Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: rejection of plaint code of civil procedure Court: allahabad Year: 1999 Page 1 of about 28 results (0.029 seconds)

Oct 07 1999 (HC)

CaptaIn Chand Singh Vs. Miss Preeti

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Oct-07-1999

Reported in : 2000(1)AWC268

..... , an order rejecting the plaint is a decree, in view of sub-section (1) of section 19, the application filed for grant of time for filing a ..... the order dated 7.9.1999 passed by sri z. khan, judge. family court. agra, rejecting the appellant's plaint registered as original suit no 304 of 1997 under order vii, rule 11, code of civil procedure on account of it having been filed beyond the prescribed period of 3 years limitation as envisaged ..... under article 58 of the limitation act. under this section, an appeal lies against the judgment and order and not against the decree. even though under the code of civil procedure ..... court.7.2. we also do not find any pleading taken by the appellant to show as to how section 125(3) of the code of criminal procedure is void being contrary to articles 14, 19, 20 and 21 of the constitution of india. we merely note that there is a ..... appeal.3. it appears that the respondent filed suit no. 8 of 1989against the appellant for grant of maintenance under section 125 of the code of criminal procedure claiming, inter alia, that she was married with him on 7.12.1988 ; that she has followed her duties as a faithful .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 21 1999 (HC)

Smt. Anita Singh and Others Vs. Pratap Singh and Another

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Sep-21-1999

Reported in : 1999(4)AWC3192

..... the said relief in the plaint. the learned civil judge (senior division), agra, after hearing the parlies' counsel, passed the impugned order ..... the cause of action in respect of even one relief claimed in the plaint, the court cannot reject the plaint under order vii. rule 11, c.p.c. on the ground that it did not disclose the cause of action. under order vi, rule 17 of the code of civil procedure, the court may at any stage of the proceedings allow either party to alter ..... the present defendant-revisionists moved an application before the civil judge (senior division). agra, claiming that the plaint as filed before that court, did not disclose cause of action about the newly added relief (c) in the plaint. consequently, a prayer was made that the plaint be rejected under order vii. rule 11 of the code of civil procedure for disclosing no cause of action in respect of ..... dated 13.7.99 stating that though the plaint was defective for non-disclosure of cause .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 07 1999 (HC)

Sukhbir Singh Vs. Iind Additional District Judge and Others

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Sep-07-1999

Reported in : 1999(4)AWC3195

..... meaning of section 115 of the code, the order under challenge herein is revisable under section 115 of the code of civil procedure. a perusal of the plaint (annexure-2 to the petition) would ..... provisions relating to execution of decrees and orders of civil court as embodied in the code of civil procedure as well as the remedial provisions of appeal or revision contained therein. since i have taken the view that determination of any question within the meaning of section 47 of the code and for that purpose, an order rejecting an execution application is not appeliable under the ..... in respect of the appeals those shall lie to the learned district judges. the said notification does not deal with the pecuniary jurisdiction with regard to section 115 of the code of civil procedure, whereas by virtue of the amendment brought about under section 115 of the c.p.c. through act no. 17 of 1991 shows that under section 115 of the ..... code and that such order is a 'case decided' within the .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 07 1999 (HC)

Ashok Kumar Shukla Vs. Additional District and Sessions Judge, Jalaun ...

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : May-07-1999

Reported in : 1999(3)AWC1911

..... other side that the power to reject an election petition under order vii. rule 11, c.p.c. should not be exercised at the threshold which in substance means that the court mustproceed with the trial, record the evidence, and only after the trial of the election petition is concluded that the power under the code of civil procedure for dealing appropriately with the ..... mind of the respondent. the sword of damocles need not be kept hanging over his head unnecessarily without point or purpose. even in an ordinary civil litigation the court readily exercises the power to reject a plaint if it does not disclose any cause of action.5. i have thoroughly studied the aforesaid decisions cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner. no ..... the issues are framed, and the evidence of the parties led, the suit is to 'be dismissed. there are different consequences of the 'rejection' of the plaint and 'dismissal' of the suit. after a plaint has been rejected, a second or separate suit may be filed again on the same cause of action subject, of course, to the plea of limitation and other restrictions ..... to be correct for the time being and then to ascertain whether those allegations disclose a cause of action or not. it is well settled proposition of law that rejection of the plaint for nondisclosure of the cause of action is to take place at the threshold. in a case where the defendant has entered appearance ; has filed written statement ; issues have .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 30 1999 (HC)

