Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: rejection of plaint code of civil procedure Court: allahabad Year: 1969 Page 1 of about 48 results (0.085 seconds)

Dec 31 1969 (HC)

Amjad Ali and ors. Vs. Muhammad Israil and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Dec-31-1969

Reported in : (1898)ILR20All11

..... being supposed that in this judgment i have had in my contemplation any of the cases under section 54 of the code of civil procedure in which the court may reject a plaint. none of these cases come within the scope of the present appeal.9. some argument was addressed to us on ..... the suit was not time-barred and that the plaint was properly stamped when presented on november 16th. the district judge on these ..... it was presented, and that 'subsequent proceedings cannot invalidate a valid plaint.' the suit was ultimately dismissed on the merits.3. on appeal by the plaintiffs the defendants put in an objection under section 561 of the code of civil procedure. their contention was that the subordinate judge was wrong in holding that ..... allow this appeal, and, setting aside the decree of the lower appellate court, i would remand the case under the section 562 of the code of civil procedure for a decision on the merits, the lower appellate court having decided the suit on a preliminary point. i would direct that costs should ..... an analogy which it was sought to draw from the practice of the high court in cases under section 3 of the court fees act. the procedure .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 31 1969 (HC)

Damodar Das Vs. Gokal Chand and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Dec-31-1969

Reported in : (1885)ILR7All79

..... , are the general scope and objects of the provisions contained in section 53 of the code.16. as to the nature of the power conferred upon the court by section 53, i need not say much, for it seems to mo obvious that the power of rejecting plaints under that section is essentially a discretionary power, exercisable summarily by the court suo motu ..... be answered in the negative.mahmood, j.9. the question put to us in this case, though expressed in general' terms, is whether, under section 53 of the civil procedure code, a plaint may be rejected at any time subsequent to the first hearing of the suit; and, in considering this question, i have arrived at the same conclusion as the learned chief justice.10 ..... referred to us must be answered in the negative. we think that the words 'at or before the first hearing 'in section 53 of the civil procedure code are mandatory and not directory, and that a plaint cannot be ' rejected,' 'returned for amendment,' or 'amended then and there' by a court after the first hearing. it will be convenient in dealing with the point before ..... (which relates to the same matter), taken with the provisions of section 4 of the act, leaves no room for doubting the proposition that applications under section 328 of the civil procedure code cannot be entertained after the expiration of the period of one month therein specified, unless indeed the rules of computing the period of limitation in themselves permit an extension of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 31 1969 (HC)

Bandhan Singh Vs. Solhu and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Dec-31-1969

Reported in : (1886)ILR8All191

..... judge's order may be, is this court empowered to interfere with it under section 622.6. the order of the subordinate judge is substantially an order rejecting the plaint. it was made on the ground that the plaintiff bad joined a cause of action with a suit for recovery of immoveable property. this may be ..... a misapplication of section 44(a); but the effect of the order was to reject the plaint, and such an order is a decree, with reference to the definition in section 2 and is appealable as a decree to the judge, and in ..... to him.4. the plaintiff has now appealed to this court to revise the orders of the courts below under section 622 of the civil procedure code.5. there was no appeal to the judge from the order of the subordinate judge under any of the provisions in section 588 of the ..... civil procedure code. he therefore rightly dismissed the appeal, which had been instituted as an appeal from an order, and this court cannot interfere in revision with his ..... j.1. this is an application under section 622 of the civil procedure code. the petitioner instituted a suit by filing a plaint in the subordinate judge's court, in which he claimed to recover possession of a house, together with some grain which was stored in it. the plaint was registered. subsequently to its registration, it appears to have .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 31 1969 (HC)

