Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Mar-26-1976
Reported in : AIR1976Kant164; ILR1976KAR1279; 1976(1)KarLJ418
..... abatement. it may be that the suit was rendered incompetent after 15-12-1970 due to the absence of the consent under section 87-b of the code of civil procedure and the court could either reject the plaint or dismiss the suit. but neither of these actions was taken by the court. the suit therefore must be deemed to have been pending in the ..... lower court even after 15-12-1970 since it was not disposed of under any of the provisions of the code of civil procedure.10. the next contention of mr narayana rao ..... filed bef6re the section was enacted is covered by the words 'no ruler of a foreign state may be sued in any court......' in section 86(1) of the code of civil procedure. while rejecting the said contention it was observed as follows: -'in our opinion these arguments cannot be accepted. the word 'sued' means not only the filing of a suit or a ..... presented to the proper officer, it was held that there was a difference between the 'presentation of the plaint' and 'the admission or receipt of the suit ' considering the terms of order tv rules 1 and 2 of the code of civil procedure, it was held that the requirements as to obtaining of the leave of the chamber judge and the admission of the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Mar-15-1976
Reported in : AIR1976Cal467,80CWN819
..... where the plaint does not disclose any cause of action. the grievance of the plaintiffs is against the black sea steamship company for ..... plaint off the file and alternatively for dismissing the suit as this court has no jurisdiction to entertain this suit and alternatively for stay of the suit.3. the first question is, whether the plaint should be taken off the file because it does not disclose any cause of action. under order 7, rule 11 of the code of civil procedure the plaint should he rejected ..... not available or it could have been in personam against the shipowner who could not have been sued because of section 86 of the code of civil procedure. in any event in the view i have taken on the first aspect of the matter it is not necessary for me to ..... the water transport concern was state property and, therefore, it belonged to the soviet government. reliance was placed on section 86 of the code of civil procedure in aid of the submission that no suit can have been instituted against the soviet government in india. speaking for myself personally i am ..... paragraph, of section 230 were fulfilled in the instant case. in the aforesaid view of the matter it must, therefore, be held that the plaint as filed does not disclose any cause of action against the defendant.4. on behalf of the respondents it was contended that this question should .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Feb-12-1976
Reported in : AIR1976P& H316
..... 's case, the learned judge of the madras high court, found that there was non-compliance of the provisions of section 80 of the code of civil procedure and that non-compliance with the requisites of section 80 entailed rejection of plaint under clause (d) of rule 11. the learned judge further observed that even if clause (d) of rule 11 did not apply, then ..... again is wholly irrelevant and no reference need be made to its facts. in noor mohammad's case (supra), again, the question of rejection of plaint was decided on the basis of the provisions of section 80 of the code of civil procedure, and that decision is of no help. to the same effect is the decision in harihar mahapatra's case (supra).10. the ..... for disposal on merits.a.d. koshal, j.12. i fully agree and would like to emphasise that the very idea of a plaint being rejected 'in part' is repugnant to the provisions of rule 11 of order vii of the code of civil procedure, the plaint in a suit is the document evidencing the suit and not the suit itself and can, therefore, either be ..... . the defendants contested the suit. after the written statement was filed, defendant no. 4 made an application on 22nd august, 1972, praying that the plaint be rejected in pursuance of the provisions of rule 11 of order vii of the code of civil procedure. the application was resisted by the bank. after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the trial court found that the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Decided on : Sep-16-1976
Reported in : AIR1977Delhi158; ILR1976Delhi773
