Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: rejection of plaint code of civil procedure Court: supreme court of india Year: 2004 Page 2 of about 48 results (0.103 seconds)

Feb 06 2004 (SC)

Kunjan Nair Sivaraman Nair Vs. Narayanan Nair and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-06-2004

Reported in : AIR2004SC1761; 2004(1)AWC786(SC); (SCSuppl)2004(2)CHN107; 2004(1)CTC628; JT2004(2)SC386; 2004(1)KLT1082(SC); 2004(2)SCALE302; (2004)3SCC277

..... correctness of judgment rendered by learned single judge of the kerala high court which dismissed the second appeal filed under section 100 of the code of civil procedure. 1908 (in short 'the code' ). the appellant was defendant no. 1 in the suit for recovery of possession on the strength of title, instituted by 7 persons ..... he was in possession. though, in view of the judgments of the courts below his claim to assert a title in him has been rejected and his possession cannot be a lawful possession to deny the right of the real owner to recover possession or assert any adverse claim against the ..... to be a lessee in respect of land in question. the fact that he asserted a claim for purchase of jenmam rights, irrespective of the rejection of the claim would go to show that at any rate he was believing in good faith to be one such person viz., lessee. clause ..... to get the benefit of section 2(d) of the compensation act the appellant is clearly eligible and, therefore, the courts below were not correct in rejecting the stand.5. in response, mr. t.l.v. iyer, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the high court has recorded categorical ..... the plaintiffs had earlier filed os 208/77 seeking a decree for declaration of right and title to the plaint, schedule property and their possession. though their title was upheld but prayer for injunction was rejected as possession was not found. appeal against the judgment in question did not bring any relief. subsequently, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 19 2004 (SC)

Sayed Muhammed Mashur Kunhi Koya Thangal Vs. Badagara Jumayath Palli D ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-19-2004

Reported in : AIR2004SC4365; 2004(4)AWC2893(SC); JT2004(6)SC556; (2005)1MLJ194(SC); 2004(7)SCALE53; (2004)7SCC708

..... second defendant that the document created in favour of the first defendant was valid. the case of the second defendant that his father was in possession from 1948 was also rejected. in the result, by the impugned judgment, the judgment of the first appellate court was set aside and a decree was passed entitling the plaintiff to recover possession of the ..... situated therein on the strength of the plaintiff's title and for the permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the appellant from demolishing or altering the existing building tomb situated in the plaint schedule property.'8. as is evident from the impugned judgment, the high court took into consideration the written statement filed by the secretary, wakf board wherein it has been stated ..... building situated therein on the strength of plaintiff's title and for a permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the appellant from demolishing or altering the existing building, tomb, situated in the plaint schedule property'. no doubt, it was brought to our notice that the trial court in its judgment has stated that the plaintiff-committee was actually acting as a mutawalli but ..... his case. this, in our view is a serious infirmity being contrary to requirement of section 100 of civil procedure code. it is plain and well-settled that in order to claim a decree for declaration of title and for recovery of possession in the civil suit the plaintiff had to essentially plead necessary facts so that the defendant could meet that case in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 05 2004 (SC)

Pankaja and anr. Vs. Yellappa (D) by Lrs. and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-05-2004

Reported in : AIR2004SC4102; 2004(5)ALLMR(SC)1022; 2005(1)ARC638; 2004(3)AWC2733(SC); 2004(2)BomCR273; 98(2004)CLT612(SC); 2004(4)CTC231; JT2004(6)SC259; 2004(6)KarLJ169; 2004(4)MhLj488;