Gulab Rai Vs. Mangli Lal

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Dec-31-1969

Reported in : (1885)ILR7All42

..... judge was a 'decree' within the meaning of section 2 of the civil procedure code; that it was appealable, and could not, therefore, be made the subject of revision.2. there can be no doubt that 'an order rejecting a plaint' is treated by the code as a 'decree,' under the express words of section 2, and ..... the learned pandit contends, that with reference to the provisions of the last paragraph of section 582, the word ' plaint,' as used in section 2, must be ..... of section 582 of the code, and the proposition of law laid down in that case may seem doubtful, but we are not directly concerned with the point decided in that case.4. in the civil procedure code there is no separate provision which allows the appellate court to 'reject' a memorandum of appeal on ..... the ground of its being barred by limitation. section 543 is limited to cases in which the memorandum of appeal is not drawn up in the manner prescribed by the code, and it ..... only by applying section 54(c), mutatis mutandis (as provided by the last part of section 582), to appeals that the code can be understood to make provision for rejection of appeals as barred by limitation. however, section 4 of the limitation act clearly lays down that every 'appeal presented after .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 31 1969 (HC)

Thakuri and ors. Vs. Bramha NaraIn and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Dec-31-1969

Reported in : (1897)ILR19All60

..... .4. the learned judge has relied in support of his view on the ruling of the madras high court in sonachala v. manika i.l.r. 8 mad. 516. that case is distinguishable from the present. it was not a suit under section 539 of the code of civil procedure. ..... rejecting the plaint, and remand the case to his court with the direction that he should fix a time within which the deficiency should be made good, and, in case of the plaintiffs' failure to supply the deficiency within the time fixed, he should proceed in the manner provided by section 54 of the code of civil procedure ..... code of civil procedure.3. the learned judge was of opinion that the suit was substantially one for possession. he ordered the plaintiffs to value the suit as a suit for possession and to pay the amount of court-fees requisite for such a suit within a time fixed by him. the plaintiffs not having complied with this order he has rejected the plaint ..... appellants, and that the appeal may proceed at the instance of those appellants.2. the suit was brought under section 539 of the code of civil procedure by three hindus who alleged that a trust had been created for certain charitable and religious purposes by eani mahtab kunwar; that the ..... banerji and aikman, jj.1. this is an appeal from an order of the district judge of saharanpur rejecting a plaint on the ground that the reliefs sought in the plaint had not been properly valued and the necessary amount of court-fees had not been paid within the time .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 31 1969 (HC)

Chunni Lall and anr. Vs. Ajudhia Prasad and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Dec-31-1969

Reported in : (1897)ILR19All240

knox and burkitt, jj.1. this is an appeal from an order rejecting a plaint purporting to have been passed under section 54, clause (b) of the code of civil procedure. the plaintiff sued for possession of certain lands and houses. one of the defendants in the written statement filed by him set out that the relief sought had been undervalued. ..... was not an order rejecting the plaint, but an order dismissing the suit.4. the contention which the defendant raised was precisely similar to that which was raised in reference to an extension of time which had been asked for, but was refused by the high court of calcutta, on an application under section 549 of the code of civil procedure. the words in that ..... 549 of the code of civil procedure should be applied to the words in section 10 of act vii of 1870. we note that in the case of bhugwandas bagla v. haji abu ahmad i.l.r. 16 bom. 263, the construction put by their lordships on section 549 was held to be applicable to the words 'the plaint shall be rejected' in section 54 ..... of the code. we hold .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 31 1969 (HC)

Baldeo Prasad and anr. Vs. Grish Chandar Bhose

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Dec-31-1969

Reported in : (1880)ILR2All754

..... over to plaintiffs; that it was drawn payable to babu hari mohan banarji, who indorsed it. the judge has rejected the plaint on the ground that it does not disclose a cause of action. this is, however, erroneous.2. under section 61, code of civil procedure, a suit may be maintained on a lost negotiable instrument, and, if it be proved that the instrument is ..... to be the endorser of the cheque, cannot give the new cheque asked for without the co-operation of the alleged drawer, captain ellis; and the plaintiff should amend his plaint by joining captain ellis as a defendant in the suit, and praying that the relief sought may be given against both defendants.4. the judge will return the ..... court may make such decree as it would have made if the plaintiff had produced the instrument in court when the plaint was presented, and had at the same time delivered a copy of the instrument to be filed with the plaint; and in by les on bills of exchange, 12th ed., chapter xxviii, p. 378, we find that the relief administered .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 31 1969 (HC)

