Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: rejection of plaint code of civil procedure Court: allahabad Year: 1981 Page 1 of about 9 results (0.127 seconds)

Sep 17 1981 (HC)

Ram Gopal Vs. Prabhu

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Sep-17-1981

Reported in : AIR1982All309

..... (air 1973 sc 171), p. ven-kateswarlu v. motor & general traders (air 1975 sc 1409) and ayesha khatoon v. durga sahaya (air 1977 cal 108). the court below has, however, rejected the application on the ground that by the amendment sought for the plaintiffwants to substitute a relief for prohibitory injunction instead of mandatory injunction. the learned counsel submitted that the ..... ordert.s. misra, j.1. this revision is directed against an order passed by the court below rejecting the application for amendment of the plaint. learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that the amendment of the plaint was asked for keeping in view the amendment made in the provisions of sections 134 to 136, u. p. zamindari abolition and land reforms act. he says ..... is allowed. the impugned order dated 7-2-1978 is set aside and the court below is directed to consider the plaintiff's application a-51 for amendment of the plaint in accordance with law and in the light of the observations made hereinabove. as none appears to contest the application, i make no order as to costs. ..... below erred in not considering each amendment sought for by the plaintiff in the plaint. there is force in the contention. it is quite manifest from the impugned order that the court below had considered only one out of several amendments sought for by the plaintiff and had rejected the entire application. this was not in consonance with law. obviously the court .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 06 1981 (HC)

Munney Khan Vs. Smt. Kaushilya Devi and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Mar-06-1981

Reported in : AIR1981All240

..... plaintiff-respondents in the three second appeals filed in this court and it was only at the time of the hearing under order 41 rule 11 of the code of civil procedure that the name of smt. kanti devi. the third respondent was added and the court directed issue of notice to her alone.3. before dealing with ..... permission of this court at the hearing of the appeal under order 41 rule 11 of the code of civil procedure. i may in this context observe that a perusal of the order dated 7th february, 1980. of this court on civil misc. application no. 277 of 1980 shows that it was contended before the learned judge who ..... advised.to seek remedy under article 226 or 227 of the constitution in view of the fact that a revision under section 115 of the code of civil procedure as amended in uttar pradesh would also be not maintainable. ..... registered will on 25th february, 1977 and praying that the application of smt. har peari devi for substitution in place of smt. kaushilya devi deceased was liable to be rejected. smt. kanti devi applied on 21st july, 1977 by an application (105-a) for substitution in place of smt. kaushilya devi, the deceased plaintiff-respondent no. ..... court, to the notice of the lower appellate court and contending that the order dated 14th july. 1977 permitting amendment was wholly without jurisdiction : and even the plaint had been amended without there being any order for its amendment, in pursuance of that order dated 14th july, 1977; and that in the absence of any application .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 26 1981 (HC)

Johari Vs. Mahendra Singh and anr.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Aug-26-1981

Reported in : AIR1981All436

..... said judgment having been fully approved by the supreme court must be held to be still effective and well founded. the preliminary objection fails and is hereby rejected and it is held that the revision is maintainable.4. on merits, the learned counsel for the revisionist has submitted that right from the beginning, ..... get a decree in the trial court. while the appeal was pending in the lower appellate court, the plaintiff made an application for amendment of the plaint introducing the claim that the plaintiff was always ready and willing to perform his part of contract. in spite of the objections of the respondent revisionist, ..... case of mahommed khan v. ayub khan (air 1978 all 463) where a division bench of this court held that the aforesaid amendment in the plaint cannot be allowed as it would prejudice the defen-dant and a valuable right created by it will be taken away. the facts of that case ..... the defendant had stated that the plaintiff had failed to aver in the plaint that he was ready and willing to perform his part of agreement and, therefore, was not entitled to specific performance of the agreement in view of ..... february, 1977 and up to 31st july, 1978 would continue to be heard by the high court and would be governed by section 115 of the code as amended by central act of 1976. according to the amendment of 1976 central act, the high court has jurisdiction to hear such revisions. in that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 18 1981 (HC)

