Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.28 seconds)
Narharibhai Chaturbhai Patel vs Ashish Mukundlal Shah on 24 May, 2022 cites

Jethiben vs Maniben And Anr. on 18 March, 1983

12. So far as the purshish ie., application Ex. 124 is concerned, if that application is allowed, it would result into the final disposal of the suit. The petitioner-original plaintiff has challenged the order passed below application Ex. 124 by which, original plaintiff was not permitted to withdraw the suit unconditionally. If ultimately, original plaintiff is permitted to withdraw the suit by allowing the said application Ex. 124, naturally, its effect would by that the entire suit would be determined. Considering the nature of the aforesaid two applications, as both the applications cannot be considered Page 20 of 27 Downloaded on : Tue May 24 20:39:06 IST 2022 C/SCA/2082/2015 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 24/05/2022 separately as ultimately, if original plaintiff is permitted to withdraw the suit by allowing application Ex. 124, there is no question of considering the application of the defendants no.1 and 2 filed vide Ex. 132, as suit would come to an end. Even the trial court has decided both the applications together and dispose of by common order and the trial court has decided the application Ex. 124, by which, the trial court has rejected the prayer of the original plaintiff to withdraw the suit unconditionally and subsequently, consequential order is passed below application Ex. 132, by which, the defendants no.1 and 2 are permitted to be transposed them as the plaintiffs. However, if application Ex. 124 is allowed interalia, no suit would remain on th file and in that case, there is no question of permitting the defendants no.1 and 2 to be transposed as co-plaintiff in the suit. As a matter of fact, if application Ex. 124 is allowed, application Ex. 132 subsequently given by the defendants no. 1 and 2 will automatically become infructuous as there is no question of permitting the defendants no.1 and 2 to be transposed as co- plaintiffs. Considering the aforesaid aspect of the matter as well as considering the fact that if the plaintiff is permitted to be withdrawn the suit, the whole suit would be disposed of finally, such order would be revisable order under the amended provisions of the Code.
Gujarat High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 12 - Full Document

Patel Dineshbhai Mohanbhai vs Decd. Naranbhai Ramdas Thro' Legal ... on 23 September, 2004

17. Considering the aforesaid judgment of Hon'ble Apex court, this Court in the judgment reported in 2005 (1) GLR Page 116 (Patel Dineshbhai Mohanbhai v. Naranbhai Ramdas (Decd.) Through Legal heirs) , in para 46 also held that the plaintiff has got absolute right to withdraw his suit unconditionally. It is required to be noted that it no doubt that respondent no.1 herein has also filed substantive civil suit for specific performance of an agreement executed between the parties on 23.03.2002 and is still pending.
Gujarat High Court Cites 21 - Cited by 8 - P Majmudar - Full Document

Hulas Rai Baij Nath vs Firm K. B. Bass & Co on 3 May, 1967

16. Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of "Ms. Hulas Rai Baij Nath v. Firm K.B. Bass and Co., reported in 1968 SC 111 has held that Order 23 Rule 1 Sub-rule (1) of C.P.C., gives an unqualified right to a plaintiff to withdraw from a suit and, if no permission to file a fresh suit sought under Sub-rule (2) of the Rule, the plaintiff becomes liable for such costs as the Court may award and becomes precluded from instituting any fresh suit in respect of the subject matter under sub-Rule (3) of the Rule. It was further held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the said judgment that there is no provisions in the Code, which requires to refuse permission to withdraw the suit in such Page 23 of 27 Downloaded on : Tue May 24 20:39:06 IST 2022 C/SCA/2082/2015 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 24/05/2022 circumstances and to compel the plaintiff to proceed with it. It has also been held that different considerations may arise where the set-off may have been claimed under Order 8 of Civil Procedure Code, or a counter claim may have been filed, if permissible by the procedural law applicable to the proceedings governing the suit.
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 119 - V Bhargava - Full Document
1