Mazhar HusaIn and anr. Vs. Nidhi Lal

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Dec-31-1969

Reported in : (1885)ILR7All230

..... plaint, as soon as the fact that the suit is a 'munsif's case' has been ascertained. there is a marked distinction between the terms of section 53 of the code of civil procedure and those of section 57. the words 'at or before the first hearing' are absent from section 57, and instead of 'may be' rejected ..... , act xiv of 1882).22. high courts, in the exercise of their original jurisdiction, are not subject to the provisions of section 57 of the code of civil procedure, but district and subordinate judges are bound by them; and i fail, with reference to those provisions of the law, to understand how a subordinate ..... that the case of the presidency small cause courts is not truly analogous, because (section 638, act xiv of 1882) section 57 of the code of civil procedure does not apply to high courts; and that the intention of the legislature was, while preventing subordinate judges from throwing open their courts to suitors ..... conferred by section 19 of act vi of 1871 is not conferred absolutely, but is made subject to the restrictions imposed on it by the code of civil procedure; that the terms of section 57(a) of act xiv of 1882 constitute an express provision of the law, ousting (except under the provision ..... local government with the powers of a munsif under section 13, or such suits had been transferred to them by the district judge under the code of civil procedure.7. the jurisdiction of a munsif under section 20, act vi of 1871, is exactly the same as it was by section 13, act .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 31 1969 (HC)

Mathura Singh Vs. Bhawani Singh and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Dec-31-1969

Reported in : (1900)ILR22All248

..... to entertain it by reason of sections 26, 31 and 45 of the code of civil procedure, which show that plaintiffs cannot join in respect of distinct causes of action against the same defendants. in such a case either the plaint must be rejected, if not amended so as to remove the defect (and here from ..... cause of action. but this court held that the first court, instead of dismissing the suit, ought, under section 53 of the code of civil procedure, to have returned the plaint for amendment by striking out the names of all the plaintiffs except one, who should be allowed to continue the suit alone. accordingly ..... precluded the court from considering the issues involved in the case, either by reason of absence of jurisdiction, or by reason of rules of procedure prescribed in the code of civil procedure, or some other cause of a similar nature; the inability, however, of the court to consider the case must not be due to ..... this court remanded the case under section 562 with a direction to the first court to return the plaint for amendment in the manner ..... but to the plaintiff and a partner who had not joined in the suit. the judgment expressly says 'it was not merely a case of procedure; it was a case of a plaintiff coming into court and failing to prove a cause of action in himself against the defendant, and thus .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 31 1969 (HC)

Manon Vs. Jino

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Dec-31-1969

Reported in : (1896)ILR18All125

..... be justified on this ground alone in dismissing the suit. we are of opinion that the code of civil procedure does not give a court power to reject such a plaint. it is true that under section 53(b)(iii) of the code a plaint may be returned for amendment, if it 'joins causes of action which ought not to ..... suit brought to set aside a deed of gift. in their judgment their lordships of the privy council say: 'the only ground of action alleged in the plaint is that the hibbanama of the 30th of may 1881 was a fabricated document, and that her (i.e., the plaintiff's) alleged signature was a forgery ..... loss. with reference to this last plea, it may be observed, that it is not alleged in the bond that the property was stolen.5. in the plaint as originally framed, two reliefs in the alternative were claimed:(1) that it may be declared by the court that the bond aforesaid, dated the 21st of ..... dying within the ten years the amount secured may be recovered from the hypothecated property with interest at 12 annas per cent, per mensem.4. the plaint alleges that the defendants colluded with one another to forge the bond, and that in order to supply a consideration for the bond they invented the story ..... be joined in the same suit.' but this, we consider, refers to causes of action the joinder of which is prohibited by section 44 of the code .....

Tag this Judgment!


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