Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: rejection of plaint code of civil procedure Court: allahabad Page 100 of about 1,222 results (0.071 seconds)

May 08 2001 (HC)

Gulbir Singh Vs. Vith Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Muzaffarnagar ...

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : 2001(2)AWC1566b

..... execution of the decreewas received. the compliance of section 17 of provincial small cause courts was also made by him. the application was opposed.3. the application for restoration was rejected by the judge. small causes court, muzaffarnagar on 2.1.1998, annexure-10 to the petition. against that order, the petitioner preferred s.c.c. revision no. 6 of 1998 ..... the presumption that the service is sufficient cannot be taken.7. it has also been contended that the registered cover, which was received back show that the copy of the plaint was not accompanied with the notice. that, therefore, the service was not sufficient. in this connection.the learned counsel has relied on a division bench judgment of this court in ..... refused the service intentionally to delay the case.10. the suit was filed in the year 1984. the shop in dispute is in the premises of house no. 148/9. civil lines. muzaffarnagar. the petitioner is also living in the said house, as is apparent from the address mentioned in this petition. summons were sent four times to the petitioner at ..... m/s. transtel electronics ltd., kanpur v. s. n. gundu rao, 1983 arc 395. it was observed in this case that if the copy of the plaint is not accompanied with the summons, the summons should not be held to be duly served.8. i have considered the arguments and the law laid down in the aforesaid .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 24 2001 (HC)

U.P. Financial Corporation Vs. Garlon Polyfeb Industries and Others

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR2001All286; (2001)2UPLBEC1558

..... this question as such a plea has not been taken in the plaint. this plea was neither raised nor considered by the learned civil judge (senior division). we have already referred tothe reasons given by the learned civil judge for granting ad interim order and, in our opinion, ..... p. public moneys (recovery of dues) act cannot be invoked. an identical plea was repelled by a division bench of this court in civil misc. writ petition no. 13738 of 2001, m/s. unique bubile tube industries v. u.p.f.c., decided on 27.4. ..... misconceived and it is also barred under section 3 of the u. p. public moneys (recovery of dues) act.5. the learned civil judge (senior division) held that the plaintiffs had paid more than rs. 1 crore towards repayment of the loan by the year 1998. ..... suit. the application was accompanied with an affidavit of plaintiff no. 5 wherein the same facts have been stated as in the plaint.4. the defendant-appellant filed an objection against the injunction application filed by the plaintiffs. the case set up in the objection is ..... under order xliii, rule 1 (r) c.p.c. has been preferred by the defendant against the order dated 6.1.2001 of civil judge (senior division), kanpur nagar, by which injunction application filed by the plaintiffs was allowed and the defendant-appellant has been directed to ..... and is hereby allowed. the impugned judgment and order dated 6.1.2001 of the learned civil judge (senior division) is set aside and the injunction application no. 5c moved by the plaintiffs is .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 06 2004 (HC)

Kuldip Singh Vs. Ram Kishan and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : 2004(4)AWC3167

..... that in regard has not been filed. we, therefore, overrule the preliminary objection by the appellant.'9. thus, the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel has no merit and is rejected.10. in view of the aforesaid, no substantial questions of law arises for consideration in the second appeal. the second appeal is devoid of any merit and is dismissed with ..... alleged, that, from the income from these properties, the father of the plaintiff, i.e., defendant no. 2 had purchased other properties, which are mentioned in schedule 'b' to the plaint. it was alleged that these properties were illegally purchased by the defendant no. 2 in his own name, whereas, it should have been purchased in the name of the plaintiff ..... plaintiff filed a suit for a permanent injunction restraining the defendant nos. 1 and 2 from interfering with the plaintiffs possession over the property mentioned in schedule 'c' to the plaint. it was alleged that the property mentioned in schedule 'c' was bequeathed to the plaintiff as well as to the defendant no. 3 by their grandfather, sri balwant singh, on .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 16 2006 (HC)