Pera Khatika and anr. Vs. Lal Behari and anr.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Nov-18-1981

Reported in : AIR1982All82

..... ) whether the suit was within time?6. the first two points were answered in favour of the plaintiff by the learned judge by holding that the procedure prescribed for execution of the decree at the time when the decree is put in execution was available to the plaintiff and, inasmuch as. the decree- ..... allowed on may 2, 1969. it is also their case that the plaintiff made another application for being put in possession of the house which was rejected on dec. 13, 1971 on the ground that the decree could not be executed as its execution had become barred by limitation. an appeal against this ..... made no averment that the decree was transferred by the judge small causes for execution to the munsif. in fact there is no averment in the plaint about making of any order of transfer at all. naturally, therefore, the defendants were not called upon to take any objection about the absence or ..... 31, 1966, within 12 years of the confirmation of the sale in his favour, it was within limitation. the sixth point was answered thus. the additional civil judge, consequently decreed the suit for the ejectment of the present appellants from the house, hence, the second appeal.7. sri r. r. yadav for the ..... v. mahadeo prasad singh (air 1970 all 544). on this principal finding, the suit was dismissed.5. when the dispute reached the second additional civil judge, varanasi as civil appeal no. 314 of 1972, the points that were posed for determination by him were:--(1) whether the plaintiff was the owner of the house .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 19 1981 (HC)

Asghar Ali and ors. Vs. Chidda

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Nov-19-1981

Reported in : AIR1982All186

..... fact that the attesting witness lived at a place six miles away from the residence of the parties could not have been made a ground for rejecting his testimony. there should have been something in his evidence itself on the basis of which this statement could be discarded. the documents having been ..... cannot be allowed to stand. in disregarding the mandatory provision of order 6, rule 4 of the civil p. c., the court of ap-peal can be said to have committed an error of procedure which has created a substantial defect in the decision of the case upon merits. 16. as already stated ..... appeal examined the testimony of the witnesses of the parties and had no difficulty in accepting what was stated by the defendent's witnesses and in rejecting the evidence offered on behalf of the plaintiffs. the facts that there was something amiss in the purchase of the stamp papers on which the document ..... agreement. according to the plaintiffs chidda khan was not a bona fide transferee without knowledge of the agreement in favour of the plaintiffs. in the plaint it was disclosed that the plaintiffs were in possession over the land in dispute. on the basis of these facts, it was prayed that a ..... be completed by may, 1958, an agreement embodying the said conditions was executed by said mohammad on the same date. it is futher disclosed in the plaint that in contravention of the said agreement, said mohammad transferred the land in dispute to chidda khan, defendant respondent no. 1 for a sale consideration of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 12 1981 (HC)

Smt. Vidya Devi and ors. Vs. Nand Kumar

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Feb-12-1981

Reported in : AIR1981All274

..... as a witness on the ground that they were too old and infirm to give their statement in court. the code of civil procedure does make a provision where infirm and old persons can be examined as a witness on commission. resort to this procedure was not taken. it is true that persons signing a document as witnesses normally are supposed to depose only ..... evidence.14. the learned counsel then argued that ex. a. was relevant and admissible piece of evidence which has not been considered by the court below and it had wrongly rejected the deed of adoption as inadmissible and not proved. it is true that the deed of adoption ex. a-1 is a registered deed and it cannot be said that ..... that the presumption will not be made in cases in which the document in question was the basis of the suit or defence or was relied upon either in the plaint or in the written statement.17. a deed of adoption, however, does not, require attestation and if the document is registered and is produced from proper custody, the provisions of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 08 1981 (HC)

Prag Datt Vs. Smt. Saraswati Devi and anr.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Jul-08-1981