..... are now before us in this appeal challenging the said order of the high court as also the order of the principal civil judge, shimoga, rejecting their application praying for amendment of the plaint.10. ms. kiran suri, learned counsel for the appellants contended that the trial court was in error in coming to the ..... them the prayer for declaration of title is not barred by limitation, therefore, both the courts below have seriously erred in not considering this question before rejecting the prayer for amendment. in such a situation where there is a dispute as to the bar of limitation this court in the case of ragu thilak ..... of this court where this court had taken the view that delay in filing an application for amendment by itself should not be a ground for rejection of such application unless a serious prejudice was caused to the opposite party. she further submitted on the facts of this case the necessary averments ..... 2000 realizing that a prayer for declaration on the facts of the case was essential the appellants filed an application for amendment of the plaint under order 6 rule 17, cpc by adding the following prayers :-'[a] to declare that the plaintiffs are the owners a1.b.m.n.n1.o1.o.l of ..... the suit schedule property.'6. the principal civil judge, shimoga, by his judgment and order dated 22nd of september, 2000 rejected the application of the appellants .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 04 2004 (SC)

Chitivalasa Jute Mills Vs. Jaypee Rewa Cement

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-04-2004

Reported in : AIR2004SC1687; 2004(1)AWC796(SC); (SCSuppl)2004(3)CHN56; JT2004(2)SC535; (2004)137PLR290; 2004(2)SCALE213; (2004)3SCC85; 2004(2)LC789(SC)

..... in issue the rejection of plea under section 10 of the cpc but the filing of the revision was delayed and the high court refused to condone the delay consequent whereupon the civil revision came to be dismissed.8. chitivalasa jute mills have filed this petition under section 25 of the code of civil procedure to transfer ..... visakhapatnam, the two suits shall be consolidated for the purpose of trial and decision. the trial court may frame consolidated issues. the code of civil procedure does not specifically speak of consolidation of suits but the same can be done under the inherent powers of the court flowing from section 151 of ..... deny that chitivalasa jute mills is nothing but a division of willard india limited. the fact remains that the cause of action alleged in the two plaints refers to the same period and the same transactions, i.e., the supply of jute bags between the period 07.01.1992 and 31.12.1993 ..... s. no. 68 of 1997 praying for a decree of rs. 48,00,630/- with interest and costs. according to willard india, as alleged in the plaint, the claim is for the price of the goods supplied and not paid, and for interest thereon for the period of non-payment. 5. in january ..... order of rejection having achieved a finality this transfer petition by willard india is nothing but an indirect attempt at reaching the same end. having heard the learned counsel for the parties we are satisfied that the transfer petition deserves to be allowed.9. on the facts averred in the two plaints filed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 25 2004 (SC)

Shipping Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. Machado Brothers and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-25-2004

Reported in : AIR2004SC2093; 2004(3)ALD126(SC); 98(2004)CLT98(SC); 110(2004)DLT649(SC); 2004(75)DRJ113; JT2004(4)SC25; JT2004(Suppl1)SC528; (2004)138PLR301; RLW2004(2)SC210; 2004(4)SCALE

..... order 7 rule 11, order 12 rule 6, order 15 rules 1 and 3 and order 23 rule 1 of cpc to point out that apart from section 151, of cpc even under those provisions of the code there is a duty cast on the trial court to put an end to a litigation if the same had become ..... was pleased to grant interim relief sought for by the respondent which became final consequent upon the appellant's challenge to the same made before the high court being rejected.6. during such continuation of the agency, the appellant allegedly noticed certain financial irregularities and was contemplating to take fresh steps to terminate the agency once again. ..... and the appellant having failed to get the injunction in the said suit vacated has resorted to this mode of getting the injunction vacated. he submitted if the plaint showed the existence of a cause of action on the date of filing of the same, subsequent disappearance of cause of action would not make the suit bad ..... appellant terminated the said contract of agency. the respondent herein challenged the said termination by way of a suit in o.s.no. 4212/95 in the city civil court at madras (the trial court). in the said suit the respondent inter alia prayed for the following reliefs:'the plaintiff, therefore, prays for a judgment and ..... (p.d.) no. 309 of 2003 and cmp no.2222 of 2003. by the above order, the high court upheld an order made by the city civil court at chennai in i.a.no. 20651 of 2001 in o.s.no. 4212 of 1995. the said i.a. filed under section 151 c.p .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 15 2004 (SC)