..... it had jurisdiction to decide the same. (7) in damodar prasad v. aditya maharaj, : air1972pat289 , the court observed that where the plaint was rejected for non-payment of court-fees, an application under section 151 of the code of civil procedure was maintainable. in balram naik v. krushna kumari, : air1975ori173 , the court approved the rule laid down in damodar prasad's case and ..... plaintiff or the counsel for the plaintiff and not finding the deficit court-fees having been made good the plaint was rejected under rule 11 of order 7 of the code of civil procedure. the application for restoration was dismissed on the ground that the order rejecting the plaint was appealable and as such the court had no jurisdiction or power to restore the suit. (4) ..... . misra (1) this revision petition has been filed under section 115 of the code of civil procedure against the order of the sub-judge, dated 2nd march, 1973, by which he has refused the application of the petitioner for restoration of the suit, in which the plaint had been rejected for non-payment of the deficiency of the court-fees. (2) the material facts ..... the power of restoration can be exercised under section 151 of the code of civil procedure where no express provision exists for such restoration (see kunjabehari das v. chanchala das, : air1966ori24 ). (8) the court below, thereforee, erred in holding that it had no jurisdiction to set aside the order rejecting the plaint in exercise of inherent powers. i am also of the view that .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jul-28-1976
Reported in : (1976)78BOMLR549
..... amount of fees paid on the memorandum of appeal. section 15 of the said act talks of rejection of the plaint. rejection of plaints is dealt with in order vii, rule 11 of the code of civil procedure, whereas order vii, rule 10 of the said code talks of return of plaints. it is pertinent, however, to note that section 15 of the bombay court-fees act does not ..... restrict the eases of rejection of plaints only to cases falling within the provisions of order vii, rule 11 of the code ..... to be represented is situate in this country. now the plain words of order vii, rule 10 of the code of civil procedure do not warrant any such conclusion. the plaint is to be returned to the plaintiff who may then file it in the appropriate court or not. it is not necessary nor required by the 'wording of that rule ..... a limited or restricted application to clause 12 is on the footing where he considers an order for returning of the plaint which could be made under order vii, rule 10 of the code of civil procedure. according to him, such an order for the return of plaint can be made under this provision only in cases in which the proper court to which the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Himachal Pradesh
Decided on : Apr-20-1976
Reported in : AIR1977HP28
..... plaintiff nor his mukhtiar had signed the amended plaint, the learned senior subordinate judge has rejected the plaint. it seems to me that the requirement in rules 14 and 15 of order 6 of the code of civil procedure that a plaint should be signed by the party and should be verified by him are purely matters of ..... procedure, and it is always open to such party to make good the deficiency at a later stage. i ..... r.s. pathak, c.j.1. this is a plaintiff s revision petition directed against an order of the learned senior subordinate judge, kalpa rejecting a plaint.2. the plaintiff filed an amended plaint on july 25, 1975, but it was not signed and verified by the plaintiff himself or by his mukhtiar. it was signed by the plaintiff's pleader. because neither the ..... , air 1961 bom 292. the proper course for the learned senior subordinate .judge was to have given an opportunity to the plaintiff or his mukhtiar to sign and verify the plaint. it would have been a different matter if such opportunity being afforded the plaintiff or his mukhtiar did not avail of it.3. shri r.k. sharma, appearing for the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : May-07-1976
Reported in : AIR1976SC1503; (1976)3SCC800; SuppSCR664
..... the appellant was that as the decision of the tribunal did not amount to a decree as contemplated by section 2(2) of the cede of civil procedure 1908, ad valorem court fees were not payable and the appellants were entitled to pay court fees as prescribed in schedule ii article 11 of the ..... passed by a tribunal on a preliminary point or that passed on merits. even otherwise, according to the general scheme of the cpc whether the suit culminates in the rejection of the claim of the plaintiff and thereby in dismissal of the suit or in acceptance of the claim of the plaintiff, where ..... means the formal expression of an adjudication upon any right claimed, or defence set up in a civil court when such adjudication so far as regards the court expressing it, decides the suit or, appeal. an order rejecting a plaint, or directing accounts to be taken, or determining any question mentioned or referred to in section ..... term 'decree' in the same sense as it was used in section 2(2) of the cpc, 1908 or in the code obtaining before that day. this also shows that the court fees act and the cpc are more or less complementary to each other. this matter was the subject-matter of a decision ..... verified. thus the scheme of the cpc of 1859 as disclosed by the aforementioned provisions, also points to the conclusion that a decree marks the culmination of a proceeding which is described as a suit, and which, according to the said code, is initiated by means of a plaint. proceedings for letters of administration .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Decided on : Apr-21-1976
