Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: rejection of plaint code of civil procedure Year: 1924 Page 1 of about 34 results (0.161 seconds)

Nov 19 1924 (PC)

Lachmi and anr. Vs. Ram Bahadur

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Nov-19-1924

Reported in : AIR1925All275a

daniels, j.1. it appears to me in this case that the learned judge has misunderstood the meaning of the words in clause (d) of rule 5 of order 33, of the code of civil procedure, 'where his allegations do not show a cause of action.' he has rejected the application to sue as a pauper not on the ground that the plaint does not disclose a cause of action, but on the ground that the defendant had a good defence to the suit, namely that the matter in suit between the parties was merely res judicata. it was not opened to the learned judge to dismiss the application on this ground and in doing so he has exercised a jurisdiction not vested in him by law or has at any rate acted with material irregularity in the exercise of his jurisdiction.2. i accordingly allow this application, set aside the order of the court below and direct that court to enquire into the application on the merits. costs will abide the result.

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 29 1924 (PC)

(Allabaksh Mira) Mohadeen Saheb and ors. Vs. Setti Chinna FakruddIn Sa ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-29-1924

Reported in : AIR1925Mad636; 85Ind.Cas.1045

..... has also been argued for the appellants that) since the alienees are not necessary parties to a suit under section 92, civil procedure code, the reliefs omitted cannot be asked for, in this suit, and that the plaint should not, therefore, have been rejected. in raghavalu chetti v. pellali sitamma : (1914)27mlj266 it was observed by the learned chief justice:that if they (alienees) had ..... , the claim for damages was omitted and it was held that, as the suit actually instituted was not the one, for the institution of which sanction was given, the plaint was properly rejected. the principle on which this decision is based is thus stated by muthuswami aiyar and brandt, jj.:having regard to the fact that the character of the suit which ..... not precisely correspond with the reliefs mentioned in the sanction order, or, in other words, since the suit instituted differed from the one, for which sanction was given the plaint was rightly rejected by the district munsif. the correctness of this decision is now challenged in this second appeal.2. in srinivasa v. venkata (1888) 11 mad. 148 two worshippers at a ..... 92, then there can be no reason, in our opinion, why the amendment should not be made.5. it is obvious that the further question whether the plaint in such cases should be rejected was not considered in that case. it is also not clear from the report whether the relief struck out was specifically mentioned in the order of the advocate .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 19 1924 (PC)

Sudalimuthu Pillai Alias Appavu Pillai and ors. Vs. Peria Sundaram Pil ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-19-1924

Reported in : 87Ind.Cas.25; (1925)48MLJ514

..... open to this court to interfere because the question is really one of jurisdiction as the plaint has to be rejected if the stamp duty is not paid. i am also of opinion that it is desirable that under section 115, civil procedure code, we should interfere and not leave the party to his remedy by way of appeal. ..... the proper appellate court if the plaintiff refuses to pay the court-fees and gets the plaint rejected. no doubt, there is such a remedy. but it seems to me to be a cumbrous remedy, for if the plaint is rejected he will have to pay the same stamp duty on appeal. it has been the practice ..... be paid by the defaulting trustee to the trust fund if he had misappropriated them. i hold that the court-fee of rs. 10 paid on the plaint is sufficient in this case.2. it was also argued that whatever might be my opinion in the case, i should not interfere in revision as ..... section 115, civil procedure code, to revise an order passed by the additional subordinate judge of tinnevelly declaring that ad valorem court-fee on rs. 11,000 was payable on the plaint presented to him by the petitioner before me in this court. the plaint was one under section 92 of the code, and in the plaint he asked that ..... i am therefore inclined to interfere under section 115 in this case and i do so. the civil .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 17 1924 (PC)

Amarta Lal Kumar Vs. Sisir Kumar Basu and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Nov-17-1924

Reported in : 87Ind.Cas.651

..... in suit should be assessed at rs. 9,905 and gave the plaintiff an opportunity of paying the deficit court-fees. the plaintiff defaulted and the result was that the plaint was rejected under order vii, rule 11. the plaintiff appealed against that order to the district judge and valued his appeal at the same value as he had put upon the ..... appeal is insufficiently stamped it is rejected.' it is clear from this order that the district judge did not ..... original plaint and questioned the finding of the subordinate judge as to the valuation of the suit. the learned district judge disposed of the appeal in these words. as the memorandum of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 14 1924 (PC)

KalimuddIn Ahamed Vs. EsabakuddIn and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Feb-14-1924

Reported in : AIR1924Cal830

..... successor could declare or was right in declaring the aforesaid order a nullity.26. as to (a) : the definition of the word 'decree' in the code of civil procedure, in so far as it purports to be a definition at all, lays down the following essential and distinguishing elements viz., that the decision must have been ..... true that an order of rejection of a plaint has been expressly included in the definition of a 'decree,' but the legislature has included it and no analogy can be drawn therefrom. the question ..... . i am unable to reconcile either in principle or in theory why an order rejecting a plaint should stand on a different footing from orders of dismissal for default, and yet one is a decree and the other is not. it is ..... therefrom. apart from that object this definition is of no value. i am not prepared to accept the contention of the respondent that because an order rejecting a plaint is a decree, an order dismissing an appeal on the ground that it was improperly constituted is by mere analogy to be treated as a decree ..... learned subordinate judge who was proceeding with the suit was succeeded by another officer; and he on the 5th july 1922 while rejecting a further application of the plaintiff for amendment of the plaint passed suo motu an order which ran as follows : - 'i doubt very much if the order of this court of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 14 1924 (PC)

