Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: rejection of plaint code of civil procedure Court: allahabad Year: 1971 Page 1 of about 13 results (0.054 seconds)

Dec 16 1971 (HC)

Gobardhan Singh Vs. Barsati

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Dec-16-1971

Reported in : AIR1972All246

..... , he made an application on december 17, 1968. under section 151 of the code of civil procedure praying that the order of december 11 1968. consigning the record be set aside and the suit be proceeded with. this application was treated as an application for extension of time. this application was rejected by the munsif on sept. 2, 1969. on the ground that, since ..... reported by the munsarim on august 4, 1967. the deficiency in court-fees was not made good within the time allowed and on october 4. 1967, the plaint was rejected as insufficiently stamped. on october 19, 1967. the applicant made an application for restoration and on december 7, 1968, the application was allo.vt'd. the -,pera-tive portion ..... relevant facts. the suit, out of which this revision arises, was filed on july 4. 1966. by the applicant in the court of the munsif. mirzapur. some amendments in the plaint were allowed by the munsif by his order dated april 11, 1967. consequent to the^e amendments, there was a deficiency in the court-fees by rs. 249.50 as ..... the earlier application for restoration stood rejected on december 11. 1968. the court had no power either to extend the period or to pass any further order restoring the plaint. the munsif relied upon the decision of this court in : air1936all477 (supra). it may here be mentioned that, though this order .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 02 1971 (HC)

Krishna Singh Vs. Mathura Ahir and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Nov-02-1971

Reported in : AIR1972All273

..... regard to this matter had been taken (vide grounds nos. 16 and 17) and an application under order xli, rule 27 of the code of civil procedure had been filed in the lower appellate court, the defendant appellant was wrongly denied opportunity of producing evidence to rebut the plaintiff's evidence. ..... in the course of his argument, learned counsel for the defendant appellant urged that the trial court had wrongly and without any legal justification rejected the defendant's application for permission to adduce further evidence in rebuttal of the evidence which the plaintiff had been permitted to adduce even, after ..... has been stated hereinabove, the submissions made on behalf of the appellant about custom or usage are not of much importance. even if the plaint suffered from omission of necessary averments or lack of particulars, the appellant cannot be permitted to make capital out of it. the issues upon ..... by the learned counsel for the appellant, but necessary foundation of the existence of such custom had been laid by the plaintiff in his plaint and that legal evidence to prove the custom had also been adduced. it was, therefore, submitted that even assuming that the findings recorded ..... mat and the mahants of several other maths or religious institutions. it is not necessary to mention the details of the other averments in the plaint, nor is itnecessary to mention in detail the various pleas raised in the written statements filed by the defendants. it will be sufficient, however .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 29 1971 (HC)

Karuna Shanker Dube Vs. Krishna Kant Shukla and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Jul-29-1971

Reported in : AIR1972All478

..... be gone into by the court and the compromise should be enforced under order 23, rule 3, code of civil procedure. in the present case on the other hand, as i have already said, from the plaint allegations themselves some support is received to the petitioner's claim or interest in the property and ..... in the peculiar facts of this case the lower court ought to have first decided the petitioner's application under order 1, rule 10, code of civil procedure and should have dealt with the compromise only after that was done. as matters stand the revision must be allowed.4. the revision is accordingly ..... rule. there is yet another consideration and it is this that according to the allegations contained in the application under order 1, rule 10, code of civil procedure the petitioner karuna shanker had been deliberately omitted from the array of parties in the suit. it was alleged that the parties were designing a ..... had no share in the disputed property and the opposite parties were the only co-sharers. in the application under order 1, rule 10, code of civil procedure however, karuna shanker contested that there was any separation of saligram with his other brothers and it was maintained on his behalf that the disputed ..... not be accepted as it affected his rights acquired by purchase pendente lite and that he should be made a party to the suit should be rejected and a decree in terms of the compromise should be passed. the broad proposition laid down in that case also was that the word 'lawful .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 05 1971 (HC)

Kundan Kishanlal Vs. Board of Revenue, U.P. at Allahabad and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Aug-05-1971