Subha Maheshwari Vs. Rajul Maheshwari and anr.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : 2006(3)AWC2544; I(2006)DMC764

..... directed deletion of issue no. 2. that does not give an occasion for deleting the aforesaid three paragraphs of the divorce petition. the order passed by the court below, thus, rejecting the application under order 6 rule 16, c.p.c. moved by the petitioner is wholly justified and does not warrant any interference in extraordinary jurisdiction of this court under ..... court below has dismissed the prayer of the petitioner for deleting those facts from the pleadings of the divorce petition, i do not find that any sort of illegality or procedural irregularity has been committed. the aforesaid issue no. 2 which is framed as 'whether o.p. has illicit relations with ajay batra as alleged' appears that the same on the ..... order of the family court dated 16.7.2005 whereby the prayer of the petitioner for deletion of paragraphs 2, 4 and 5 of the divorce petition has been partly rejected.3. the petition of divorce made by the respondent no. 1 before the family court is on the ground of cruelty. for that purpose certain facts have been pleaded in ..... the aforesaid three paragraphs of the plaint stating that the petitioner wife had been in illicit relations with one ranveer and subsequently a second man ajay batra. this act of the wife has given a lot of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 18 2005 (HC)

Ram Bharosey Vs. Smt. Manju Agrawal and anr.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : 2005(2)AWC2162

..... been filed only to delay of the disposal of the appeal, therefore the amendment prayed, cannot be granted by means of the amendment in written statement. the application therefore was rejected by the appellate authority. thus, this writ petition.4. learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner-tenant submitted before me that the appellate authority has committed error in denying the ..... 1972, (in short 'the act') before whom the appeal under section 22 of 'the act' is pending, whereby the amendment application filed on behalf of the petitioner-tenant has been rejected by the appellate authority.2. the brief facts of the present case are that the respondent-landlady manju agrawal filed an application under section 21(1)(a) of the act ..... (3)awc2162 , wherein the division bench after considering the law laid down by the apex court has ruled :'...the amendment is not permissible if the very basic structure of the plaint is changed or the amendment itself is not bona fide. in case the facts were in the knowledge of the party at the time of presenting the pleadings, unless satisfactory .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 04 1963 (HC)

Ram Bali Vs. Tulsi

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1964All231

..... invalid, (2) the award was given without taking evidence and (3) that the award was undated and no notice was given about the filing of the award. the trial court rejected the first two contentions but accepted the third contention as it considered that no proper evidence was recorded by the arbitrators and notice of the hearing should have been given ..... 2. the facts giving rise to the application are these : ram babu plaintiff filed a suit for partition of share of the plots in list a filed with the plaint. tulsi defendant no. 1 was the main contestant. the plaintiff alleged that he was the son of jaganandan the uncle of defendant no. 1. jagannath defendant no. 2 was alleged ..... to the parties in writing. according to the learned munsif this constituted legal misconduct and therefore the award was set aside. on appeal to the civil judge by the opposite party, the evidence of the parties end their witnesses was considered and the lower appellate court preferred to believe the evidence of the arbitrator rajbans. it ..... orders.c. manchanda, j. 1. this is a revision application against the order of the civil judge, jaunpur dated, the 27th of february 1962, whereby the order of the munsif holding that there was legal misconduct by the arbitrators in making the award was set aside. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 17 1986 (HC)

Fabcon, Corporation Incorporated, in U.S.A. Vs. Industrial Engineering ...

