Showing : 11-20 of 21 Results

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Year of decision: 2010
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 37, Rule 1, 2, 3, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 15, Rule 3, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 5, Rule 5-- Summary suits - Expeditious disposal of summary suits is provided in O.5.R.5, O.15.R.3 & O.37.Rr.1, 2 & 3 CPC...........
KERALA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2010
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 37, Rule 2-- Setting aside decree passed U.O.37.R.2(3) - Decree can be set aside under special circumstances envisaged U.O.37.R.4 - In an application U.O.37.R.4 defendant should not only show sufficient cause for his non appearance on relevant date but also disclose grounds to defend the suit...........
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2007
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 37, Rule 3, 4-- Summary suit - Leave to defend - Not applied within 10 days of service of summons - Decree passed - Application to set aside exparte decree - Summons as prescribed in Form No.4-A issued to defendant contrary to Sub-rule (4) & (5) of Rule 3 of Order 37 CPC - Summons no where mentioned that before..........
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2007
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 37, Rule 2-- Summary suit - Requirement before a summary suit lies are : (1) There must be a concluded contract; (2) The contract must be in writing; (3) The contract must contain an express or implied promise to pay...........
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2005
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 37, Rule 3-- Summary suit - Leave to defend - Plea that defendant was not served with summons for judgment - Trial Court holding that once the summons in substituted form is served then there is no need to issue summons for judgment - O.37.R.3 prescribes that defendant should file appearance within ten days of..........
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2005
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 9, Rule 13, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 37, Rule 2, 3-- Provision of O.9.R.13 is not applicable to a decree passed under O.37.Rr.3(6) or R.2(3)...........
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Year of decision: 1999
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 37, Rule 4-- Summary suit - Leave to defend - Granted to defendant No.3 - Plea of defendant Nos.1 and 2 that when leave was granted to defendant No.3 leave should have been granted to defendants 1 and 2 to avoid inconsistent decrees - Not tenable - No bar under CPC to pass decree against some defendants...........
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 1999
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 37, Rule 3-- Conditional leave to defend - Defendant employed as an Engineer Trainee with the plaintiff - Plaintiff was to serve for a period of two years after the completion of probation period - Defendant in default was liable to pay liquidated damages and also the salary for at least 3 years on the basis..........
PUNJAB AND HARAYANA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 1998
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 37, Rule 3(5)-- Unconditional leave to defend - Summary suit by Bank - Bank had been purchasing Hundis and making payments though alleged Bills not being honoured - Leave granted without any condition upheld in view of law laid down by Supreme Court in M/s. Sunil Enterprises JT 1998(3) SC 641...........
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 1997
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 37, Rule 3(3), Partnership Act, 1932, Section 32(3)-- Proviso - Partnership firm - Summary suit - Leave to defend - One of the defendants stating on affidavit that he had retired from the firm prior to the suit transaction - Plaintiff found to have dealt with the firm without knowledge of the said defendant's retirement - In view of S.32(3) and its..........

Showing : 11-20 of 21 Results