In a suit filed against Reciever appointed by court sanction u/s 80 CPC is required – however if leave nto taken before instituion is taken afterwards (leave to continue with suit) then defect is not fatal so as to defeat the very action. Courts should not be hypertechnical. Supreme Court of India Everest Coal Company […]Read More Suit against court appointed Reciever Sanction u/s 80 CPC sine qua non
Comment : In this case an unregistered firm sued to recover possession from a tenant (erstwhile insofar as term of tenancy had ceased) – the suit was resisted on the ground that since the basis of suit lied in contract entered into with tenant – it is hit by the mischief of S.69 and an […]Read More Eviction of Tenant by unregistered partnership firm !
Comment : This case takes a very pragmatic view of requirment of service of 15 days notice before filing a suit for recovery of possession after termination of month to month tenancy, it says that even if the tenant pleads non service of notice – if otherwise landlord – tenant relationship is accepted, the service of […]Read More Service of Notice in Suit for Eviction – held 106 TPA automatically complied.
Supreme Court of India Federal Bank Ltd. vs V.M. Jog Engineering Ltd. And Ors. on 29 September, 2000 Equivalent citations: AIR 2000 SC 3166, 2001 106 CompCas 267 SC Author: M J Rao Bench: M Rao, U Banerjee JUDGMENT M. Jagannadha Rao, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. The appellant Federal Bank at Bombay was the […]Read More Forgery and Cheating
Comment : In this case the court held that S.151 does not empower the court to pass wild anti suit injunctions – where the power is expressly given in S.94(a) CPC/O.39 R 1 & 2, 151 should be pushed into action only rarely. In this case a court gave an anti suit injunction staying proceedings […]Read More Manohar Lal Chopra v. RaI bahadur Seth Hiralal – Supreme Court on Court’s power to grant injunction under it’s inherent powers.
Comment : In this case the Court held two basic points :- i) Civil and Criminal Proceedings can go on, on an acquittal u/s 138 would not automatically oust a civil suit for recovery. ii) Doctrine of Reverse Burden – to be proceeded with caution – presumption de hors proof of foundational facts improper. Supreme Court […]Read More 138 Acquittal won’t bar civil suit for recovery says Supreme Court
The question raised in this civil revision petition is as to whether under Order VI, Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code, amendment of the plaint in a partition suit can be allowed at the instance of the defendants? Court held yes – since holistically in partition suit there are no judgment debtors and strict […]Read More Amendment of Plaint to prevent partial partition – application by defendant ?
Supreme Court of India Krishna Mohan Kul @ Nani Charan Kul … vs Pratima Maity And Ors. on 9 September, 2003 Equivalent citations: AIR 2003 SC 4351, 2004 (1) JCR 30 SC Author: A Pasayat Bench: D Raju, A Pasayat JUDGMENT Arijit Pasayat, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. By the impugned judgment, learned Single Judge […]Read More Burden of Proving good faith of transactions hit by undue influence