Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: rejection of plaint code of civil procedure Court: allahabad Year: 1988 Page 1 of about 10 results (0.076 seconds)

May 17 1988 (HC)

iqbal Singh and ors. Vs. Jagdish Chandra and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : May-17-1988

Reported in : AIR1988All242

..... seeking relief against defendants 1 to 6, it is only sought against defendants 2 to 6.11. thus, the court below has committed error in rejecting the amendment application of the applicants. in view of legal position, the revision is allowed. the order dated 19-2-1988 is quashed. the court ..... in the present suit, the allegations have been made against all the parters. it cannot be said that on account of the amendment of the plaint, the cause of action will be changed.10. thus contention of the learned counsel for the opposite parties that by the amendment, the cause of ..... is liable for accounting.7. the learned counsel for the opposite parties has urged that from the averments made in paragraphs 2 and6 of the plaint only sri ram narain is the accounting partner. the perusal of the aforesaid paragraphs does not show that the rights of accounting from other partners ..... against an order dated 19-2-1988 by which the trial court has rejected the application of amendment in the plaint filed by the plaintiff-applicants. the plaintiffs-applicants moved an application before the trial court for amendment in the plaint by virtue of which in the relief clause insted of defendants 2' to ..... 6, defendants 1 to 6 were sought to be added. it was averred that it has occurred by typing error and instead of defendants 1 to 6, it has been typed as defendants 2 to 6. there is no other amendment sought. however, the court below rejected .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 15 1988 (HC)

Ambrish Kumar Singh Vs. Raja Abhushan Bran Bramhshah and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Feb-15-1988

Reported in : AIR1989All194

..... the two suits were also different. thus the order dated 7-8-1986 rejecting the application under section 92 c.p.c. in suit no. 4/83 will have no effect on the maintainability of the present suit.10. section 92, c.p.c. was amended by the code of civil procedure (amendment) act, 1976. before this amendment suit could be filed either by ..... contention is without any substance.8. now i come to the third point, 'the effect of filing of suit no. 4/83 and its dismissal on 7-8-1976.'the plaint of that suit has been filed along with the stay application. that suit was filed by raja abhushan brahm shah as plaintiff no. 1 and maharaja kamal singh as plaintiff ..... maharajah of benares as well as the person interested to file the suit independently.5. the interest of the plaintiffs have been disclosed in paras 1 to 4 of the plaint and also in the affidavit filed by sri anurdh singh, before the learned district judge, varanasi, which i have looked into very carefully.6. it is clear that the plaintiff ..... may be required according to the law in force at the time.' suit no. 422 of 1986 has been filed by five plaintiffs against the defendant-applicant. along with the plaint an application under section 92, c.p.c. dated 5-11-1986 was also filed for leave, which was granted by the learned district judge, varanasi on 12-8-1987 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 04 1988 (HC)

Hira Devi and ors. Vs. Harinath Chaurasiya and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Aug-04-1988

Reported in : AIR1989All11

..... execution, it cannot be assumed that the court has inherent lack of jurisdiction. in the present case the suit for specific performance of the contract was maintainable in the civil court. the plaint was filed by respondent no. 1 and the written statement was filed by the petitioners, who did not raise any objection about the lack of jurisdiction, nor the plea ..... decree is passed by a court having no jurisdiction to make it, other objections cannot be raised. the jurisdiction has assumed such a connotation that irregularity or illegality in the procedure or in the pleading is not covered by the expression 'jurisdiction'. it is better to make a reference to expression 'jurisdiction' as stated in halsburys laws of england, 4th edition ..... that the execution court cannot go behind the decree except in very exceptional circumstances where the decree itself was without jurisdiction. the learned munsif, however, rejected the objections of the petitioners under section 47 of the civil p.c. the revision against that order also failed by order dated 18-3-88. it is against these orders the present petition has been ..... its validity on the grounds which were open to judgment-debtor at the appropriate stage before the decree was passed. the word 'execution' is not a defined term under the code. according to collins concise english dictionary the word 'execution' connotes 'to carry out, to complete, to perform, to accomplish, to carry into effect' etc. according to webster's iii international .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 08 1988 (HC)