Ram Kumar Agarwal and Another Vs. District Judge, Mainpuri and Others

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Aug-30-1999

Reported in : 1999(4)AWC3394

..... a regular appeal would be maintainable. in such case, it would be amenable to the revlsional jurisdiction under section 115 of the code of civil procedure.6. the learned district judge had jurisdiction to entertain the misc. appeal as well as a civil revision out of the said order. therefore, even if the appeal was decided treating the same as an appeal, still then ..... be rejection of a plaint.therefore, it also does not come within the meaning of order vii. rule 11 which could be a ..... order under order vii, rule 10 as rightly contended by mr. srivastava. at the same time, the plaint having not been rejected, the order returning the plaint cannot be treated to be an order within the meaning of rule 11. though there was no order rejecting the plaint itself, mr. singh had sought to contend, that if the order is not an order within the ..... meaning of rule 10 even if it is an order for return of plaint, virtually the same is a rejection of the plaint. but the learned court having not rejected the plaint, by implication, it cannot be considered to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 13 1999 (HC)

Hari Kishan Gupta and Others Vs. Civil Judge, Kannauj and Others

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Sep-13-1999

Reported in : 2000(1)AWC345

..... high court of kerala and madhya pradesh had taken the view by reason of section 141 of the code of civil procedure, the provision of the code is applicable in a proceeding under order xxxiii and, therefore, a plaint can be returned for being presented in proper court if it attracts the mischief of order 7 rule 10 ..... applicant is indigent or not only when the court sees no reason to reject the application on any of the grounds mentioned in rule 5. the enquiry under rule 1 sub-rules (1) and (2) of order xliv of the code of civil procedure is also identical with those under rule 5, order xxxiii. in the ..... case of pavianose v. sugathan : air1993ker177 , it was held that if there is no cause of action, then an application to sue as indigent is liable to be rejected.14. under order xxxiii, rule 5 ..... regard to the question of jurisdiction. but the same does not come within the rule 5 which deals with the grounds of rejection of such an application. the return of the plaint does not imply that the court can go into the question raised by the defence. it is only to be ascertained on ..... scope and ambit of the enquiry as prescribed in rule 5. the enquiry is confined as to whether the application should be granted or rejected. such application can be rejected only on the ground specified in rule 5 and not otherwise. the consideration of order xxxiii is confined only to the question as to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 09 1999 (HC)

Tej Pal and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Others

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Mar-09-1999

Reported in : 1999(4)AWC3175

..... , reject the memorandum of this appeal. consequently the appeal stands dismissed. the office is directed to consign its record to ..... persuaded to refer this question to a larger bench and hold that we possess powers to reject a memorandum of appeal on account of deficiency of the court fee under sections 148, 149 as well as section 151 of the code of civil procedure to prevent abuse of the process of our own high court.9. we, accordingly ..... mentions memorandum of appeal and the quantum of proper court fee which is required to be paid thereon.6. sections 148 and 149 of the code of civil procedure reads thus :'148. enlargement of time.--where any period is fixed or granted by the court for the doing of any act prescribed or allowed by ..... orderbinod kumar roy and s. k. jain, jj.1. miscellaneous application dated 22.12.1997 filed under sections 148, 149 and 151 code of civil procedure has been put up for consideration along with the report dated 29.11.1993 of the stamp reporter. according to the stamp reporter stamp ..... that they are not in a position to pay the deficit court fee, now being left with no sption we reject this miscellaneous application.5. now we come to the prayer of mr. mithal to return the plaint. section 4 of the court fee act. 1870 reads thus :-'4. fees on documents filed, etc., in high .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 24 1999 (HC)