KalimuddIn Ahammad Vs. Esahakuddin

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Feb-14-1924

Reported in : (1924)ILR51Cal715

..... his successor could declare or was right in declaring the aforesaid order a nullity.27. as to (a).--the definition of the word 'decree' in the code of civil procedure, in so far as it purports to be a definition at all, lays down the following essential and distinguishing elements, viz., that the decision must have ..... true that an order of rejection of a plaint has been expressly included in the definition of 'decree', but the legislature has included it and no analogy can be drawn therefrom. the question ..... . i am unable to reconcile either in principle or in theory why an order rejecting a plaint should stand on a different footing from orders of dismissal for default and yet one is a decree and the other is not. it is ..... therefrom. apart from that object this definition is of no value. i am not prepared to accept the contention of the respondent that because an order rejecting a plaint is a decree, an order dismissing an appeal on the ground that it was improperly constituted is by mere analogy to be treated as a decree ..... subordinate judge, who was proceeding with the suit, was succeeded by another officer; and he on the 5th july, 1922, while rejecting a further application of the plaintiff for amendment of the plaint, passed suo motu an order which ran as follows: 'i doubt very much if the order of this court of the 8th .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 01 1924 (PC)

M. Chidambaram Chettiar Vs. S.K. Kother Mytheen Rowther and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Dec-01-1924

Reported in : 87Ind.Cas.720; (1925)48MLJ491

krishnan, j.1. the order dismissing the pauper application on the sole ground that some time subsequent to the application and before the court passed its orders the petitioner became an insolvent, cannot be supported. the grounds on which a pauper application can be rejected are stated in order 33, rule 5, civil procedure code. subsequent insolvency is not one of the grounds. it is suggested that on his becoming an insolvent the petitioner ceased to have a cause of action under clause (d); but clause (d) only provides that his allegations should show a cause of action. that refers to his allegations in his plaint and not to subsequent events. the proper procedure would have been to enquire whether -the petitioner was a pauper and if he was and his allegations showed a cause of action to give him leave when his application would be numbered as a suit. if he has become insolvent the provisions of order 22, rule 8 can then be applied. it is clear that the official receiver cannot make himself a party to the pauper application but only to the suit after it is allowed.2. the petition is therefore allowed and the lower court's order is set aside and the case remanded to that court for a fresh disposal according to law. costs to abide and follow the result.

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 14 1924 (PC)

KalimuddIn Ahammad Vs. EsahakuddIn and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Feb-14-1924

Reported in : 83Ind.Cas.220

..... his successor could declare or was right in declaring the aforesaid order a nullity.26. as to (a): the definition of the word ' decree ' in the code of civil procedure, in so, far as it purports to be a definition at all, lays down the following essential and distinguishing elements viz., that the decision must have been ..... true, that an order of rejection of a plaint has been expressly included in the definition of ' decree' but the legislature has included it and no analogy can be drawn therefrom. the question whether ..... . i am unable to reconcile either in principle or in theory why an order rejecting a plaint should stand on a different footing from orders of dismissal for default, and yet one is a decree and the other is not. it is ..... . apart from that object this definition is of no value. i am not prepared to accept the contention of the respondent that because an order rejecting a plaint is a decree, an order dismissing an appeal on the ground that it was improperly constituted is by mere analogy to be treated as a decree ..... subordinate judge who was proceeding with the suit was succeeded by another officer; and he on the 5th july 1922 while rejecting a further application of the plaintiff for amendment of the plaint passed suo motu an order which ran as follows: 'i doubt very much if the order of this court of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 03 1924 (PC)

Mathura Das Vs. Samraj Singh and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Jul-03-1924

Reported in : AIR1925All240

..... has not been tried on the merits, both-courts having dismissed it as barred by section 47 of the civil procedure code. the ground taken by the trial court and approved by the court below is that, according to the allegations in the plaint ramraj singh's purchase was made after the issue of an injunction and of an attachment in execution of the ..... to file a separate suit to establish his title. it appears to us that, if the decree-holder had attempted to appeal against this order, his appeal would have-bean rejected on the ground not only that the order purported to have been passed under order 21, rule 58, but that the court below had held that the purchaser was a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 17 1924 (PC)

Fateh Singh Vs. Jagannath Baksh Singh

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Nov-17-1924

Reported in : (1925)27BOMLR725

..... dismissed. this confirms the view which the courts below and their lordships have taken.22. several authorities upon the construction of section 11 of the code of civil procedure were cited, which it was suggested put a construction on explanation iv which was favourable to the plaintiffs. they have been considered by their lordships; ..... , besides denying the custom and asserting the validity of the widow's gift have pleaded that the suit was barred by section 11 of the code of civil procedure as raising a question which had already been heard and decided, both courts, as already stated, took this view, and without going into other ..... of a ten-anna share in the property.12. this application to amend came on for hearing on march 15, 1909, and the learned judge rejected the application to be allowed to add the amendments averring the family custom, holding that it was an attempt to introduce a new case. when ..... that they were some at least of the nearest reversionary heir, or that the only nearer reversionary heir had colluded with the widow. in their plaint they did not rely on collusion, which they only introduced in their replication, taking, however, that view of the pleadings which is most favourable ..... a suit for possession, and that in order to show their right it had become necessary to mention certain additional averments of fact in the plaint, the additional averments being allegations of the family custom and a statement as to the death of the widow, and the new relief claimed .....

Tag this Judgment!


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