Reported in : ILR1976Delhi311
..... november, 1975, at best it could be said that the petition as at present filed does not disclose a cause of action and was liable to be rejected under order 7 rule 11 of the civil procedure code and even in such a case the petitioner could seek amendment. we express our inability to sustain this contention. in gaganmal ramchand's case a contention ..... him from acting, in any manner, prejudicially to the public order or the security of india or to the security of the state or to the defense of india or civil defense or the maintenance of supplies and services essential to the community. the petitioner in the premises avers that the impugned orders had been passed with ulterior motive and collateral ..... that he had not done any such act from which it could be inferred that his activities were and are in any manner prejudicial to the defense of india or civil defense or maintenance of public order or the security of india or the maintenance of supplies and services essential to the community. (4) giving the background, according to him, leading ..... was raised that since the claim did not disclose any cause of action the plaint ought to have been rejected and that the trial court in allowing the amendment of .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Orissa
Decided on : Jul-19-1976
Reported in : AIR1976Ori216; 42(1976)CLT1018
..... orderp.k. mohanti, j.1. this revisional application under section 115 of the code of civil procedure is directed against an order of the learned district judge of bolangir rejecting an application for amendment of the plaint.2. the petitioner and opposite party no. 4 filed title suit no. 79 of 1967 in the court of ..... one. the amendment sought for appears on the face of it to be an afterthought and totally disjunct from the original plaint.5. rule 17 of order 6 of the code of civil procedure says that the court may allow amendments which would be found necessary for the purpose of determining the real question in ..... as to whether ugre is alive or dead. neither ugre nor his heirs are parties to the suit.3. the prayer for amendment of the plaint was rejected by the learned district judge on the grounds that:(i) it sought to introduce a new case,(ii) it would entail addition of new parties ..... the court held that where the plaintiffs made out a new case for which there is not the slightest basis in the plaint as it originally stood, there is a strong ground for rejecting amendment5-c. the case of doss ram doss v. mehendro roy decha, (1872) 18 suth wr 274 appears to be ..... , but to avoid multiplicity of proceedings, subsequent events may also be allowed to be pleaded during the pendency of the proceeding by amendment of the plaint. the plaintiffs sought for declaration of title on the strength of their purchase. by the proposed amendment they claimed title by inheritance. the amendment sought .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Decided on : Aug-06-1976
Reported in : 15(1979)DLT129
..... to defendants 1 and 2 for a sum of rs. l,15,000.00 . another defense taksn is that .the plaint is liable to be rejected under order 7, rule 11 of the code of civil procedure since the alternative relief for recovery of money valus has not been asked for in the suit. (8) none of the ..... taken into possession by the joint receivers. (20) the submission relating to the non-maintainability of the suit under order 20, rule 10 of the code of civil procedure and or not in compliance with form 32 thereof will now be considered. order 20 rule 10 places an obligation on the court to state in the ..... asunder : (1) this court has no territorial jurisdiction. (2) the suit is had for misguide of cause of action under order 2 rule 3 of the code of civil procedure. (3) the contract act is exhaustive and according to section 167, the plaintiff has to seek his remedy under section 167 of the contract act. (16) ..... j.(1) this order will dispose of la. 444 of 1976 filed by the plaintiff under order 40 rule 1 and section 151 of the code of civil procedure for appoiltment of receivers for taking immediate possession of the cylinders lying stored at various places mantioned in the application, as well as la. 468 ..... or identification of the cylinders has been given by the plaintiff. (3) the suit is not maintainable under order 20, rule 10 of the code of civil procedure as alternative relief of money has not been asked for and in this connection the learned counsel referred to form 32 of appendix 'a' of the .....Tag this Judgment!