Smt. Kusuma Gupta and ors. Vs. Smt. Sarla Devi and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Jan-08-1988

Reported in : AIR1988All154

..... below has committed a clear error. it ignored the indisputable legal position that the grant of temporary injunction is governed by order 39 of the code of civil procedure. the principles governing the grant of temporary injunctions are far too well settled to require any elaboration. to capitulate, these are the existence of ..... appellants to render accounts of the firm. simultaneously with the suit the plaintiff filed an application under order xl, rule i of the code of civil procedure for appointment of a receiver over the assets of the firm. by an ex parte order the court below appointed a receiver against which ..... a result of the injunction sought by the plaintiffs. 5. by the impugned order the court below has allowed the plaintiff's application and rejected the objection of the appellants. the order is founded almost solely on an interpretation of section 53 of the partnership act. 6. for the ..... contested by the appellants. by the impugned order the plaintiffs' application has been allowed overruling the objection of the appellants. 3. shortly stated, the material plaint allegations are that the plaintiff and pushpa devi (respondent no. 3), the appellants (arrayed as defendants nos. 2 to 4 in the suit) satish ..... amarendra nath varma, j. 1. this appeal is directed against an interim injunction granted by the learned second additional civil judge, shahjahanpur, restraining the appellants from either utilizing the machinery fixed in the concern messrs banda khandsari udyog, shahjahanpur .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 14 1988 (HC)

Rajiv Lochan Pandey Vs. Madan Gopal Sharma and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Oct-14-1988

Reported in : AIR1989All45

..... application shall lie under this rule for setting aside that ex parte decree.'8. the trialcourt rejected the application. against that order, the petitioner filed an appeal under order xliii, rule 1(r) of the code of : civil procedure. the appeal has been dismissed by the impugned order dated may 29, 1988. against this ..... its comparison with the admitted ones. the learned civil judge rejected the prayer by saying that the prayer made was belated and, as such, that could not be acceded to. in his opinion no case under order xli, rule 27 of the code of civil procedure had been made out for appointment of the ..... in its absence. as such, the appeal deserves rejection for deficiency of court-fee in addition to the fact that it is time barred as well.7. the petitioner also filed an application under order ix, rule 13 of the code of civil procedure in suit no. 759 of 1983 for setting aside ..... decree of suit no. 759 of 1983 having been dismissed, the application was barred because of the explanation to order ix, rule 13 of the code of civil procedure. this explanation was added by c.p.c. (amendment) act 104 of 1976. it reads-'explanation-- where there has been an appeal against a ..... gopal sharma also filed suit no. 758 of 1983 against the petitioner for permanent injunction. respondents nos. 2 and 3 were impleaded as defendants in the plaint. petitioner contested the suit and filed written statement in the same.4. the aforesaid two suits were consolidated by an order dated november 19, 1983, .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 17 1988 (HC)

Mahendra Radio and Television, Meerut and anr. Vs. State Bank of India

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : May-17-1988

Reported in : AIR1988All257

..... displace the plaintiff completely from admissions made by the defendant in the written statement, amendment should not be allowed. in that case the trial court rejected the application of the defendant for amendment on the ground that the defendant wanted to resile from the admissions made and by proposed amendment the ..... the admissions made earlier. even in the original written statement in paragraph 17, which has not been deleted the averment of paragraph 17 of the plaint was denied. it was further stated; 'the defendants acknowledged their indebtedness only on paper............ the defendants went on signingthe documents as and when desired ..... where the defendant has not filed a pleading, it shall be lawful for the court to pronounce judgment on the basis of the facts contained in the plaint, except as against a person under a disability, but the court may, in its discretion, require any such fact to be proved. (3) in ..... merely referred as a matter of record were sought to be amended by giving details; secondly, the execution of various documents referred to in the plaint were alleged in the proposedamendments to have been got in by the plaintiff on the blank papers; and, thirdly, the denial by the defendants- ..... the first leg of argument in this regard by the respondent is that the earlier written statement did not specifically deny the averments made in the plaint and thus under order viii, rule 5, c.p.c. it shall be treated to be admitted, and permitting now to amend the written .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 01 1988 (HC)

