Showing : 11-20 of 32 Results

DELHI HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2014
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 7, Rule 11-- Rejection of plaint - No cause of action in favour of plaintiff and against defendant Nos.4 to 13 to file a suit for recovery as there is no privity of contract - There is non disclosure of facts to proceed with the trial of suit qua defendant Nos.4 to 13 as there is no allegation of any liability..........
KERALA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2012
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 1, Rule 1, 3, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 2, Rule 3-- Joint trial - Circumstances requisite to allow joint-trial are (1) A common question of law or common question of fact must arise from all such suits and (2) In all such suits, the right to relief must be in respect of or arising out of same act or transaction or same series of act or transactions..........
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2012
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 39, Rule 1, 2-- Temporary injunction - Grant of - Plaintiff had not been able to prove that property in dispute was joint property of the parties - Trial Court was of the view that appellant will not suffer any irreparable loss in case suit is decided finally, but has failed to consider that if it comes in the..........
DELHI HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2011
Details
Hindu Law, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 20, Rule 12, Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988, Section 4(1), Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 41, Rule 23-- Appeal - Remand - Counter claim - One plea of partition of joint family taken - Plea categorically rejected by trial Court - Held, it is clear that counter claim stood rejected - Matter cannot be remanded back even when Court has not given specific observation in the concluding paras of the..........
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2011
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 1, Rule 10-- Impleadment of a party - Application for - Delay of 7 years - Petitioner, son of defendant sought his impleadment after lapse of 7 years form the date of institution of suit on the ground that he is coparcener of joint Hindu family - Earlier Trial court was directed to conclude the proceeding..........
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2009
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 7, Rule 11-- Rejection of plaint - Plea that ad valorem Court fee is payable - Suit for declaration that plaintiff alongwith defendants No.1 to 3 are owners in joint possession - Plaintiff claiming relief of declaration and injunction on the basis of existing title - Trial Court dismissed the application by..........
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2009
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Section 151, Order 39, Rule 1, 2-- Ad interim injunction - Plaintiff and defendant purchasing land comprising khasra numbers which were still joint and not yet partitioned by co-sharers - Held, even if the parties purchased the property by specific khasra numbers and boundaries, it cannot be said that they were in exclusive..........
KERALA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2009
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Section 151-- Consolidation/joint trial of suits - While considering joint trial too much significance is not to be given to the fact as to whether the contesting parties are the same and determination of the rights of the parties arising under the two suits are the same or intimately connected - Determining..........
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2008
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 4-A-(As in U.P.) - Consolidation of suits - When two or more suits or proceedings are pending in the same court, and the court is of opinion that it is expedient in the interest of justice, it may by order direct their joint trial, whereupon all such suits and proceedings may be decided upon the..........
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2007
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 20, Rule 18-- Suit for partition - Property in exclusive name of respondent - Appellant failed to adduce evidence to confirm that joint family property nucleus had sufficient funds to acquire suit property and therefore it was joint property - Respondent led sufficient evidence that he purchased family land..........

Showing : 11-20 of 32 Results