Reported in : AIR1982All37

..... nov. 24, 1965. but the service of the same has been found to have been duly proved on the defendant-appellant. in para 5 of the plaint, it has further been stated that the plaintiffs were willing for the execution of the sale deed in favour of both of them or any one of them ..... the averment made in the plaints and the surrounding circumstances, it is established in substance that the plaintiff was ready and willing to perform his part of the contract and had remained ready ..... the observations of the supreme court, referred to above, make it clear that the requirement of section 16(c) and of form 47 of appendix a to civil p. c. and are not to be interpreted narrowly and in a hypertechnical manner. it is the substance of the matter which is of importance. if from ..... failed to comply with the requirements of law contained in section 16(c) of the specific relief act, 1963 and form 47 contained in appendix a of civil p. c., the suit should have been dismissed in limine. i shall presently deal with each of the submissions urged on behalf of the defendant-appellant. ..... has to be remembered that section 16(c) or form 47 of appendix a of civil p. c. does not provide for booby trap of which an unscrupulous litigant should be allowed to take advantage. 13. a reading of the plaint makes it clear that the plaintiffs-respondents have clearly stated that they made repeated attempts .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 18 1981 (HC)

Sushil Kumar Sen Vs. Ram Chandra Sharma (Deceased by L. Rs.)

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Nov-18-1981

Reported in : AIR1982All129

..... without contribution of the seven items of expenditure amounting to rs. 15,596/3/3 that had been incurred by him.19. i think that the correct procedure to be followed in this case was to have first ascertained whether the danpatra dated 22nd june, 1945 was invalid to the extent of the plaintiffs' share ..... and 7 detailed under point no. 5 of the judgment of the lower appellate court and which has alreadybeen rejected, shall not be allowed to be reagitated. the trial court shall issue a commission to the civil court amin or to an advocate commissioner to be appointed for the purpose for drawing up a scheme for ..... . the lower appellate court thus found that the mortgage deed itself was evidence of partition and it further relied on ext. a-40 which is the plaint in suit no. 79 of 1950 filed by badri narain agarwal and jagarnath prasad agarwal in which they claimed that tara chand was separate owner of a ..... no power to execute it on behalf of the plaintiffs and that it was illegal and was obtained by fraud the details of which are given in the plaint. by another danpatra dated 5th july, 1945 the third defendant shambhoo nath sen also transferred his 1/2 share in the two houses in suit, to ..... in favour of the first defendant ram chandra sharma in respect of the plaintiffs' 1/3rd share of the two houses specified at the foot of the plaint and situated at mohalla alinagar of the city of gorakhpur and for partition of the plaintiffs' 1/3rd share therein and separate possession over the same.2 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 02 1981 (HC)

Dr. Ram Baj Singh Vs. Babulal

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Sep-02-1981

Reported in : AIR1982All285

..... decided that controversy against him. 7. the court of appeal has affirmed the findings recorded by the trial court with a slight modification. whereas the trial court had rejected the testimony of p. w. 1 dr. hari shankar prasad, who was medical officer of health at ghazipur, where the machine in dispute is situate, on the ..... filed by the defendant respondent. in his testimoy before the trial court, the plaintiff has reiterated the stands taken by him in his plaint. he has not been cross-examined on that allegation. the defendant-respondent, on the other hand, has made no clear statement as to when the consulting chamber ..... have referred to the controversy between the parties as to the date when the plaintiff-appellant is said to have started his physician's consulting chamber. in the plaint, it has been specifically stated that the said chamber was started in the year 1962. there is no specific denial of this averment in the written-statement ..... or annoyance to persons who may have occasion to use any public right.' 18. the offence of public nuisance has been made punishable under chapter xiv of the said code. a public nuisance may also be abated by a criminal court in the exercise of its jurisdiction under section 133 of the cr. p. c. 1973. however ..... restraining him from using ms brick grinding machine shown by letters ka, kha, ga, gha in the sketch map given at the foot of the plaint. the plaintiff-appellant shall be entitled to his costs throughout. .....

Tag this Judgment!


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