Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: multifariousness Year: 1947 Page 1 of about 5 results (0.001 seconds)

Apr 16 1947 (PC)

Bhagavatula Pankala Rao Vs. Kadiyala Venkatasubbayya

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-16-1947

Reported in : (1947)2MLJ337

..... suit decided that the suit was bad for misjoinder or for multifariousness and put the plaintiff to his election. the material seems to indicate that the plaintiff clearly anticipated failure because of the objection taken in the written statement and met that ..... one which would be un-objectionable ; but that he had been bound to elect as a result of the court's decision that the suit as framed was bad for multifariousness. it seems to me that there are no such facts in the present case and there is nothing in the evidence to show that the court which heard the prior ..... , j., in gurubhotlu v. jogayya (1935) 42 l.w. 256. that was a case filed against the two sets of defendants. there was an objection taken on the ground of multifariousness. on this objection being taken the plaintiff himself admitted that the objection was good and elected to proceed against one set of defendants, the other defendants being given up and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 06 1947 (PC)

Bhagwandas Ranchoddas Modi Vs. Natwarlal Maganlal Mehta

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Oct-06-1947

Reported in : (1949)51BOMLR471

..... issues which were raised at the hearing and which read as follows:-(1) whether this honourable court has jurisdiction to try this suit ?(2) whether the suit is bad for multifariousness ?(3) whether the plaintiffs are entitled to maintain the suit?(4) whether there were any books of accounts of the four trusts mentioned in the plaint ?(5) whether the defendant ..... the two questions involved in the first issue which were argued before me.16. as regards the second issue, mr. k.k. desai argues that the suit is bad for multifariousness because there are four charities involved in the suit and the accounts of four different charities will have to be taken. in my opinion this is in substance the advocate ..... , whose duty it is to protect charity moneys, whether belonging to one charity or several charities, and it is against the same defendant. i, therefore, hold that there is no multifariousness, and i answer that issue in the negative.17. so far as issue no. 3 is concerned, it was argued that on the facts of the case the plaintiffs were .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 03 1947 (PC)

Bhondu Vs. Ch. Raj Singh

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Apr-03-1947

Reported in : AIR1948All60

..... the risk of its dismissal, or proceed only against narain. this court has, in shyam behari v. maha prasad : air1930all180 , defined the duty of the court in a case of multifariousness. say the learned judges at page 108:upon the finding that there is a defect of multi-fariousness in the suits, the learned judge should put, the plaintiff upon their .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 03 1947 (FN)

Northern Pacific Railway Co. Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Mar-03-1947

..... is to be put is the controlling test of its military or naval character. pencils, as well as rifles, may be military property. indeed, the nature of modern war, its multifarious aspects, the requirements of the men and women who constitute the armed forces and their adjuncts, give military or naval property such a broad sweep as to include almost any .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 10 1947 (FN)

Everson Vs. Board of Education

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Feb-10-1947

..... conveyance. the transportation supplied is by public conveyance, subject to all the hazards and delays of the highway and the streets incurred by the public generally in going about its multifarious business. nor is the case comparable to one of furnishing fire or police protection, or access to public highways. these things are matters of common right, part of the general .....

Tag this Judgment!


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