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1987All338

..... this court for decision as contemplated under the proviso to section 104 of the patents act, 1970. this was opposed by the defendant. the application filed by the plaintiff was rejected by the trial court against which this revision is preferred by the plaintiff.3. having heard learned counsel for the parties i do not find merit in the revision. section ..... it is asserted that there is no valid patent held as such by the plaintiff and no relief can be had on the basis of the averments contained in the plaint subsequent to the defence being put in, there was an application filed by the plaintiff wherein the plaintiff asserted that the defendant be taken to have raised a counter-claim .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 07 1950 (HC)

Mt. Mojibunisa Bibi and ors. Vs. Kadir Bux

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1951All380

..... , this objection has no force. as stated above, the registrar of the small cause court at calcutta rejected the judgment-debtor's objection on abe ground that he had no jurisdiction to entertain it. he, therefore, did not decide it on the merits. further, ..... to order 21, rule 4. under that rule'where a decree has been passed in a suit of which the value as set forth in the plaint did not exceed two thousand rupees and which, as regards its subject-matter, is not excepted by the law for the time being in force from ..... by counsel for the decree-holders. it has been contended that the civil judge had no jurisdiction to entertain the objection of the judgment-debtor when the same objection had been dismissed fey the presidency small cause court at calcutta ..... prayer was made in it for transfer of the decree to a court which had no jurisdiction to execute the decree. this objection was dismissed by the civil judge. on appeal, however, the objection was accepted and the execution application was dismissed as time barred.3. two points have been urged before us ..... it was not the function of the transferee court to question the order of transfer. then the judgment-debtor filed an objection in the court of the civil judge, jaunpur, on 27-7-1945, and the main point taken on his behalf was that the second execution application was barred by limitation because .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 06 2001 (HC)

Krishna Mohan and Another Vs. Balkrishna Chaturvedi (Dead) Through L.R ...

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR2001All334

..... the above execution case smt. ram kail for herself and as guardian of the appellants filed objection under order xxi, rule 90. c.p.c. which was rejected on 4.3.1967. thereafter the mother of the appellants did not file any declaratory suit, therefore, the suit filed by appellants was barred and not maintainable ..... was constructed by their father ram avtar and he was in possession over it till his life time. the open land shown with green colour in the plaint map was appurtenant to the said house and was being used by their father for the purpose of 'sehan' for tethering cattle, preparing cow dung cakes ..... 1982 are allowed and second appeal nos. 2214 of 1982 and 2830 of 1982 are dismissed, accordingly the judgment and decree of lower appellate court in civil appeal nos. 45 of 1979 and 46 of 1979 are set aside and the judgment and decree of trial court partly decreeing suit no. 91 of ..... grounds which they had taken in their suit no. 91 of 1968 and raising further pleas of nonjoinder and limitation etc.6. the trial court [additional civil judge) framed necessary issues in both the suits, separately but consolidated the above suits and decided the same by a common judgment. on considering the evidence ..... been filed against the judgment and decree dated 13.5.1982 passed by sri k. c. bhargava, the then learned 1st additional district judge, allahabad in civil appeal no. 46 of 1979, 45 of 1979, 642 of 1979 and 571 of 1979 respectively which were decided by a common judgment.2. krishna mohan .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 19 1957 (HC)

Raja Ram Jaiswal Vs. Ganesh Prasad and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1959All29

..... be made personally liable for the plaintiffs' commission as he had all along been acting for and on behalf of the company. both these contentions were rejected by the learned single judge and the appeal of sri raja ram jaiswal was dismissed. permission to file an appeal to a division bench was, however, ..... no decree could, therefore, have been passed against the appellant alone when the suit was dismissed against the other defendants.(3) it was not clear from the plaint whether the plaintiff was claiming rs. 2,000/- on the basis of. the express terms of the contract contained in the letter dated 22-12-1941, ..... our opinion it cannot be allowed to be raised for the first time in the letters patent stage. it may, however, be observed that from the plaint it appears to be clear that the plaintiff claimed the amount in dispute by enforcement of the contract entered into between the parties. there was, therefore, ..... had acted in this transaction not in his personal capacity but as agent he ought to have raised the plea specifically in his written statement, the learned civil judge definitely found that 'in my opinion the defendant no. 2b. raja ram jaiswal is personally liable for the payment of the commission which he ..... it was not the case of either party that the position of the appellant was that of an agent. the plaintiff did not allege in the plaint that the appellant was an agent and the appellant too did not plead in his written statement that he had acted in the capacity of an agent .....

Tag this Judgment!


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