Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: rejection of plaint code of civil procedure Year: 1952 Page 1 of about 82 results (0.069 seconds)

Nov 10 1952 (SC)

Nemi Chand and anr. Vs. the Edward Mills Co. Ltd. and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Nov-10-1952

Reported in : AIR1953SC28; 1953(1)BLJR115; (1953)IMLJ117(SC); [1953]4SCR197

..... , rule 11, civil procedure code, provides as follows :- 'the plaint shall be rejected - (b) where the relief claimed is undervalued, and the plaintiff, on being required by the court to correct the valuation within a time to ..... within a time to be fixed by the court, fails to do so.' 14. an order rejecting a plaint is a decree as defined in section 2, sub-section (ii), and is appealable as such. there is an apparent conflict between the provisions of the code of civil procedure and the provisions of section 12 which make the order relating to valuation final and efforts ..... be fixed by the court, fails to do so;...... (d) where the relief claimed is properly valued, but the plaint is written upon paper insufficiently stamped, ..... chapter on a plaint or memorandum of appeal shall be decided by the court in which such plaint or memorandum, as the case may be, is filed, and such decision shall be final as between the parties to the suit.' 13. the provisions of this section have to be read and construed keeping in view the provisions of the code of civil procedure. order vii .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 11 1952 (HC)

City Bank of Lahore and ors. Vs. Duni Chand and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jun-11-1952

Reported in : AIR1952P& H353

..... 'inter alia' that the suit could not be instituted in the civil courts at simla.3. finding that the suit could not be instituted in the civil courts at simla, the court of first instance has rejected the plaint under rule 11 of order vii of the code of civil procedure. the plaintiff-bank appeals: '6. that defendants nos. 2 ..... no. 2 also resides at simla, this court has jurisdiction to try the suit. in any case, leave, of the court under section 20 of the code of civil procedure has also been obtained to institute the suit at simla against defendant no. 3'.4. defendants nos. 1 and 2 put in a written statement. paragraphs ..... the preliminary issue, the court of first instance seems to think that the case did not tome within section 20(b) of the code of civil procedure and that leave to institute the suit at simla ought not to have been given.10. the relevant provisions of section 20 of the ..... nos. 6 and 12 of the written statement read:'6. para. 6 of the plaint is admitted to this extent that the firm duni chand and sons ..... joint hindu family. defendant no. 3 is one of the members of the joint hindu family. in rejecting the plaint, the court of first instance thought that the case did not come within section 20(b) of the code. in so thinking, the court failed to take into consideration the facts admitted by the answering defendants .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 03 1952 (HC)

Dharam Chand Vs. Punam Chand

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Mar-03-1952

Reported in : AIR1953Raj6

..... to recover a sum of rs. 10,000/- as damages for malicious prosecution. the plaint of that suit has been rejected by the civil judge, sirohi under order vii rule 11 (a) of the code of civil procedure. the plaintiff has come up in appeal to this court and has valued the memorandum of ..... schedule ii, article 11. the order in the present case, under section 2(2) of the code of civil procedure, is deemed to be a decree. under these circumstances, even if the rejection of the plaint is treated merely as an order, it must be deemed to have the force of a decree ..... contained thewords 'from an order rejecting a plaint or'and these were omitted by section 155 of thecode of civil procedure when the rejection ofa plaint was included as a decree in section 2 ofthe code as these words had become redundant. it is obvious, therefore, that an order rejecting a plaint under order vii, rule 11amounts ..... and would not be covered by schedule ii, article 11.learned counsel was not able to point out a single case where a memorandum of appeal from an order rejecting ..... question as to how a memorandum of appeal in such a case should be valued. but this decision clearly shows that appeals from orders rejecting plaints under order vii, rule 11 are covered by schedule i, article 1 of the court-fees act and not by schedule ii, article .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 25 1952 (HC)

Sreedam Chandra Bhur Vs. Tencori Mukherjee and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Jun-25-1952

Reported in : AIR1953Cal222,57CWN104

..... defendants in their capacity as members of those bodies.4. the plaint was originally filed on the 4th december 1951, and was immediately rejected by the learned subordinate judge under order vii, rule 11(d) of the code of civil procedure for non-compliance of the provisions contained in section 80 of the code. a fresh plaint was filed the next day, and the learned subordinate judge ..... it is so prayed, and that without passing an order for rejection of the plaint. -- 'gunnaji bhavaji v. makanji khoosal chand', 34 bom 250. as was observed in --'ratan chand v. secy. of state', 18 cal wn 1340, action is to be taken under order vii, rule 11 of the code of civil procedure only if there is a clear and specific admission in the ..... heard the counsel for the plaintiff and reserved his orders. the next day the learned subordinate judge again came to the conclusion that the plaint must be rejected as the chandernagore administration was ..... plaint from which it follows that the suit is barred-reference may also be made to the observations of this court in -- 'pran krishna v. kripanath', 21 cal wn 209.8. let us now consider whether on the plaint as filed the court will be justified in rejecting in limine the plaint .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 06 1952 (HC)

Vishwa Nath and anr. Vs. Smt. Sita Bai Anand and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jun-06-1952

Reported in : AIR1952P& H335

..... ,831/14/3. the deficiency in court-fee was not made up and the plaint was, in due course, rejected under order vii, rule 11, civil procedure code.on appeal, the learned senior subordinate judge upheld the decision of the trial court. a second appeal was brought to this court and the matter came ..... possession of property alienated by the father. it was held that the transfer could be treated null and void, and so the plaintiff could maintain a possessory suit and his plaint should therefore have been stamped under section 7(v) of the court-fees act. '16 pat 766' was also a case in which a document, namely, a deed of gift ..... reliefs claimed at rs. 130/- for purposes of jurisdiction and at the same figure for purposes of court-fee. objection was taken that the amount of court-fee on the plaint was insufficient and the trial judge upheld the objection holding that court-fee was payable on the total value of the two decrees, namely, on the sum of rs. 42 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 07 1952 (HC)