Reported in : AIR1972All184

..... the one-third share which he had already occupied. his contention was that the opposite parties had failed to apply for restitution under section 144, civil procedure code and by virtue of sub-section (2) thereof the suit was barred. it was further contended that he perfected his title to the extent of ..... application is made. in my opinion that provision of the civil procedure code has no application. where an ex parte decree is set aside, it cannot be said that the decree has been varied or reversed, a decree ..... the petitioner has raised three contentions. his first contention is that the suit is barred by sub-section (2) of section 144, civil procedure code. sub-section (1) of section 144, civil procedure code provides for restitution where a decree has been varied or reversed and sub-section (2) thereof bars a fresh suit where no such ..... of any variation or reversal of any prior decree. a restitution in such a case may be claimed under section 151, civil procedure code. but sub-section (2) of section 144, civil procedure code will not come into play at all so that it cannot be said that a fresh suit would be barred. this view ..... act seeking a declaration that they were the owners to the extent of 5/6th share of the land comprised in schedule i annexed to the plaint and the petitioner was the owner of the remaining 1/6th. the petitioner contested the suit on various grounds. he contended that earlier in 1950 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 29 1971 (HC)

Farooq Ahmad Vs. Muneshwar Bux Singh

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Apr-29-1971

Reported in : AIR1972All155

..... ram ram charan v. dy. commr., bahraich, air 1968 all 321 in which it was laid down that where issue of notice under section 80 of the civil procedure code by the plaintiff is admitted by the defen-dant, the onus to prove the notice to be defective lies on the defendant. the application of this rule to ..... in dispute. what he contended was that the service was effected less than 30 days before the institution of the suit. that plea of fact has been rejected by the lower courts and therefore does not call for consideration in the second appeal, it is to be taken for granted that the service was made more ..... onus by relying upon the plaintiff-respondent's own averment in paragraph 2 of the plaint. the learned district judge who decided the first appeal, relied on the aforesaid decision in mast ram ram charan's case but he did not further take ..... to exist.there is no reason why the defendant should not be allowed, in discharging the onus, to rely upon the contents of paragraph 2 of the plaint which indicates that the notice given was one for vacation of the shop. in the absence of anything to the contrary, the appellant has thus discharged his ..... notice only demanded vacation of the shop. in this connection reliance of the learned counsel for the appellant is placed on paragraph 2 of the plaint and this paragraph recites that a registered notice for vacation of the shop was given to the defendant on 13-2-1968. the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 24 1971 (HC)

Shiva Prasad and anr. Vs. State

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Feb-24-1971

Reported in : 1971CriLJ1574

..... ; it excludes the jurisdiction of the court to proceed under sections 476 to 479, in respect of offences specified in section 195 (1) (b) and (c) of the code of criminal procedure only where a person appearing before the court as a witness has intentionally given false evidence in any stage of the judicial proceeding or has intentionally fabricated false evidence ..... purposes of the case by accused no. 1 in a judicial proceeding in the suit which was being tried by the learned 1st additional civil judge, kanpur.17. section 479-a of the criminal procedure code deals with procedure in certain cases of false evidence and the relevant portion of that section is as follows:-notwithstanding anything contained in sections 476 to 479 inclusive ..... v. p. goel, learned brief: holder for the state submitted that the com-' plaint against the accused was under sec tion 471 of the indian penal code and the only procedure laid down in respect of such a complaint is under section 476, criminal procedure code, and, therefore, it was not necessary for the learned 1st additional civil judge to follow the provisions of section 479-a ..... the applicants. moreover this application in revision was admitted on 15th april, 1968 and has been pending for more than two years and, therefore, i will not be justified in rejecting the revision only on the ground that the applicants did not approach the sessions judge before filing the revision in this court. i, therefore, respectfully agree with the observations of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 20 1971 (HC)

Saeed Ahmad Vs. Murli Dhar and anr.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Jan-20-1971

Reported in : AIR1971All331

..... act and of any rules made thereunder every election petition shall be tried by the tribunal as nearly as may be in accordance with the procedure applicable under the code of civil procedure.' provisions of section 90 (2) of the representation of the people act are almost similar to that contained in rule 52 of the rules ..... questioning the election of any candidate is to be presented on the ground mentioned in sections 100 and 101 within a certain period. provisions of the code of civil procedure have been made applicable to the hearing of the election petition under section 90(2) of the act, which runs as follows: 'subject to the ..... be filed, that the power of amendment could be exercised only subject to this provision, and that accordingly an amendment which raised a new charge should be rejected if a fresh petition on that charge would be barred on that date. he also observed that the matter was not one of discretion but of jurisdiction ..... , the court has jurisdiction to allow amendment of plaint even in such cases. the fact that the claim has since become barred by time is a factor which has to be taken into consideration in ..... to allow amendment of pleadings, although as a general rule, a plaintiff is not to be allowed to amend his plaint by introducing a new cause of action, which, since the date of the plaint has become barred by limitation. as held in the case of charan das v. amir khan, air 1921 pc 50 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 15 1971 (HC)

