Limitation Act, 1963, Section 5, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 41, Rule 3A -- Condonation of delay - Delay of 1116 days in filing appeal - Respondents raised very same grounds which were raised in earlier round of litigation and delay was not condoned - Grounds put forth were insufficient to constitute `sufficient cause' u/s 5 of Limitation Act - Application dismissed...........
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 39, Rule 1, 2 -- Interim injunction - Court must satisfy three essential prerequisites before granting an interim injunction i.e: (i) existence of a prima facie case in favour of applicant evincing a reasonable probability of success at trial; (ii) balance of convenience lies in favour of granting injunctive relief; and (iii) applicant..........
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 39, Rule 1, 2 -- Interim injunction - Appellant is incontrovertibly absolute owner of property with disputed area constituting merely a fraction of entire premises - He has already entered into an agreement to redevelop the property - In these circumstances, restraint imposed by impugned injunction order significantly circumscribes..........
Limitation Act, 1963, Section 5, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Section 114, Order 47, Rule 1 -- Condonation of delay in filing review application - Appellants were suffering from diabetes and hyper tension which is not sufficient ground for condoning delay in filing review application...........
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Section 114, Order 47, Rule 1 -- Review - In exercise of jurisdiction U.O.47.R.1 CPC, it is not permissible for an erroneous decision to be reheard and corrected - A review petition has a limited purpose and cannot be allowed to be an appeal in disguise...........
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Section 114, Order 47, Rule 1 -- Review - Lack of jurisdiction either pecuniary or territorial, has to be taken at the earliest opportunity - Since the same has been raised before High Court, appellant cannot be allowed to raise lack of pecuniary jurisdiction at such belated stage - Moreover, on the date of filing of first appeal, High Court had..........
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 9, Rule 13 -- Ex parte decree - Setting aside - Defendant was duly served and even filed written statement - He thus, cannot be allowed to plead that he was not aware of ex parte decree - Merely because defendant sold or had agreed to sell property in dispute to third party, who had asked defendant to take care of litigation, cannot be..........
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 9, Rule 13 -- Ex parte decree - Setting aside - Limitation - Defendant was duly served and even filed written statement - Limitation for moving application for setting aside ex parte decree U.O.9.R.13 CPC thus, to commence from date of ex parte decree and not from the date of alleged knowledge...........
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 23, Rule 1 -- Withdrawal of suit without seeking liberty to file fresh suit - Plaintiff abandoned his prayer with respect to declaratory relief - Plaintiff cannot maintain present suit seeking same relief without seeking permission to file fresh one at the time of withdrawal of earlier suit abandoning his claim...........
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 23, Rule 1 -- Main relief abandoned in the previously instituted suit without seeking permission to file fresh suit - Prayer in the subsequent suit stemming out from the relief earlier abandoned - Plaintiff cannot maintain subsequent suit for consequential relief...........
