Showing : 591-600 of 1043 Results

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2007
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 23, Rule 3, 3-A, 3-B-- Compromise decree - Not signed by all the parties - Same not lawful or valid - Compromise decree on that basis cannot be passed - Rights of defendant No.2 were in issue and in absence of his signing the compromise, no valid decree could have been passed on the basis of such compromise...........
KERALA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2007
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Section 2(10), Order 21, Rule 10-- Execution - Suit dismissed and positive order in favour of defendant directing plaintiff to remove unauthorised constructions made during pendency of suit - Non compliance of order - Execution petition at the instance of defendant is maintainable...........
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2007
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Section 11, Order 2, Rule 2-- Res judicata & rule embodied in O.2.R.2 CPC - Distinction - Former places emphasis on the plaintiffs duty to exhaust all available grounds in support of his claim while the latter requires the plaintiff to claim all reliefs emanating from the same cause of action...........
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2007
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 6, Rule 2-- Pleadings - Plea of ownership - It is sufficient for the plaintiff to allege in plaint that he is the owner and it is not necessary for plaintiff to state in plaint that he is owner on the basis of sale deed - Certified copy of sale deed filed is admissible for that purpose - Plaintiff cannot be..........
KERALA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2007
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 17, Rule 3(a), 3(b)-- A decision U.O.17.R.3(a) as in the case of a decision under O.17.R.2 Explanation shall be a decision on merits - A decision purportedly made under R.3(a) unless the same is on merits will have to be construed as a decision under R.3(b) itself...........
KERALA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2007
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 17, Rule 3(a)-- Applicability of the provision - Conditions necessary are : (1) Time must have been granted to the party concerned to produce his evidence or cause the attendance of his witnesses or perform any other act necessary for the further progress of the suit; (2) The party failed in doing any of the acts..........
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Year of decision: 2007
Details
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Section 166(1)(c), Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Section 2(11)-- Accident - Claim petition by a legal heir but who was not dependent on deceased - Held, claim petition is maintainable - Claim petition has to be decided on ground of right to entitlement - Liability does not cease because there is absence of dependency...........
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Year of decision: 2007
Details
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Section 166(1)(c), Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Section 2(11)-- Accident - In case of death, all or any of the legal representatives of the deceased become entitled to compensation and any such legal representative can file a claim petition - Where all the legal representatives had not joined, then application can be made on behalf of the legal representatives..........
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Year of decision: 2007
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 2, Rule 2-- Provision of O.2.R.2 CPC is directed to securing the exhaustion of the relief in respect of a cause of action and not to the inclusion in one and the same action or different causes of action, even though they arise from the same transaction - One great criterion is, when the question arises as to..........
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Year of decision: 2007
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 2, Rule 2-- Scope - (1) The correct test in cases falling under Order II Rule 2, is whether the claim in the new suit is in fact founded upon a cause of action distinct from that which was the foundation of the former suit; (2) The `cause of action' means every fact which will be necessary for the plaintiff..........

Showing : 591-600 of 1043 Results