Bal Kishan Agarwal Vs. PulIn Garg and Others

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : May-24-1999

Reported in : 1999(3)AWC2010

..... indigent person is granted, there is no suit in existence and the provisions of temporary injunction contained in order xxxix of the code of civil procedure (for short 'code') cannot be invoked. a reference to the provisions of order xxxix of the code was made to urge that there must be a suit before the court can have jurisdiction to issue an injunction. his contention ..... case, it was observed that where an application for permission to sue as a pauper is rejected under order xxxiii, rule 5, the court while rejecting the application can, under section 149 allow the appellant to pay the requisite court fee and treat the application as a plaint, if however, the court has refused to allow the applicant to sue as a pauper ..... under order xxxiii. rule 7 (3), then the court while rejecting the application for permission to sue as pauper, cannot under section 149 allow the applicant to pay ..... the requisite court fee and treat the application as a plaint. this decision appears to be wide off the mark and has hardly any relevance to decide the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 11 1999 (HC)

Smt. Irfana Begum Vs. Raj Kumar Agarwal and Others

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Oct-11-1999

Reported in : 2000(1)AWC242

..... brought about by the legislature in the provisions contained in order viii, rule 10. c.p.c. by central act no. 104 of 1976, namely, the code of civil procedure (amendment act, 1976). order viii, rule 10, c.p.c. before amendment was as under :'where any party from whom a written statement is so ..... under order ix. rule 13. c.p.c. was not maintainable and the application of the defendant-appellant for setting aside the decree has rightly been rejected. the order dated 1st may, 1998 does not suffer from any illegality. learned counsel for the respondents has placed reliance on the following cases :* vinayak shreedhar ..... 1995 shows that it was passed merely in absence of the written statement of the defendant and without application of mind to the facts pleaded in the plaint. the order dated 17.1.1995 is being reproduced below :izkfkzuk i= 72 lh&ij; lquk x;ka izkfkzuk i=ij izfroknh dh vksj ..... nor the plaintiff gave any evidence in support of his case. the court remains under obligation to apply its mind to the facts stated in the plaint and to assess whether the decree could be passed or not. even suit can be dismissed in absence of written statement, for which a sufficient scope ..... -the plaintiff invoking provisions of order viii, rule 10. c.p.c. to decree the suit on the basis of uncontroverted averments contained in the plaint in the absence of any written statement. against this application objection was filed by defendant-appellant alleging that written statement has been filed. on 17.1. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 19 1999 (HC)

Krishna Bhagwan Agarwal and Another Vs. Ist Additional District Judge, ...

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Apr-19-1999

Reported in : 1999(2)AWC1753

..... constitution of india involves the determination of the validity justification. correctness and propriety of the order of appointment of receiver under the provisions of order xl, rule 1 of the code of civil procedure in a suit for the relief of dissolution of the firm, rendition of accounts and partition and distribution of the properties and assets between the partners.2. the woodcut ..... -revisionist from exercising their rights from going to cinema premises or looking the accounts that were being maintained. it was a case where the application for appointment of receiver was rejected in view of the established facts as mentioned above. in k. p. a. v. vellayappa nadar v. bhagirathi ammal and others (supra), relied upon by the learned counsel for the ..... property is exposed to manifest peril, the court will feel, inclined to prevent that by putting a receiver in charge of the same. a mere shadowy claim woven in the plaint with allegations which are inconsistent and apparently misleading cannot invoked the court's assistance in this respect.'the cases of bhupendra nath v. manohar mukherjee. : air1924cal456 ; p. c. l. choudhuri ..... of accounts and for partition and distribution of the properties and assets of the firm. the details of all the branches of partnership business are given at thefoot of the plaint. with the filing of the suit, the plaintiff-respondent no. 2 moved an application for appointment of receiver. the contesting partners who are defendant no. 1 to 4 to the .....

Tag this Judgment!


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