Sm. K. Ponnalagu Ammal Vs. the State of Madras, Represented by the Sec ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-07-1952

Reported in : AIR1953Mad485; (1953)IMLJ410

..... j. at page 42 in -- '.) this extension is evidently based on grounds of justice. guha j. in --62 cal 701 (k) says:'.....the code of civil procedure, by the provisions relating to the right of appeal, as they now stand, does not provide for an appeal against a finding contained in a judgment; ..... bhogilal v. dakore temple committee . 'the term 'judgment' in the letters patent of the high court means in civil cases a decree and not a judgment in the ordinary sense.'in the code of civil procedure we find three expressions used relating to the decisions of courts, namely, decree, order and judgment. decree is denned ..... or any of the matters in controversy in the suit and may be either preliminary or final. it shall be deemed to include the rejection of a plaint and the determination of any question within section 47 or section 144, but shall not include (a) any adjudication from which an appeal ..... provided.'the argument was that the word 'judgment' in this clause had the same meaning as the word 'decree' in the civil procedure code and section 96 of the code which provides for an appeal from 'every decree passed by any court exercising original jurisdiction to the court authorised to hear appeals from ..... lies as an appeal from an order, or (b) any order, of dismissal for default.''order' means'the formal expression of any decision of a civil court .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 27 1952 (HC)

K.S. Namjundaiah Vs. Setti Chikka Thippanna

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Mar-27-1952

Reported in : AIR1952Kant123; AIR1952Mys123

..... the recent decision of the supreme court in 'logendra-nath jha v. polai lal biswas', 1951 scj 503, wherein it has been observed:'though sub-section (1) of section 439, criminal procedure code, authorises the high court to exercise, in its discretion, any of the powers conferred on a court of appeal by section 423, sub-section (4) specially excludes the power to ..... reputation of the person against whom the imputation is made. ratanlal in his law of crimes has stated at page 1235 that in the words of the authors of the code,'the essence of the offence of defamation consists in its tendency to cause that description of pain which is felt by a person who knows himself to be the object .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 03 1952 (HC)

M.S. Srikantaiah Vs. M. Hanumantha Rao and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Dec-03-1952

Reported in : AIR1954Kant138; AIR1954Mys138

..... for the driver to have stopped it though he saw the carts at a good distance. this is nobody's case, as the plaintiff does not allege even in the plaint that the bus was being driven at a high speed.2. the learned munsiff appears to be under an impression that the burden of proof shifts on the owner and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 08 1952 (HC)

R.S. Ramakrishna and ors. Vs. K. Rajagopal and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Aug-08-1952

Reported in : AIR1953Kant139; AIR1953Mys139

..... declares unequivocally that any relief claimed in the plaint which is not expressly granted by the decree shall for purposes of section 11 be deemed to have been refused. stress is laid in that explanation on 'the relief claimed in the suit'. mulla in his code of civil procedure, 11th edition, has pointed out that explanation ..... such part of it as the present plaintiffs could be held liable to contribute towards the same with interest thereon. that alternative claim of theirs also was rejected by the learned district judge who held that they had not made out that they had paid off the bank. the appeal to this court in -- ..... doctrine of constructive 'res judicata' enunciated in explanation iv to section 11 did not apply. abdur bahim, offg. c. j. observed that 'by the plaint in the earlier suit, all that was asked for was a declaration that the alleged sale was not genuine. it did not contain any alternative prayer that ..... suit only on his furnishing security, which he did, by executing in favour of the court on 31-3-1933 a mortgage bond whereby the plaint schedule properties and a house were given as security towards the satisfaction of any decree that may be passed in that suit. that suit was subsequently ..... 8 is his brother. the plaintiffs 1 to 7 have brought a suit for partition and separate possession of their 13/15th share in the plaint schedule four items of property consisting of about 172 acres of wet and dry lands situate in gundulpet taluk, for mesne profits for four years before .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 10 1952 (SC)

importers and Manufacturers Ltd. Vs. Pheroze Framroze Taraporewala and ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Dec-10-1952

Reported in : AIR1953SC73; (1953)55BOMLR271; [1953]4SCR226

..... bench of the small causes court dismissed the appeal with costs. the second defendant thereafter moved the high court in revision under section 115 of the code of civil procedure which was also dismissed with costs. the second defendant has now come up in appeal before us after having obtained leave of this court. 2. ..... 1947, at the same rent. the defendants contested the suit on a variety of grounds, but the trial court by its judgment dated october 18, 1950, rejected all the pleas and passed a decree directing both the defendants to vacate the flat by march 31, 1951, and awarding, only as against the first defendant, ..... to any protection under the act. the claim or question as to the respective rights of the plaintiffs and the second defendant thus raised in the plaint certainly arises out of the act and the language of section 28 appears to be wide enough to cover the same. apart from that section, ..... premises at rs. 370 per month from november 1, 1947, till delivery of vacant possession. the appellant points out that on the face of the plaint the plaintiffs declined to recognise it as a lawful occupant as subtenant or otherwise and treated it as a mere trespasser having no lawful claim to the ..... application, and the court of small causes had no jurisdiction to entertain this suit. in view of this plea it is necessary to refer to the plaint in this suit. after setting forth their title as owners of the sunama house as trustees under the will of framroze d. b. taraporewala the plaintiffs .....

Tag this Judgment!


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