Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: multifariousness Year: 1931 Page 1 of about 4 results (0.001 seconds)

Dec 17 1931 (PC)

Bhagauti Shukul and ors. Vs. Chandrika Prasad Kueri

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Dec-17-1931

Reported in : AIR1933All147; 150Ind.Cas.289

..... the premium, which is the consideration of the lease already given effect to.5. another argument put forward on behalf of the applicants is that the suit was bad for 'multifariousness,' which implies that there was a (sic) of defendants and causes of action. order 1, rule 3, civil p.c., is a complete answer to this contention. two sets of ..... any court situate in the gorakhpur district, and. in any case, of want of jurisdiction in a court of small causes. they also urged that the suit was bad for 'multifariousness' and that the plaintiff is not entitled to interest as claimed by her. all these pleas were overruled by the lower court and have been pressed before me in revision .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 14 1931 (PC)

Bhagvan Gokul Ji and Co. Vs. Balku Babaji

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Apr-14-1931

Reported in : AIR1932Bom1; (1931)33BOMLR1291; 136Ind.Cas.497

..... common to the case against both the defendants, and this seems to me sufficient to bring the case within the rule, and the finding that the suit is bad for multifariousness appears to me on the facts to have been a mistaken one. i agree that the decree should be set aside as proposed by the learned chief justice.2. costs .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 06 1931 (PC)

B. Ram Karan, Singh (Dead) and ors. Vs. Nakchhad Ahir and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : May-06-1931

Reported in : AIR1931All429

..... same defendants on account of several causes of action in one and the same suit. in one case the multiplicity of suits is to be avoided and in the other multifariousness of the causes of action. it is also clear that the bundle of facts which would constitute the cause of action in favour of the plaintiff would not necessarily be .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 25 1931 (PC)

Tinkarhi Dasee Vs. Narendranath Mukherji and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Jun-25-1931

Reported in : AIR1932Cal512

..... were several other purchasers of other portions of the mortgaged property who were made parties, and who also alleged paramount titles in themselves, so that the suit would have been multifarious and confused in the highest degree if it had gone on in that shape. they were all dismissed with costs.' . ...' it was the paramount claims that could not be conveniently .....

Tag this Judgment!

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