Guni Ram and anr. Vs. Kodai and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Feb-15-1971

Reported in : AIR1971All434

..... proved and tendered in evidence. it is after the document is formally proved that the endorsement referred in rule 4 of order xiii of the code of civil procedure is to be made, i am clear in my mind that the admission of evidence by a court to prove due execution of an instrument ..... producing them. rule 8 empowers the court to impound the document when produced.thus the substantive law in the stamp act and the procedural law in the c. p. code do make a clear distinction between production of a document and its admission in evidence. to my mind under section 35 of the ..... unstamped.4. the learned munsif believed the evidence adduced on behalf of the defendants and held that guniram had not executed any agreement. the learned munsif further rejected the document. paper no. 30/a.1, as he found it to be unstamped. the result was that the plaintiffs' suit was dismissed.5. the ..... distinction between production of an instrument and its admission in evidence or in acting upon it. that is also the distinction made under the scheme of the civil procedure code. order xiii, rule 1 lays down when the documentary evidence is to be produced. then rule 2 deals with the effect of non-production of documents. ..... was a denial of the existence of any agreement to sell,3. the plaintiff did not file the document evidencing the said agreement along with the plaint. on 17-9-1965 the defendants filed their written statement and on that date the issues were struck. the plaintiffs also filed an application on the .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 07 1971 (HC)

irfan Ahmad Vs. Nabil Ahmad Khan

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : May-07-1971

Reported in : AIR1972All15

..... the amount as mesne profits and prayed that an issue be struck on this plea, but the plaintiff's prayer was rejected. thereafter the plaintiff filed the present application for amendment of the plaint, giving rise to this revision.3. the amendment application (kha-74) has been placed before me in extenso. the ..... the administration of justice. a party cannot be refused just relief merely because of some mistake, negligence, inadvertence or even infraction of the rules of procedure. the court always gives leave to amend the pleading of a party, unless it is satisfied that the party applying was acting male fide, or that ..... limitations. since the name in which the action was instituted was merely a mis-description of the original plaintiff, no question of limitation arises; the plaint must be deemed on amendment to have been instituted in the name of the real plaintiff on the date on which it was originally instituted.' ..... late the supreme court has been taking a liberal view of the scope of amendment of pleadings as contemplated by order vi, rule 17, civil p. c. in jai jai ram manohar lal v. national building material supply. gurgaon (air 1969 sc 1267) their lordships observed in paragraph 5 ..... ordergyanendra kumar, j.1. this is a revision by the defendant against the order of the civil judge, malihabad at lucknow, allowing amendment of the plaint. the parties ' were partners in a business which stood dissolved. there is, however, difference of opinion between the parties as to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 24 1971 (HC)

Moorti Shree Behari Ji Vs. Prem Das and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Nov-24-1971

Reported in : AIR1972All287

..... all 540 (fb) (supra) on the observation that it related to a joint stock company, hence not applicable. the court below thus was in error in rejecting the application of the deity for that reason. 7. there remains then the question whether the finding of the court below that the deity was possessed of sufficient ..... court below first to consider if the application of the deity for permission to sue in forma-pauperis could be rejected on any of the grounds mentioned in rule 5 of order 33. c. p. code and if not then to make an enquiry whether the deity was possessed of sufficient means so as to pay ..... court-fees. 4. the plaintiff in the proposed suit was the deity and not balramdas.on a reading of the plaint in the pro-posed suit it cannot be said that it does not disclose a cause of action in favour of the plaintiff deity for the reliefs ..... claimed in the suit. the learned civil judge, to my mind, unnecessarily entered into the controversy whether balramdas was competent to be next friend of the deity, while considering the application under order ..... could not act the next friend. it was also alleged that the deity was possessed of sufficient property to enable it to pay court-fees. the learned civil judge allowed the objections and dismissed the application of the deity for permission to sue in forma-pauperis without granting any time to the deity to pay the .....

Tag this Judgment!

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