Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: multifariousness Year: 1935 Page 1 of about 5 results (0.001 seconds)

Mar 08 1935 (PC)

Rajah Sir Annamalai Chettiar Vs. S. Rm. Ar. Ramanathan Chettiar and or ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-08-1935

Reported in : (1935)69MLJ497

..... to have the earliest opportunity to repel such a disgraceful charge, and not to seek a further opportunity of having the claim against them dismissed on the technical plea of multifariousness. this natural attitude is not the attitude adopted by the petitioners in these petitions.7. no case has been brought to our notice in which leave to appeal to his ..... an appeal from the decree of the subordinate judge of devakotta dated 7th november, 1932, dismissing o.s. no. 109 of 1930 on his file on the preliminary ground of multifariousness or misjoinder of defendants and of causes of action. in appeal this court held that there was no such misjoinder and remanded the suit to the original court for disposal ..... majesty in council has been granted from an order deciding a point of procedure like a plea of multifariousness. in the present case the plea of multifariousness is moreover devoid of any real substance; persistence in such a plea deserves no encouragement. it is no doubt open to us under clause (c) of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 08 1935 (PC)

Annamalai Chettiar Vs. S. Rm. Ar. Ramanathan Chettiar and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-08-1935

Reported in : AIR1936Mad311

..... to have the earliest opportunity to repel such a disgraceful charge, and not to seek a further opportunity of having the claim against them dismissed on the technical plea of multifariousness. this natural attitude is not the attitude adopted by the petitioners in these petitions.7. no case has been brought to our notice in which leave to appeal to his ..... an appeal from the decree of the subordinate judge of devakotta dated 7th november 1932 dismissing o.s. no. 109 of 1930 on his file on the preliminary ground of 'multifariousness' or misjoinder of defendants and of causes of action. in appeal this court held that there was no such misjoinder and remanded the suit to the original court for disposal ..... majesty in privy council has been granted from an order deciding a point of procedure like a plea of multifariousness. in the present case the plea of multifariousness is moreover devoid of any real substance; persistence in such a plea deserved no encouragement. it is no doubt open to us under clause (c) of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 20 1935 (PC)

Anjaneya Sastri Vs. Kothandapani Chettiar and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Sep-20-1935

Reported in : AIR1936Mad449; (1937)2MLJ437

..... as well as the adjoining vacant land constituted the endowment. as to the point of law, the reference to it in issue 4 as an objection on the ground of 'multifariousness' is not accurate, because no relief has been claimed against defendants 2 and 3 on any independent cause of action. appellant's learned counsel therefore urged the objection only as ..... misjoinder he held that as defendants 2 and 3 claimed right to the suit property they were necessary parties to the suit and that the suit was not bad for multifariousness. two questions have been argued in this appeal on behalf of defendant 3; (1) on the merits, that the learned judge should have held that a trust within the meaning .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 19 1935 (PC)

Vedali Guruvabhotlu Vs. (Reddi) Jogayya and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-19-1935

Reported in : AIR1935Mad696; 158Ind.Cas.9

..... to the decision on the issue of multifariousness. i do not see that that makes any difference. we are only concerned with the question whether there has been an abandonment within the meaning of order ..... to give up certain defendants, and the cause of action against them, in obedience to the court's view that the suit as framed is bad for multifariousness.3. the argument of the courts below in the present case, if i understand it aright, is that the plaint was not in fact amended pursuant ..... with the other provisions of the code. it is well established law that if a suit is so framed, as to be open to the charge of multifariousness, the plaintiff must elect the cause of action which he is prepared to prosecute or the defendants against whom he will proceed. in respect of the ..... para. 6 of the judgment in that suit (ex. c):the defect is cured by the plaintiff's own admission that there is multifariousness inasmuch as he practically concedes that he cannot prove any collusion between the two sets of defendants. he has accordingly confined this suit to item 1 in ..... -had been instituted against two sets of defendants, in respect of two sets of properties, and an objection was accordingly raised that the suit was bad for multifarious ness. this objection was made the subject of issue 5 in that, case and when the case came on for trial what happened is thus recorded in .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 21 1935 (PC)

Haru Bepari and ors. Vs. Roy Kshitish Bhusan Roy Bahadur and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : May-21-1935

Reported in : AIR1935Cal573,158Ind.Cas.780

..... ), formulated the view that two or more distinct subjects in section 17, court-fees act, are equivalent to 'two or more distinct causes of action,' that section 17, refers to 'multifarious suits,' and that it is applicable only to suits in which two or more distinct causes of action have been joined.6. with great respect to the judge who decided .....

Tag this Judgment!


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