief in equity and multifariousness. the decree was that the demurrer be sustained and the bill dismissed. the dismissal was in general terms, but with a reference to the opinion, reported in 173 f. 382 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 24 1914 (PC)

Kashinath Ramchandra Vs. Nathoo Keshav

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1914Bom180; (1914)16BOMLR454

..... join in a suit to establish title to land any other cause of action so long as you did not make your bill open to objection on the ground of multifariousness. up to the time of the judicature act of 1873 the common law courts entertained actions for rent upon the covenant in the lease after ejectment on the ground of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 28 1914 (PC)

Bal Krishna Das Vs. Hira Lal Bagla and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1914All393; (1914)ILR36All406

..... same lady. these transfers he alleges to be null and void as against his interest. there were various defences, among them being the plea that the suit was bad for multifariousness. during the pendency of the suit the plaintiff and defendants 1 and 2 came to terms. under the compromise that house which was transferred to defendants 3 and 4 and ..... 2. on the basis of this compromise the court below gave the plaintiff a decree as against defendant 1 and 2, but it held that the suit was bad for multifariousness and it called upon the plaintiff to elect as to the portion of his suit with which he would proceed. the plaintiff declined to elect, and so the court below ..... civil procedure, the point is covered by the clear language of order i, rule 3. under that order it is clear that the plaintiff's suit was not bad for multifariousness and be was entitled to join all the defendants as parties to the suit so as to enable him to recover his share in the whole of the estate of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 28 1914 (PC)

Balkrishna Das Vs. Kunwar Hira Lal Bagla and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : 24Ind.Cas.95

..... same lady. these transfers he alleged to be null and void as against his interest. there were various defences, among them being the plea that the suit was had for multifariousness. during the pendency of the suit the plaintiff and defendants nos. 1 and 2 came to terms. under the compromise that house which was transferred to defendants nos. 3 and ..... . on the basis of this compromise the court below gave the plaintiff a decree as against defendants nos. 1 and 2, but it held that the suit was had for multifariousness and it called upon the plaintiff to elect as to the portion of his suit with which he would proceed. the plaintiff declined to elect and so the court below ..... civil procedure, the point is covered by the clear language of order i, rule 3. under that order it is clear that the plaintiff's suit was not had for multifariousness and he was entitled to join all the defendants as parties to the suit so as to enable him to recover his share in the whole of the estate of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 21 1916 (PC)

Krishnappa Mudali Vs. Periasami Mudali

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1917)32MLJ532

..... up a title adverse to both the mortgagor and mortgagee the ground of exoneration is that he ought never to have been made a party the suit being bad for multifariousness as the plaintiff is joining causes of action which ought not to be joined and the joinder of which will be embarrassing. in jaggeswara dutt v. bhuban mohun mitra i ..... was against the provisions of sections 44 and 45 of the old code of civil procedure (order ii, rules 4 and 5 of the present code) and was bad for multifariousness and in mussammat radha kunwar v. thakur reoti singh (1916) 31 m.l.j. 571 their lordships of the privy council ware of opinion that the joinder in a mortgage .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 21 1916 (PC)

Krishnappa Mudaly Vs. Periaswamy Mudaly

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1917)ILR40Mad964

..... up a title adverse to both the mortgagor and mortgagee, the ground of exoneration is that he ought never to have been made a party, the suit being bad for multifariousness as the plaintiff is joining causes of action which ought not to be joined and the joinder of which will be embarrassing. in jaggeswara dutt v. bhuban mohan mitra i ..... was against the provisions of sections 44 and 45 of the old code of civil procedure (order ii, rules 4 and 5 of the present code) and was bad for multifariousness and in musammat radha kunwar v. thakur reoti singh 20 c.w.n. 1279 their lordships of the privy council were of opinion that the joinder in a mortgage suit .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 23 1917 (PC)

Afzal Shah and anr. Vs. Lachmi NaraIn and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1918All425; (1918)ILR40All7

..... question the finding of law on which their suit was dismissed by the court below. the pleas in the memorandum of appeal are that the suit is not bad for multifariousness, that it was maintainable as framed and that the reliefs claimed therein could have teen granted in one suit against all the defendants. it is unnecessary for us, as the ..... , and this dismissal has been affirmed by the additional district judge in appeal. the only point dealt with by the lower appellate court was that the suit was bad for multifariousness. as a matter of fact there had been an order by the predecessor in office of the learned judge who finally disposed of the appeal, which was no doubt well .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 23 1917 (PC)

Saiyed Afzal Shah and anr. Vs. Lachmi NaraIn and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : 42Ind.Cas.856

..... question the finding of law on which their suit was dismissed by the court below. the pleas in the memorandum of appeal are that the suit is not bad for multifariousness, that it was maintainable as framed and that the reliefs claimed therein could have been granted in one suit against all the defendants it is unnecessary for us, as the ..... this dismissal has been affirmed by the additional district judge in appeal.2. the only point dealt with by the lower appellate court was that the suit was bad for multifariousness. as a matter of fact there had been an order by the predecessor in office of the learned judge who finally disposed of the appeal, which was no doubt well .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 26 1921 (PC)

Bolisetti Mamayya Vs. Kolla Kottayya, Kommurri Ramayya Rice Mill Compa ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1921Mad616; (1921)ILR44Mad810

..... the petition to find out whether the objection of multifarionsness is sustainable. in the present case, on the allegations in the creditor's petition as it stands, the objection of multifariousness cannot be sustained. that ground of appeal is therefore rejected.9. now, as regards the two other contentions the learned district judge, as pointed out already, might have distinctly stated ..... of inconvenience should not be given too much weight. as i stated, the test is whether if the application was treated as a suit, that suit would be bad for multifariousness, that is, for misjoinder of different causes of action against different defendants. if no such objection can be successfully advanced a single application is, in my opinion, maintainable in that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 26 1921 (PC)

Bolisetti Mamayya Vs. Buragadda Venkateswaralu and anr. and Kolla Kota ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1921Mad294; (1921)40MLJ570

..... of inconvenience should not be given too much weight. as i stated, the test is whether if the application was treated as a suit, that suit would be bad for multifariousness, that is, for misjoinder of different causes of action against different defendants. if no such objection can be successfully advanced a single application is in my opinion maintainable in that ..... case. of course, we should confine ourselves to the allegations in the petition to find out whether the objection of multifariousness is sustainable. in the present case, on the allegations in the creditor's petition as it stands, the objection of multifariousness cannot be sustained. that ground of appeal is therefore rejected.8. now as regards the two other contentions, the learned .....

Tag this Judgment!


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