Dalip Singh Vs. Mehar Singh Rathee and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jul-15-2004

Reported in : 2005(5)ALLMR(SC)872; 2005(1)ALT43; 2005(II)OLR(SC)377; (2005)139PLR484; 2004(10)SCALE112; (2004)7SCC650

..... the doctrine of lis pendens. the suit was, however, dismissed by holding that the suit was barred under order 2 rule 2 of the code of civil procedure. plea that the suit was barred by order 2 rule 2 cpc was neither taken in the written statement nor was an issue struck on this point. 10. aggrieved against the order of the trial court ..... of the agreement but correspondingly the appellant was not ready to execute the sale deed as per agreement. plea that the suit was barred by order 2 rule 2 cpc was rejected on merits as well as on the ground that such plea having not been taken in the written statement and the fact that no issue was struck on this point ..... impleadment of respondents 2 to 4 and the sons and daughters of the appellant as respondents 5 to 10 being necessary parties and also seeking amendment in the plaint including the relief clause. additional prayer for declaration that the sale deed dated 22-3-1988 executed in favour of respondents 2 to 4 was null and void and not ..... the territorial jurisdiction to try the suit. on 20-3-1989 the court at sonepat returned the plaint to respondent 1 for presentation before the appropriate court having jurisdiction. immediately after the return of the plaint respondent 1 presented the plaint in the court of additional civil judge, gohana on 21-3-1989. 6. the suit land was sold by the appellant to respondents .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 16 2004 (SC)

Hanil Era Textiles Ltd. Vs. Puromatic Filters (P) Ltd.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-16-2004

Reported in : AIR2004SC2432; 2004(4)ALD22(SC); 2004(5)ALLMR(SC)534; 2004(2)AWC2133(SC); 2004(2)BLJR1091; (SCSuppl)2004(4)CHN11; 2004(3)CTC220; 2005(1)CTLJ118(SC); 111(2004)DLT39(SC); JT2

..... not open to the parties to confer by their agreement jurisdiction on a court which it does not possess under the code. but where two courts or more have under the code of civil procedure jurisdiction to try a suit or a proceeding, an agreement between the parties that the dispute between them shall be ..... 4. the appellant (defendant in the suit) moved an application under section 20 read with order vii rule 10 and section 151 cpc before the trial court praying that the plaint in suit no.162 of 1997 be returned for presentation before the court having territorial jurisdiction in which the suit should have been ..... amount. the dispute in the present appeal is regarding the territorial jurisdiction of the court at delhi to try the suit and para 8 of the plaint which contains the necessary averment in this regard is reproduced hereinbelow :'8. that the cause of action has arisen at delhi as the ordered goods ..... absence of the written statement having been filed by the defendant, he had to decide the controversy on the basis of the allegations made in the plaint and especially when the plaintiff had asserted that the goods were delivered to the defendant at delhi on the basis of form ct-3, the court ..... dated 21.12.2001 of the high court of delhi by which the appeal preferred by the appellant against the order of rejection of the appellant's application under order vii rule 10 cpc passed by the additional district judge, delhi on 28.3.1998 was dismissed.3. the appellant hanil era textiles limited, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 04 2004 (SC)

Dr. Suresh Gupta Vs. Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-04-2004

Reported in : 2004ACJ1441; AIR2004SC4091; 2004(2)ALD(Cri)739; (2004)3CompLJ271(SC); 2004CriLJ3870; 2004(4)CTC309; 112(2004)DLT866(SC); 2004(77)DRJ235; JT2004(6)SC238; 2004(3)MPHT503; 200