Vishnu Saran Pandey Vs. Sunil Kumar Bhalotiya

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Mar-01-1988

Reported in : AIR1988All194

..... subject matter of adjudication in catena of authorities. the aforesaid rules 2 and 3 of order xvii, c.p.c. are quoted as follows : --'2. procedure if parties fail to appear on day fixed. -- where, on any day to which the hearing of the suit is adjourned, the parties or any of ..... filed by the defendant as against the impugned order dated 23rd july, 1987, by virtue of which his application for setting aside ex parte decree were rejected. before the admission of the case this court issued notice to the plaintiff/respondent and he having appeared and (filed) counter-affidavit to the affidavit ..... , within limitation applicant examined the record of the case and made the application before the trial court for settingaside the ex parte decree, which was rejected by means of the impugned order, which is subject matter of present revisions.3. learned counsel for the applicant urged that the impugned order suffers ..... facts in these revisions are : the plaintiff-respondent filed a suit for ejectment and arrears of rent against the applicant. the suit was contested denying plaint allegations with further averment that provisions of act 13 of 1972 are applicable and the suit has been filed on incorrect facts. on 28th oct.1985, ..... 103 and 157 which are pari materia with order 9, rule 8 order 9, rule 9 and order 17, rule 2 respectively of the present civil p.c. 1908. an application in that case under section 103 was made for restoration. the application was disallowed on the ground that the order .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 11 1988 (HC)

Ghanshyam Das Agarwal Vs. Ram Chander and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Jul-11-1988

Reported in : AIR1988All303

..... the applicant by virtue of which dispute regarding title of the disputed accommodation was specifically raised and such an amendment was rejected by means of order dt. 13th feb. 1986, against which a revision (civil revision no. 524 of 1986) was preferred before this court and this court by means of judgment and order dt ..... again it has not been disputed that that order has become final between the parties. it was urged that the said finding has been recorded while rejecting the amendment sought. thus, it would not exclude the applicant from raising such a plea on the residue of the pleading where he has already pleaded ..... being disposed of finally at the admission stage itself.3. the main contention on behalf of the applicant was that the trial court should not have rejected the said two issues since the question regarding transfer of title by the erstwhile landlord to the transferee by means of sale deed dt. 9th aug ..... of small causes. it is open to a party to raise such an issue before the competent civil court. it is made clear that the finding recorded by this court by means of this order rejecting the framing of issue is without prejudice to the right of the applicant of raising such a ..... . 19th march, 1986, also rejected the revision of the applicant. when the finding has been recorded in the aforesaid revision .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 22 1988 (HC)

Smt. Chandania Vs. Gyan Chand and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Dec-22-1988

Reported in : AIR1989All75

..... the plaintiff had successfully proved the due execution of the will by nathan singh. the plea that the suit was barred by section 34 of the specific relief actwas also rejected. as a result, the appeal was allowed and the suit of the plaintiff-respondent was decreed, declaring the plaintiff to be entitled to realize the rent from the defendants nos ..... thereof. the suit was dismissed by the trial court. on appeal, the decree of the trial court was reversed and the suit was decreed. hence this second appeal.2. the plaint case was that the plaintiff's husband munshi nathan singh was the owner of the house in suit and other movable and immovable properties. he executed a will bequeathing all .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 30 1988 (HC)

Bhaiyalal Vs. Ram Din

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Nov-30-1988

Reported in : AIR1989All130

..... and had indicated his intention through successive notices but the defendant did not execute the sale deed as he was bound to do under the said agreement. the trial court rejected the defence version on the ground that the defendant had not produced a copy of the agreement which was alleged to have been executed for the retransfer of the property ..... the plaintiff. the trial court had decreed the suit. on appeal, the learned district judge reversed the decree of the trial court and dismissed the suit.2. shortly stated, the plaint case was that on 14-4-69 he hold the house belonging to him in favour of the defendant for a sum of rs. 4,000/- under a sale deed .....

Tag this Judgment!


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