Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: rejection of plaint code of civil procedure Court: allahabad Year: 1936 Page 1 of about 7 results (0.026 seconds)

Dec 14 1936 (PC)

Pt. Amba Shankar Vs. Mt. Seoti

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Dec-14-1936

Reported in : AIR1937All280

..... the suit. if the plaint is 'rejected' on one of such grounds, the order rejecting the plaint is a decree as defined in the civil procedure code. it is, however, perfectly clear that, before an order can amount to such rejection as is contemplated by section 2(2), civil p.c., it must be 'rejection' authorized by some provision of the code of civil procedure. if the plaint is rejected for a cause for which ..... the coda-does not empower the court to do so, it will not be a decree, as defined in the civil procedure code, even though the court may use ..... the word 'reject' in disposing of the suit. what ..... can be done by a court of first instance in reference to a plaint may also .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 11 1936 (PC)

Chunna Mal Vs. Bhagwant Kishore

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : May-11-1936

Reported in : AIR1936All584

..... considerations lead to the conclusion that the scheme of the code of civil procedure is not that the application is from the very start a sort of a double document both a plaint and an application and that if the application is dismissed the plaint still remains and the suit is still pending until an additional ..... section 303 than that contemplated by section 310.7. as there were no negative words in. the act 8 of 1857 requiring the rejection of the plaint under circumstances like those before their lordships nor anything in its enactments which obliged their lordships to say that the petition should not be ..... the plaintiff out of court. the high court also took the view that although the plaint could not be rejected altogether and should be retained as a plaint it should be taken to have bean converted into a plaint only from the day when court-fees were paid. their lordships of the privy council ..... merely by withdrawing the previous application upon which those proceedings were instituted. if he does withdraw it, the court passes an order that the application is rejected, but if; may also and often would, at the same time, pass an order that costs are to be paid. the mere withdrawal has ..... lordships intended to lay down that where an application is granted the position is governed by the old section 308; and where the application is rejected the position is governed by section 310. their lordships were dealing exclusively with a case which was not expressly provided for in act 8 of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 04 1936 (PC)

S. Zahoor Muhammad Khan Vs. Dr. M.X. De-noronha and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Feb-04-1936

Reported in : 164Ind.Cas.730

..... had not been so appended. permission was therefore, sought to insert those boundaries as well. the learned munsif rejected this application with the result that the parties went 1o trial on the unamended plaint and on the merits the learned munsiff was against the plaintiff and the suit was dismissed on january 12, ..... order for substitution of names was irregular. we arc of the opinion that these two grounds of appeal arc untenable in view of section 105 (1), civil procedure code. it is conceded by the parties that no appeal lay against the order for substitution, nor was a revision permissible. it is, however, said by ..... the subject-matter of the suit lay in bansmandi and qasimganj both and further the boundaries of the plot in bansmandi alone were inserted in the plaint at a subsequent stage and the boundaries of the plot in mohalla qasimganj were not so inserted. this mistake on the part of the plaintiff ..... appeared to be a firm and as such it should sue through a named individual, the plaintiff applied for amendment and prayed that the heading of the plaint should be m. x. de noronha & son through w. c. de noronha senior. the suit was eventually dismissed by the learned munsif on january ..... allowing the amendment sought for in application dated november 46, 1931, giving further permission to the plaintiff to make any other matter clear in the plaint along with the said amendment.' it appears that the plaintiff brought a suit in the court of the munsif of oawn-pore for the recovery of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 05 1936 (PC)

Bisheshar Dayal Vs. Mt. Jafri Begam and anr.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Nov-05-1936