..... supplied]4. as the magistrate decided to proceed with the trial, the doctor approached the high court by petition under section 482 of the code of criminal procedure. the high court refused to quash the criminal proceedings and upheld the order of the magistrate although it records that the metropolitan magistrate was ..... a case of high degree of negligence on the part of the doctor. mere lack of proper care, precaution and attention or inadvertence might create civil liability but not a criminal one. the courts have, therefore, always insisted in the case of alleged criminal offence against doctor causing death of ..... want of due attention and skill cannot be described to be so reckless or grossly negligent as to make him criminally liable.25. between civil and criminal liability of a doctor causing death of his patient the court has a difficult task of weighing the degree of carelessness and ..... course of medical treatment given by them to their patients, is necessary so that the hazards of medical men in medical profession being exposed to civil liability, may not unreasonably extend to criminal liability and expose them to risk of landing themselves in prison for alleged criminal negligence.23. for ..... an accident, no criminal liability should be attached to it. mere inadvertence or some degree of want of adequate care and caution might create civil liability but would not suffice to hold him criminally liable.22. this approach of the courts in the matter of fixing criminal liability on the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 16 2004 (SC)

Pukhraj D. JaIn and ors. Vs. G. Gopalakrishna

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-16-2004

Reported in : AIR2004SC3504; 2004(5)ALLMR(SC)932; 2004(3)AWC2214(SC); 2004(3)CTC308; JT2004(5)SC329; (2004)3MLJ183(SC); 2004(4)SCALE688; (2004)7SCC251

..... erroneous in law and must be set aside. the proceedings in the trial of a suit have to be conducted in accordance with provisions of the code of civil procedure. section 10 cpc no doubt lays down that no court shall proceed with the trial of any suit in which the matter in issue is also directly and substantially ..... recovery of the amount was decreed by the trial court on 24.7.1985 but he himself preferred a revision against the decree wherein an order of rejection of the plaint was passed by the high court. in such circumstances, it is absolutely apparent that the respondent no.1 was not ready and willing to perform his ..... of rs.12.50 on the enhanced claim, the high court in a revision filed by him set aside the decree for refund of the amount and rejected the plaint. the suit giving rise to the present appeal was instituted by respondent no.1 on 2.4.1988 wherein he again sought specific performance of the agreement ..... was an unusual revision filed by a plaintiff yet allowed the same on 18.2.1987, set aside the judgment and decree of the trial court and rejected the plaint.(vi) the appellants nos.1 to 5 after execution of the sale deed in their favour on 18.4.1985, filed a suit being os no. ..... paying aforesaid amount the respondent no.1 filed a memo stating that he was not in a position to pay the court fee and as such the plaint may be rejected being deficiently stamped. the trial court decreed the suit for recovery of the amount on 24.7.1985.(v) though the suit filed by respondent no. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 27 2004 (SC)

Sri Inder SaIn Bedi (Dead) by Lrs. Vs. Chopra Electricals

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-27-2004

Reported in : 2004(4)AWC2980(SC); JT2004(7)SC345; (2005)139PLR477; 2004(7)SCALE227; (2004)7SCC277

..... payable by the respondent in accordance with order 20 rule 12 of code of civil procedure.3. respondent in his written statement took preliminary objection that the plaint was liable to be rejected as the appellant has not given any valuation in the plaint regarding relief of mesne profit. another preliminary objection taken was that notice ..... as a tenant of the entire portion of property of the plaintiff, which was in occupation of the defendant.'13. in para 2 of the plaint the appellant had made a specific averment that the respondent had taken from the appellant a portion comprising of hall, 3 office cum store rooms ..... appellant filed replication to the written statement filed by the respondent denying the averment in the written statement and reiterated the averment set out in the plaint.5. on the pleadings of the parties the following issues were framed by the trial court:'i) whether the plaintiff is entitled to a decree ..... parties that the appellant filed suit no. 519 of 1994 for possession of the portion shown in the green colour in the plan attached with the plaint.] that the appellant served a notice under section 106 of the transfer of property act (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') dated 6.3. ..... , (hereinafter referred to as 'the suit property') as shown in red colour in the site plan ex. p.2. it was averred in the plaint that the respondent had taken from the appellant one hall, three offices-cum-store room and toilets for workmen in the ground floor and two mezzanine halls .....

Tag this Judgment!


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