Reported in : AIR1937All251

..... altogether from the authority of the privy council in the decision above referred to we would observe that there is nothing in the code of civil procedure which forbids a mortgagee from impleading a person who claims (sic) paramount title to the mortgaged property. under order 1, rule 3 ..... present suit than she would have been if she had appeared and taken the defence of no jurisdiction in the mortgage suit and the defence having been rejected and she had not appealed against the order of the munsif.6. learned counsel for the respondents maintained that the decision of the learned munsif that ..... jafri begam's name in the khewat was subsequent to the execution of the mortgage. it is true that the averments in para. 5 of the plaint in the mortgage suit are somewhat vague. it is difficult to conceive how in the circumstances the mortgagee could have been more specific. there can be ..... their lordships laid down the principle that before a party can be said to be properly impleaded a distinct case must be made against him in the plaint. we have to consider therefore whether in the present suit a distinct case was made against mt. jafri begam in the mortgage suit. we have referred ..... suit he impleaded the mortgagor, mt. jafri begam, wife of the mortgagor, and mt. fakhr-un-nissa, the original mortgagee. in para. 5 of the plaint bisheshar dayal averred:defendant 3 is a subsequent vendee of a portion of the property mortgaged. mehdi ali khan, the mortgagor got, after the execution of the mortgage .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 31 1936 (PC)

Lakhan Vs. Emperor

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Aug-31-1936

Reported in : AIR1936All788; 165Ind.Cas.769

..... report is made by a police officer and a complaint is not.23. then i come to a particular class of offences for which the code provides a particular procedure which must take place before a magistrate can take cognizance, and of these section 195 deals with three groups of offences. group (a) ..... of police and the case be proceeded with. not to insist on a strict compliance with the provisions of the law would be to perpetuate irregular procedure for the future. when a proper complaint is filed hereafter, it may be more appropriate on the facts alleged in the report to prosecute the ..... the report of a police officer in either only cognizable or only non-cognizable cases. as pointed out by sir john woodroffe in his commentary on the criminal procedure code, p. 12, note 17:but now section 190(b) has been amended so as to include any report whether in cognizable or non-cognizable cases, ..... a view to his taking action. he had before him both the report of the circle inspector and the endorsement of the superintendent of police and rejected the contention that the endorsement should, be taken as incorporating the preceding report of the circle inspector which had contained a definite recommendation that; a ..... next the allegation must be made 'with a view to his taking action under this code.' this does not require that there should be a formal prayer to that effect; in this a complaint differs from a plaint in a civil court, where there must be a prayer setting out the relief for which the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 18 1936 (PC)

B. Jang Bahadur Singh and ors. Vs. Basdeo Singh and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Apr-18-1936

Reported in : AIR1936All549

..... and takes delivery of possession. an application for enforcement of a collateral security is wholly out of place in execution proceedings in the pre-emption case. in this view we reject the second contention put forward on behalf of the sureties.5. the third and the last contention raises a question of some importance. it is argued that the sureties were ..... after that event roust be considered to be in wrongful possession and liable to pay mesne profits to the pre-emptor. the expression 'means profits' has been defined in the civil procedure code as profits which the person in wrongful possession of property actually received or might with ordinary diligence have received therefrom together with interest on such profits. according to the ..... each of the two cases, the plaintiffs are entitled to rs. 4.22 per year and interest thereon in each case. the accuracy of the figure mentioned in the plaints has not been specifically challenged in the written statements or at any time after they were filed, and we are disposed to accept the plaintiffs' figures. the plaintiffs have claimed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 14 1936 (PC)

Hakim MoIn UddIn Vs. Shiekh Abdus Samad

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Oct-14-1936

Reported in : AIR1937All78

..... special damage provided the consent of the advocate general is obtained and the other conditions of the section are satisfied. the section enacts only a rule of procedure and does not, as is made clear by sub-section (2), deprive any person of any right which he may have independently of its provisions. ..... trial court found in favour of the defendant and dismissed the suit holding that it was barred by section 321, municipalities act. on appeal the learned civil judge found that the suit was not barred and remanded the suit to the trial court for decision. against this order of remand the present appeal ..... the grant of permission by the municipal board to the defendant but it was rejected. thereafter the defendant set up his mill and worked it for sometime. the plaintiff has stated his case in para. 4 of his plaint as follows:the vibrations, sound and smoke o the defendant's mill have rendered ..... sub-section (2) of section 91 civil p.c., lays down:nothing in this section shall be deemed to limit or otherwise affect any right of suit which may exist independently of its ..... in respect thereof. the words 'public nuisance' have not been defined in the code. by virtue of section 3(44) general clauses act, it means a 'public nuisance'' as defined by the indian penal code. under section 268, penal code, a 'public nuisance' is an act or illegal omission,which causes any common injury .....

Tag this Judgment!


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